It would be much appreciated if you check out our other write-ups too The Beginner's end - Here You are worthy! - Here Absurd Worldviews - Here Clearing the darkness around the web - Here The personal brand Chronologic - Here

To state the bookish definition capitalism mean an economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state.

Likewise, socialism is given as a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.

Image From: https://amac.us/why-socialism-doesnt-work-as-learned-by-a-waiter/

Common ownership of resources, equal sharing and having an economy which doesn't need billionaires to support the economy. These are all some of the ideologies that socialism holds. These are all absolutely valid points when we think about them. Meanwhile, capitalism does not have any of the above commendable qualities. Capitalism led to disparities, made life nearly lifeless to many. Though all this happened to be real, capitalistic countries like the USA have a lead over other countries in many respects. With the advent of the internet general trend of thinking also have been more liberalistic and individualistic where the individual is given more gravitas.

So what led the societies to show a cold shoulder to socialism?

Image from: https://thepoliticalinsider.com/this-meme-brilliantly-explains-bernie-sanders-socialism-boom/

 

Where is the incentive?

On one of the pleasant spring, tomorrows let's say I found a way to store energy more efficiently in a regime that is pro-socialistic. Then, a lanky government official who had no interest whatsoever about the discovery would then pat my back uttering out a pre-written passage of sweet praise and print my name on the list of other 1000 preceding creators gone by with nothing more than the same process. Then the government would "take care" of the creation. The real question that had been left unanswered in the process is "does the ritual of the government suffice?". Giving out just a badge of honor and a little money but with nothing more remotely helpful to the inventor may not satisfy the exclusivity that they may ask for. People always wanted more when they did more, they need an incentive for their creation and worse they may expect more incentive than they deserve.

Where is the motivation?

The former question slides me right into this next question

The zeal of creation:

An ant is motivated to run around the fields to get its food because it is in a desperate need of energy for its next day survival. Humans "sometimes" being overly considerate and curious may want to help the very energetic ant and give it food daily without the ant running around to get food. When they do, there is no more motivation prevailed in the ant to run around with high hopes to find food. I think it is clear where this is heading, when all you need is being provided then where is the motivation to produce anything new. The comfort of having relatively adequate amounts of basic amenities which may create a bubble of satisfaction that leads to a life where motivation may become a thing of the past. If it takes the government to make everything where is the motivation for them to make anything? They would much rather keep it the way it is lest it helps them to flex their riches to their neighbors.

Image from: https://primaryethicssupportmaterial.wordpress.com/category/laziness-it-is-good-to-be-prepared-lazy-arthur-ants-lesson/

Ego

We all have role-models that we look up to and most of them are famous in their respective fields. We aspire to become something of such kind as they possess this aura that others in their field tend to miss. Most of us like to be heard through the herd, we like to have a spotlight shining upon us. We aspire to become the next role model. For this to happen we need individuality, Freedom of aspiration, freedom of individual thought. This is not in a suggestion that socialism suppresses individual thought but it is more driven towards society as a whole.

Gamble

The ecstatic feeling that we experience when the bowler we bet on had taken a wicket. The probability that it would happen in one of the 6 balls bowled is very less. But the resultant happiness that we endure when the bowler takes that wicket injects hope into us. That kind of result-oriented ideas have made us to think that we might reach the top of economic pile more sooner than we really may. We live on a gamble called hope and Capitalism gives us this hope. It makes us try every day and try to reach the goal. Many may never reach the goal but considerable amount would come near. This sweet poison of gamble and hope fed capitalism into the system.

We can argue that capitalism provides much more leeway for independent thought and innovation than socialism. Socialism being society driven may have a less tendency to develop as fast as the capitalistic counterpart as it lacks the incentive. Whereas most individuals like to compete and reach their hefty goals they set upon.

But the real question is which of them gives us more happiness?

Let me know your thoughts in the comments down below.

- Ias Luhar

It would be much appreciated if you check out our other write-ups too

The Beginner's end - Here

You are worthy! - Here

Absurd Worldviews - Here 

Clearing the darkness around the web - Here

The personal brand Chronologic - Here

follow me on 

Twitter - Here  Instagram- Here

Note: It may seem that I am pro-capitalistic but I can make a whole other write up which is pro-socialistic. Here I have concentrated only on one side of my thought train. Just a heads up.