Encyclopedia of Opinion

Question: Is socialism ethical?
Position‹2 of 3›: No, socialism is not ethical and disadvantageous
Argument: Socialism takes away personal property.

The government owns all property in a socialist society.

The argument

Socialism is the intended solution to solve most of humanity's problems. Yet, looking at the historical practice of socialist ideas, socialism has become problematic with an inclination towards dictatorship. Under socialism, the state is the only employer responsible for the ownership of shops, factories, production, and work facilities. This government system results in a lack of freedom as opposition towards the state could cause limitation or refusal of such services. Socialism is not ethical because it forces people into submission to the state. The implementation of socialism in the Soviet Union in the past proves its failure in solving the nation's problems. The Soviet farms and factories failed to sustain the people in meeting their quotas. In other countries like India, China, and the United Kingdom, after decades of trying socialism, it was rejected because it didn't work. Socialism is a system that believes that the state can make better decisions for the people. By taking away peoples' right to make decisions for themselves, the state takes away their freedom and their rights to own personal property, making socialism unethical.

Context

In the United States, the Democratic Presidential candidates in the 2020 race are running on the platform of socialism. Redistribution of wealth, healthcare for all, and college education for all are a few of the key takeaways from the Democratic agenda. Is socialism ethical?

Premises

[P1]Under socialism the state is the sole owner of shops, factories and the means of production, and the only employer. [P2] This concentration of ownership leaves individuals dependent on the state and unable to hold personal property or oppose it without risking their livelihoods. [P3] Removing people's right to own property and make their own decisions strips them of freedom, as seen in the failures of the Soviet Union and other states. [C] Therefore, by taking away personal property and freedom, socialism is not ethical.

Counter-arguments

Socialism is ethical because it provides equal, universal benefits to all its citizens. For example, socialism allows each person under the state to be entitled to free health care. With everything controlled and owned by the state, it would also provide a minimum basic income for those who cannot work and are unable to maintain basic living standards. Such improvements would allow poor communities to live in better conditions, reducing poverty. The state governs the income of the people, decreasing the marginal utility of income. The redistribution of wealth from the very rich to the poor would result in a balanced society, providing people with equal opportunities. Decreasing the wealth gap between the rich and poor would result in a more equal and cohesive society.

Rejecting the premises

[Rejecting P1] The definition selects the twentieth-century command-economy version and treats it as the whole. Socialism as a family of positions ranges from public ownership of major industries through worker cooperatives to market socialism, most of which involve neither a single employer nor state ownership of shops. [Rejecting P2] The argument conflates personal property with the means of production — a distinction socialist theory itself insists on. Public ownership of factories is not the confiscation of homes and possessions, and the conclusion depends on running the two together. [Rejecting P3] The historical cases are real, and they are cases of authoritarian one-party states as much as of economic systems. Separating what follows from public ownership from what follows from the absence of political freedom is exactly the work the premise skips. [Rejecting C] The ethical verdict is drawn from examples chosen to support it. There is no account of the Nordic mixed economies, and no engagement with the trade-off the debate actually concerns: economic security and universal provision set against economic liberty.

Proponents cited

Winston Churchill
“Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.”
Thomas Sowell
“Socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant that only an intellectual could ignore or evade it.”
Ben Shapiro
“Socialism states that you owe me something simply because I exist. Capitalism, by contrast, results in a sort of reality-forced altruism: I may not want to help you, I may dislike you, but if I don’t give you a product or service you want, I will starve. Voluntary exchange is more moral than forced redistribution.”
Margaret Thatcher
“Socialist governments traditionally do make a financial mess. They always run out of other people's money.”
Lee Edwards
“Socialism is guilty of a fatal conceit.”
Alexis de Tocqueville
“Democracy attaches all possible value to each man; socialism makes each man a mere agent, a mere number. Democracy and socialism have nothing in common but one word, equality. But notice the difference: while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude.”