Two Views On Socialism (1958)

This is your forum. We're here to get it started, then we'll turn it over to you. Now, we're not here to advocate socialism. We're here to get a better understanding of socialism by discussing it. Let's get started. I think our first question is why study socialism? After all, the United States is the richest nation on Earth, and this has been brought about under a capitalistic system. Why would anybody want to change to a different system? It's obvious that some people do favor change. We've had organized socialist parties in the United States for more than 100 years. Besides, how can anyone decide intelligently what is good and bad in socialism without finding out something about it. That's true. All right. Harold, what is socialism? It's hard to define because socialists disagree among themselves on many points. But on three points they do agree. One, productive wealth should be owned by the government. And the government should be the only employer in the major businesses and industries. Two, competition in industry should be abolished. Three, production for use should be substituted for production for private profit. You could also get communists to agree on those points. True enough. But communism is more extreme than socialism. Yes. Communists advocate violent revolution to destroy capitalism. While socialists generally favor a peaceful change. But what sort of change? Why do socialists feel that a change is needed? What is their goal? Don? All right. I have an answer to those questions on a wire recording made especially for us by an outspoken advocate of socialism. We should bear in mind that this man's purpose, admittedly, is to persuade us to his point of view. This is his argument in favor of socialism. I am a socialist. It is my personal belief that capitalism is unjust. That we must establish a new social and economic order. To establish it, we must change social institutions which, to a large extent, determine our scale of values. Now, the idea of socialism is very old. But modern socialism, well, we might say that modern socialism stems from the factory. The factory made the capitalist. And to the capitalist, the workers went. Trading their freedom for jobs. Who will deny that capitalism breeds inequality among men? Some men obtain more than their fair share of the national income. Others, many others, receive too little. Too little wealth, too little freedom. Capitalism created this scene. And this one. Get rich quick. Never mind wasting our land and our timber. Never mind wasting our oil, gas, and coal. Our natural resources and human resources have been plundered for profit. Socialists believe that the answer is planning. Central nationwide economic planning. You may ask, "What would such a planned economy mean to me?" To answer that question, let's imagine a family living in a socialist community. Living in this very house. Father works in the steel mill. But his employer is his government. And so he is also one of the owners of the mill. And of all other basic enterprises which so largely control his life. His hours of work and his wages are established by the government on the basis of what it thinks is best for him and the community. Because he is working for himself and for the community, he derives intense satisfaction from his work. Notice anything different about the newspaper? There's no advertising. Advertising is a wasteful result of business competition. Peggy Ann has a new pair of shoes. She bought them at the government store, where the price was low because government ownership has eliminated not only advertising, but other wasteful practices in competitive distribution. Gone are all the unnecessary competing shoe stores and other establishments. But Peggy Ann will never want for shoes. Production is planned so that there are shoes and all other essentials for everyone. Socialism produces for use, not for profit. Ted is all wrapped up in making plans for going to college. He's looking ahead. His government encourages him in his plan because socialism stands for the welfare of all people, and it's possible for Ted to make plans far in advance because there's no fear of what the future will bring. Father is secure in his job. Production planning has eliminated depression and unemployment, and the old battle between capital and labor. By producing for use instead of for profit, by substituting cooperation for competition, we achieve our goal of a happy, orderly society. I believe that our only hope of survival is to establish democratic controls of the economic processes by which we live. That is socialism. That is why I am a socialist. There we have one man's argument for socialism. Next, we're going to hear an opposing argument. In order to balance the issues pro and con, we played that first recording for a man who believes in capitalism. His purpose is to reply to some of the charges of socialism against capitalism. I believe in capitalism, free enterprise, for the same reason that the overwhelming majority of Americans believe in it. Because it affords opportunity for the individual to achieve success through his own efforts and because of his merits. Now, let's take another look at that steel mill as it actually is under capitalism. This is private ownership, but not ownership by one or two capitalists. This enterprise is owned by 50,000 stockholders, and some of those stockholders are employees of the business. The hope of accumulating wealth is the incentive for these stockholders to work and save. They invest their savings in this factory and other forms of productive equipment, thus making possible the production of more and more goods. The same urge to accumulate wealth inspires the workers to do their best, and these workers are paid the highest wages on earth for working the shortest hours to produce the most goods. In production, America leads the world, and it is production nourished by our system of free enterprise given us the high standard of living which is so much a part of what we call the American way of life. We are proud of our pioneer ancestors. Yet, how many of us today would like to live as they did? Shouldn't we be equally proud of our economic system that has brought into millions of homes the modern wonders of the electric refrigerator, the stove, the radio, and all the things that once were luxuries, but which are now necessities. That system, our system, is American capitalism, free enterprise. It's true that private ownership creates differences in income, but here we have an extreme case. And this represents the opposite extreme. These are more typical of the average homes of workers, workers who enjoy not only a high standard of living, but a high standard of freedom. Each is his own master, free to enjoy the rewards of his work, free to go off on a trip with his family, free to quit his job if he wants and work in another, free to worship as he pleases, to vote as he chooses, free to go into business for himself. Yes, in America, the man who owns this house may have been born in this one, and he may yet live in this one. And he can achieve this entirely by his own efforts, his own free enterprise. Now, it's true that in the past our natural resources have at times been exploited in a wasteful manner. But many steps to conserve these resources are rapidly being taken by industry and by government. And we must never lose sight of the fact that full utilization of our natural resources has been one of the keys to full production. But now, let me draw for you a somewhat different picture of that socialist family. We'll start the same way. Here's father home from work. Of course, he hasn't worked very hard. Why should he? His government wouldn't fire him and take away his security. And he's paid not according to the work he does, but according to what the government allows him to have. Father's working not for himself, but for the community. And how is the community making out? Production hits all-time low. Washington. The central planning board has issued new production quotas for all plants in the nation. Job performance quotas for individual workers are increased from 50% to 100% under penalty of drastic reductions in food and clothing ration. Of course, production is down. There's no incentive for men to work. Oh, yes, there are no ads in the paper. What goods are produced are distributed efficiently through government-owned stores. That's where Peggy Ann got her new shoes. She had wanted something a little more dressy, but there were no other stores in which she could shop around. Under socialistic monopoly, you pay what is asked and take what you get. Now, what about young Ted and his plans for the future? Is it really his future? Socialists talk of freedom, yet the freedom of the individual is sacrificed to the dictates of the master plan. And what of those who disagree? They can't disagree. Criticism might upset the plan and confusion would result. Everyone must abide by the plan whether he likes it or not. Decisions are left to a small group of leaders. And to enable them to carry out their ideas, opposition to these leaders must be stamped out. Thus, socialism means not democracy, but tyranny. Few men today will argue that there should be no control over business. And we do have some instances of government ownership of business. But does this mean that we should adopt socialism? I say no. I say we should fight to preserve capitalism. Free enterprise. Because of what it has done for the average worker. Here's a good question for your discussion. How far have we gone in government ownership and control? And how much farther can we go and still preserve the high scale of living, the personal freedom, and the opportunity for individual advancement, which make up the American way of life? That is a good question for your discussion. We've had some statements as to what socialism means in principle. And we've heard two conflicting opinions of what it would mean in practice. Now, it's your forum. What is your opinion? What does socialism mean to you?