Tuesday, February 9, 2010

Capitalism, Socialism, Populism: Which is Best?

Capitalism means varying degrees of rule by the oligarchy and the wealthy classes. Socialism is rule by the state bureaucracy. Both can benefit or scourge the masses depending on the character of the rulers. Populism is direct rule by the populace thru the internet, and currently it does not exist.

If the populace indeed rules, what happens? First the skilled masses (employees) will determine programs and laws, so state funds, assets and credit-worthiness get to be used for mass benefit. Second, employee masses all need ‘sideline income,’ so they will tend to use state assets towards formation and expansion of world-scale companies that are owned by thousand-employee entrepreneurial groups. Corporate formation translates to creation of jobs for bottom poor. Third, good laws are perpetual, so corporate formation and job-creation goes on forever, eventually employing all the populist society’s poor. Employee ownership of companies also means profit dividends and stock shares worth trillions of dollars perpetually flowing among the masses instead of bottling up within the tiny oligarchy as in capitalist societies. As one may see, what capitalism and socialism failed to do (democratize wealth and political power), populism have the potential to attain.

But what are the seeds of populism? Potentially, they already exist in the form of blogger nets. Bloggers already democratize information. By simply spreading populist ideals worldwide, they can eventually redeem all the world’s poor while acquiring stock shares and dividend incomes for themselves.

No comments: