James McCusker’s Aug. 16 column (“Capitalism isn’t ideal; socialism just makes it seem that way”) is full of misleading statements and logical fallacies. First, he fails to mention that moral concerns about capitalism have been raised continuously throughout its history. Adam Smith’s other book was “The Theory of Moral Sentiments,” written and revised at the same time as his “Wealth of Nations.” John Stuart Mill expressed misgivings about capitalism’s effects. Leon Walras, one of the inventors of supply-and-demand analysis, was a socialist himself. And modern economists of the 20th century debated whether free-market capitalism automatically leads to maximum social welfare. Their conclusion: no, it must be guided.
Second, he borders on comparing free-market capitalism in theory with socialism in practice. Hunger and starvation do not dog socialism unless the capitalist countries boycott and try to destabilize it. And no one should claim that capitalism’s history of thugs as leaders gives it much high moral ground.
Finally, McCusker uses “capitalism” with an modifier. He should recognize that U.S. presidential candidates do that with “socialism.” “Democratic socialism” is as different from the socialism he describes as home economics is to economics. That is why Europeans do not call Sweden’s economy for example, “socialism.” They correctly call it “social democracy.”
Robert Scott Gassler
Everett
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
