The arguments denouncing capitalism are flawed

Sep 08, 2017 Letters

Dear Editor,
I could not resist the urge to suffer my sick eyes to read the content of a certain letter. After reading it four times, I still could not grasp the writer’s concept that socialism is a superior system to capitalism. These are the types of narratives that dissuade young people from believing that they have the skills to read and understand. As they lose confidence in their ability to read and comprehend they will stop reading- the feeling of incompetence and illiteracy will set in like rigor mortis on their souls.
The most basic comprehension question in this missive should be this. Give one reason for the writer opining that “Socialism is a superior system to capitalism”? Not a single reason is given. Albeit the letter’s objective was to lambast a certain columnist (Peeping Tom) for an article captioned- “Capitalism cannot exist where there is socialist thinking” which the writer, one Gerald Perreira describes as a “most vexatious and vulgar opinion piece”. He remonstrates at the Peeper’s ignorance in regards to “the genesis and development of capitalism and socialism, both globally and in Guyana.
Perreira wrote. “The socialism we speak of existed prior to European notions of socialism and are rooted in our ancient traditions and cultures.” In analyzing this sentence, the socialism referred to makes socialism multifaceted-meaning that there are different types of socialism. With that in mind, the Peeper could have been speaking of a different type of socialism than the one Perreira was alluding to. Who is the “we” in the “we speak of existed”?
Suddenly he is writing on behalf of himself and other people (we) . Sir! If you’re on the path of refuting someone’s knowledge of something or concept you have to provide a clear and concise description of your knowledge of that something or concept. Sir you wrote; “The socialism we speak of existed” blah! blah! Existed means it was there -genesis speaks of beginnings – where is your genesis that you accuse the Peeper of not knowing?
Perreria wrote; “Peeping Tom teaches us nothing about capitalism and socialism because he/she has not a clue about either.”As I see it, the peeper wrote under the assumption that readers could reckon with his message. You are saying that the Peeper, “has not a clue about each “of the “isms” and your point about socialism is a superior system to capitalism puts the onus on yourself to explain the concepts and the pros and cons and your reason for giving socialism superior status. Me! I don’t have a clue. I am writing because of my disappointment in Mr Perreira content.
What I do believe is that socialism on paper is a glittery concept. It seems to offer a fair distribution of a country’s wealth. What the proponents of socialism failed to understand or grossly underestimate is the inherent greed in humans that commands them to strive and struggle to achieve wealth and prosperity for themselves. State ownership of the forces of production under socialism practically killed the human spirit in that regard. Ultimately it failed leaving a trail of dictators around the world. The optimist in me persuades me to encourage the youths to continue to read and be enlightened. You are the future- be instrumental in the changes you want to see.
Rudolph Singh

1 thoughts on “The arguments denouncing capitalism are flawed”

Kassem_B September 9, 2017 at 4:51 am

‘The arguments denouncing capitalism are flawed’
Welcome on board
An important topic for discussion in Guyana since both major Parties in Guyana on paper claimed to be socialist with one passing that phase and proclaimed itself a fully fledged communist Party in the late 1980s, with both Parties running the country for some 50 years now continuously.