| And both views are capable of happening. Socialism, and eventually communism is achievable, but not only that it will be achieved, for the following reason.
Civilisations began on the extreme right. A single individual held total power, typically in the form of absolutist monarchies. These were then reigned in by lords and aristocrats, limiting the power of kings. This (i'll use english history for my own ease) is shown in the Magna Carta of 1215. Now power is now in the hands of the aristocratic class. This in turn is pulled back, with power put in the hands of 'free' individuals. This comes up in the Civil War, and completed in the Glorious Revolution. This is usually highlighted in some sort of rights for individuals laid out, the Bill of Rights of 16...something something. These rights affectively allow anyone to become as powerful as a king, but only economically, not politically. (of course they can corrupt the political process with their wealth, and often do).
This is really as far as we are now. History has reached the middle of the political spectrum on its leftward journey.
Now is where we throw in todays technology. Where once the economies of one country really only affected it, gloabalisation means that we are all interconnected through great big multinational corporations and their subcontractors. This also means that, where once a baron could only sap the wealth of his surrounding serfs, CEO's can sap the wealth of workers from around the world. However, the relationship between serf/baron is different to the worker/ceo. Population sizes meant that if a baron lost his serfs, he couldn't replace them, and he would lose out. So he had to look after them to some extent. Today however, there is a vast pool of workers. If your worker dies from no food, get a new one.
This global economy means that an ever decreasing minority controls an ever increasing amount of wealth. This will eventually drive enough people into desperation that they rebel. They have to rebel, its either that or starve. They will form militant unions and create socialist/communist parties. This in turn scares those with wealth. They will vote for right wing hardliners who will use draconian measures to control the rioting masses. The lefties will have to now use violence or else be totally oppressed. Finally, the revolution begins.
Think back to 1929 in Germany. The Wall Street Crash drove many back into poverty. Communist groups began to take hold again. Middle class money went into Nazi party coffers. They took power, crushed the unions and arrested, murdered political dissidents. Imagine this on a world wide scale.
If the left wants to win, it will have to fight on a world wide scale, irrespective of countries. When one country is 'captured', revolutionaries MUST move on to fight in the next war. Otherwise they get to comfortable in power. Outside powers try to invade, meaning they have to become dictatorships or they will be ineffective, and then we have another USSR on our hands.
If right wing hardliners did take power, the lefties would still be able to fight back, because they are the (world wide at least) the vast majority. However once the left wins, the right will at least temporarily be destroyed. In the mean time, democratic mechanisms and decent education for all people will mean that nobody will see the need to vote for right wingers (why would a majority vote for a group that suppresses majorities in favour of minorities?). If this much is achieved, humanity can then begin to work together, now without borders or divisions. Black people have fought with white people, Portugese with Chinese, Hutu's with Tutsi's.
And if done on a world wide scale, there will be no foreign powers threatening invasion. This means proper democracies can be built, instead of dictatorships 'on behalf of people' as happened before. As the majority have been involved in a revolution, either on the front lines or in support, they will not give up their newly found rights, and any government oppression will be opposed, if not ended they can take up arms again.
Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.
Winston Churchill |