Chapter 9: Communism versus Commonism
Economic Systems
There are various economic systems that
include capitalism, socialism, communism, etc. Capitalism tries to follow the market
economy that determines the price and quantity in the market whereas socialism
the central economy that the price and quantity are determined by a central
authority. Most countries in capitalism may not follow the market economy but
the mixed economy in which the market usually determines the price and
quantity, but sometimes the government intervenes in the market to regulate the
price and/or the quantity.
Capitalism
Capitalism is an economic system
characterized by private ownership of resources and markets, which is also
called the free enterprise system.[1]
Another important characteristic of capitalism is decentralized decision making,
using markets. No nation in the world precisely fits the two criteria for
capitalism; however, the United States comes close. The strengths of capitalism
include its capacity to achieve economic efficiency because competition and the
profit motive force production at the lowest cost, and economic freedom because
economic power is widely dispersed. The weaknesses of capitalism include capitalism
tends toward an unequal distribution of income; private markets can fail to
provide an adequate amount of public goods; capitalism inevitably leads to
macroeconomic instability that can result in severe recessions or even depressions;
and capitalism fails to protect the environment.
Socialism
Socialism is an economic system characterized
by government ownership of resources and centralized decision making.[2]
Its characteristics are public/government ownership and centralization. Under a
socialist economy, a command system owns and controls in the public interest
the major industries, such as steel, electricity, and agriculture. However,
some free markets can exist in farming, retail trade, and certain service
areas. The market failures in a capitalist system create so much economic
hardship that a country is better off using socialism to organize its
production. However, the government may fail to improve on these market
outcomes. Or worse yet, government intervention may make matters worse. Socialism
produces poor economic results mostly because some government officials are
corrupt, ignorant, or succumb to special-interest-group political pressure. The
strengths of socialism include: There is an equitable distribution of income because
government ownership of capital and other resources prevents a few individuals
or groups from acquiring a disproportionate share of the nation’s wealth; rapid
economic growth is achieved when planners have the power to direct more
resources to producing capital goods and fewer resources to producing consumer
goods; and there is no unemployment. The weaknesses of socialism include: Economic
inefficiency results because the government often uses many workers to perform
work that requires only one or two workers; the absence of the profit motive
discourages entrepreneurship and innovation and thus suppresses economic growth;
the central planning process is subject to errors and is unresponsive to the
wants of the majority of the population; and “perks” for government officials,
nepotism, and the illegal use of markets create disparities in income.
Communism
Karl Marx rejected capitalism and saw profits
as unjust payments to owners of firms – the capitalists. Marx believed that the
market system would destroy itself because wealthy owners would go too far and
exploit workers as unrelenting greed for profits would lead the owners to pay
starvation wages. Marx thought that private ownership and exploitation would
produce a nation driven by a class struggle between a few “haves” and many
“have-nots.” Marx believed communism to be the ideal system.
Communism is a stateless,
classless economic system in which all the factors of production are owned by
the workers (common ownership, no private property), and people share
production according to their needs.[3]
In ideal communism, each worker produces according to his/her ability and
consumes according his/her needs. Free access to the items of consumption is
made possible by advances in technology that allow for super-abundance.[4]
In Marx’s view, this is the highest form of socialism toward which the
revolution should strive. No nation has achieved the ideal communist society
described by Marx, or has capitalism self-destructed as he predicted.
Communism versus Socialism
Many countries have socialist political
parties and economic system, but very few (or none) have a truly communistic
economic system. Many countries have government programs that borrow from
socialist principles. Socialism is frequently interchangeably used with
communism, but the two economic systems or ideologies have differences.[5]
In socialism properties are owned by the central authority or the government
whereas in communism properties are owned commonly by all workers. In socialism
the central authority or the government has strong power whereas in ideal
communism no state exists.
The early church Christians shared their
possessions with others: “All the believers were together and had everything in
common. Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he had
need” (Acts 2:44-45); “All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one
claimed that any of his possessions was his own, but they shared everything
they had” (Acts 4:32). The early church Christians’ life within a Christian
community, which I call ‘commonism,’ was very similar to an ideal life in
communism. People could use/consume items as they needed. However, there is no
private ownership granted but common ownership in communism whereas there was private
ownership in commonism although people did not claim private ownership once
they brought their possessions to the church/community. The early church
Christians believed that they were one body of Christ, who is the head of the
(universal or catholic) church and lived a life for others as they were the
branches of the same body. The early church’s commonism (or commonal life) was
according to the economic principle of sharing or equality.
As we examined, in
capitalism individuals make money according to their ability and spend it as
they want. A primary problem with capitalism is that it widens income
inequality – the rich may become richer, the poor poorer. The inequality gap
cannot be narrowed, and this has been one of the most serious issues in today’s
capitalist countries.
In communism individuals
work using the production tools that are commonly possessed and spend as they
need. In communism all are owned by workers/individuals commonly or
collectively. Communism seems to be ideal, but this common ownership reduces
overachievers’ desire or incentive to work hard as people are selfish or
individualistic that they want to possess their own property by nature. Thus,
communism lowers productivity of the economy as a whole and may lead the
society to poverty.
However, a society in
commonism is fundamentally different from a society in communism. Commonism
does not deny or reject the strengths of capitalism but it complements its
weaknesses. That is, in commonism individuals make money according to their
ability like in capitalism. People possess their own property/wealth. However,
they are willing to share their possession with poorer people by bringing some
or whole of them to the community or church (this is a voluntary sharing not a
forced sharing by the government or the central authority), believing that
their poorer neighbors are the branches of the same body and loving them.[6]
The Origin of Commonism
This spirit of commonism is from Jesus’
teaching of sharing. Jesus in Matthew 14:13-21 (also in Mark 6:30-44; Luke
9:10-17; and John 6:1-14) fed five thousand men (not counting women and
children). If Jesus had not taken a boy’s five loaves and two fish and shared
them, those people who gathered would have suffered from hunger and those five
loaves of bread and two fish could have been only one boy’s lunch meal. But
when Jesus took and broke them, the crowd with his disciples could see the
miracle of abundant feeding, with remaining of twelve baskets full. Jesus let
his disciples partake in this miraculous feeding, telling them, “You
give them (the crowd) something to eat.” (Matthew 14:16). And Matthew 14:19
states: “Then he ordered the crowds to sit down on the grass; and taking the
five loaves and the two fish he looked up to heaven, and blessed, and broke and
gave the loaves to the disciples, and the disciples gave them to the crowds.”
Jesus’ disciples were partakers of this miracle.
Jesus in Matthew 25:31-46
speaks about the judgment of the nations. When the Son of Man comes in his
glory, he will separate people one from another as a shepherd separates the
sheep from the goat. Then the king (Son of Man) will say to the people on his
right in Matthew 25:34-36: “34Come, O blessed of my Father, inherit
the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world; 35for
I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a
stranger and you welcomed me, 36I was naked and you clothed me, I
was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.”
What Jesus fed the crowd
(Matthew 14:13-21, 16:5-12) and told his disciples about the judgment of the
people (Matthew 25:31-46) was to teach about economic principles of commonism
or sharing. What was the problem of the rich young man who visited Jesus in
Matthew 19:16-22? He was not willing to share his wealth with the poor (Matthew
19:21-22). Jesus’ teaching of sharing and the commonal life of the early
Christians in their community were succeeded by Paul in his economics of
sharing, which we will discuss in the next chapter, Chapter 10.
[1]
Irvin B. Tucker, Economics for Today (10th
ed.). Cengage Learning, 2019, 794-795.
[2]
Ibid., 795-796.
[3]
Ibid., 796-797.
[4]
Anonymous, “Communism vs.
Socialism,” Diffen. Retrieved from https://www.diffen.com/difference/Communism_vs_Socialism
[5]
Ibid.
[6]
K. P. Choi, Paul’s Life, Epistles, and the Central
Themes of His Theology (in Korean). Seoul, Korea: Qumran Publishing House,
2013, 258-259.
No comments:
Post a Comment