Moral and economic category in capitalism - Essay Example

? Capitalism Through the history capitalism has developed into a powerful prosperity engine. However,for now it is possible to say that the system underwent the number of changes, which lead to destruction of market capitalism. It happens due to multiple factors: active migration from poor countries to rich and racial intolerance in rich countries, large gap between poor and wealthy, weak financial system, the change of climate. The crisis of 2008 happened namely due to these factors. Scholars defined different factors that could destroy the world financial system in future. As market capitalism represents a complex system, these factors are derived from many other factors. The scholars Branko Milanovic and Niall Ferguson examine the disruption of capitalism and define the factors, which lead to it. Branko Milanovic asks the question if the large gap between poor and wealthy can destroy capitalism. According to the scholar, in order to answer this question, we should divide it into several parts: (1) if the gap between poor and wealthy destroys capitalism; (2) if democratic capitalism represents reliable system; (3) if the gap between rich and poor destroys democratic capitalism in Europe. The answer to first question is not positive, according to Milanovic. Actually, capitalism is a leading system in the modern world. In the past capitalism had a competitor – centrally planned socialism, but now it is eliminated. Capitalism is so popular that even those who are not satisfied with it, can’t offer anything else. If the gap between poor and rich is growing, it threatens the dominance by demonstrating its negative moments such as, for example, too much materialism. However, if to take into account the fact that capitalism is the most popular political system in the world, it is not at risk to be destroyed as any system has its negative sides. “But since no ideological alternatives currently exist — and even less, political parties or groups to implement them — the hegemony of capitalism looks pretty unassailable. Of course, nothing guarantees that it would look like that to our children or grandchildren, for new ideologies can be invented. But this is how it looks to a reasonable observer today” (Milanovic). The second question is difficult to answer as the combination of capitalism and democracy was not popular throughout history. Capitalism and democracy were usually separate. In the modern society there is also a tendency to separate capitalism and democracy and this is caused by inequality. “Thus, it does not take huge leaps of imagination to see that capitalism and democracy can be decoupled. And inequality can play an important role in that. It already does so by politically empowering the rich to a much greater extent than the middle class and the poor” (Milanovic). Actually, capitalism prescribes preserving the interests of the elite, than the interests of the middle-class. Such a tendency can be met in all the countries with capitalist regime. The answer for third question is positive as Europe has its own problems. First, there are certain difficulties connected with globalization. Globalization also increases inequality as wealthy people still benefits from it more than middle class and poor. Moreover, globalization is connected with migration. Migration represents problem for any country as brings such problems as racial intolerance and cultural differences, which prevent state from the development. “Both the property-rich and the highly skilled gain because their financial and human capital is more mobile and cannot be easily taxed unless one wants them to flee the country. Low taxation in turn increases inequality between the rich and the poor because it undercuts the funding sources on which the modern European welfare state was built” (Milanovic). Niall Ferguson is a historian the views of whom are rather controversial. “There are two common assumptions about Ferguson. One is that his newspaper columns and telegenic persona, including expensive sunglasses and seductive Scottish burr, must imply a lack of intellectual bottom. The other is that he strikes a pose of contrariness for its own sake, arguing against conventional liberal wisdom, most famously by defending some aspects of imperialism, in order to shock, amaze and sell books” (Smith). He also considers capitalism to be the best system, but he does not consider inequality to be harmful. On the contrary he considers it to be beneficial. Ferguson also talks about its failure but the reasons he names are different However, he takes United States as an example of capitalist society that is going to fail. Ferguson is relentlessly accused the government in failure of capitalism. He stated that Margaret Thatcher's laws can serve as examples. However, the examples of modern politics are destructive according to him. According to Ferguson, slavery was abolished, notwithstanding that it was beneficial. Notwithstanding that Ferguson on the one hand values democracy high as any person in democratic state, he is still a bit confused about it as considers homosexuals to be the reason of state’s failure. He is sure that homosexuals, who can’t have children are the reason of the failure of the state as its welfare is dependent on demography. Certainly, such opinion is also relentless and historian himself is considered to be relentless by many scholars. “These may seem like completely out-of-this-world claims, but if you scratch the surface they’re not so surprising. There is a fairly well-known conspiracy that claims that Big Guv’ment are trying to spread homosexuality in order to control population growth. Not to say that Ferguson buys into this conspiracy, of course, but it is reflective of a certain aspect of the mind-set of some conservatives – that is, the fear of a masculinity under threat from nefarious and possibly camp forces. The roots of such fear should be obvious to anyone with a passing interest in pop psychology and need not be repeated here”(Pikington). His views are severely criticized as they are unique and quite opposite to the views of the previous historian discussed, Branko Milanovic. Milanovic first of all considered the gap between poor and rich to be the main reason of capitalism downfall, while Ferguson’s views are quite opposite. The views of Branko Milanovic and Niall Ferguson are quite opposite. The both are famous scholars and very bright personalities with. Both of them consider capitalism to be the best system and are sure that people benefit from it. They recognize its popularity. However, speaking about the reasons of the capitalism failure, the views are quite opposite. Branko Milanovic has more relevant point of view, he is sure that capitalism suffers from inequality, while Niall Ferguson can’t support these ideas as his own ideas are unique. On the contrary he states that capitalism should have the element of inequality and some democratic principles such as the support of homosexuals only spoil the welfare of the states. “Ferguson, no doubt under the advice of his publisher, quickly made an apology. But if the debacle has taught us one thing it is that many of the academics on the anti-austerity bus are not primarily arguing from the position of rationality at all. Their work likely relies on, and has always relied on, elements of urban myth and fear. At the end of the day many of them are no more sophisticated than the loony right-wing in the US – the only difference is that they come wearing cloaks and gowns rather than baseball hats with teabags stapled to the front” (Pilkington). Also the historian accuses modern politicians in capitalism failure and thus of the failure of the state. References Milanovic, Branko. Inequality and Democratic Capitalism n.d., accessed May 19, 2013 http://www.theglobalist.com/storyid.aspx?storyid=9934 Pilkington, Philip 2013, Homosexuality Leading Cause of Economic Crisis, Harvard’s Niall Ferguson accessed May 19, 2013 Reports http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2013/05/philip-pilkington-homosexuality-leading-cause-of-economic-crisis-harvards-niall-ferguson-reports.html Smith, David 2006, Niall Ferguson: The empire rebuilder accessed May 19, 2013 http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2006/jun/18/academicexperts.highereducation Read More