Democracy vs. Socialsim

Nations today have many common goals, values, and interests. With hundreds of nation states in today’s modern world, one can expect the goals and focuses of nations to be many and varied. However, there is one common interest that unites all people and nations. That is the concept of the common good, defined simply by Princeton University as, “the good of the community.” This is a goal all nations strive to attain. Economic prosperity and the protection of freedoms and liberty are the two most fundamental components of the common good. Both contribute to the well-being of the citizenry and are essential to the life of a nation and while they may be universal threads to all nations, the means to which these ends are accomplished can be drastically different.

The dissimilarities between liberal democracy and democratic socialism illustrate the range of means used to achieve the common good (specifically economic prosperity and protection of liberty) appropriately. Both ideologies seek what they believe is best for their citizens and establish laws, customs and every day practices to ensure that national interests are promoted. In a perfect world, social democracy would be the best ideology for governments to practice, but in reality liberal democracy offers the best solutions to modern day problems and best achieves economic prosperity and the protection of liberties.

Democratic socialism may differ most greatly from liberal democracy when it concerns the type of economic environment in place to achieve the common goal of prosperity. These socialist nations believe it is appropriate for the state to own significant enterprises and businesses otherwise controlled by private individuals and companies. In fact, a large majority of modern democratic socialist nations employ public over private ownership. One of the most prominent examples is Italy’s economy where nearly 50% of all industrial output comes from government owned firms. Other examples include the coal industry during World War II as well as the healthcare and natural gas industries in many social democracies today.

Why then do these nations place so much of an emphasis on public ownership when liberal democracies (such as the United States) have relatively nothing to do with public ownership? Among the most prominent answers is the governments desire to control the social impact that is innate within these corporations. Whether it is determining how many people should be employed in which sectors of the economy or by strictly controlling means of production, social democracies wish to control these circumstances that would have otherwise been out of their reach and in the hands of private industries. Another reason these nations seek public ownership is to ensure that there is an equal distribution of wealth. Democratic socialists believe in the age-old maxim of all people collectively “enjoying the fruits of labor” and in order to make that a reality, they distribute wealth evenly among people, regardless of individual participation and effort.

Liberal democracies, on the other hand, very rarely take part in public ownership of major industries. The belief in a “laissez-faire” economic approach serves as the guiding light for the economic environment in liberal democracies. This French phrase meaning “leave alone,” stipulates an economic doctrine of no interference by the government, which ultimately empowers competition and consumer choice. In order to best achieve economic growth and prosperity, private companies must be in competition with one another so that they are forced to produce the best product at the best price to consumers – this concept is non-existent in the democratic socialist belief of public ownership. Over regulation (particularly the kind found in democratic socialism) crushes all incentive for better performance, efficiency, innovation and consequently the constant goal of larger profit margins and growth.

Many make the argument that not only does democratic socialism hurt consumers but that it also promotes an un-healthy, inefficient business model. Production is stifled because of the absence of incentive to produce a substantial income and profit. Services are also more than likely to decline in quality as the overbearing democratic socialist economy eliminates the flexibility and motivation that a privately held business would have. Thus, liberal democracy, when compared to democratic socialism, is the best means to economic prosperity and an essential part of the common good.

The second main aspect of the common good deals with the protection of rights. Liberal and social democracies are daily faced with the choice to either uphold or suppress basic human and civil rights. However, the extent to which these ideologies place on this value differs. Democratic social ideologies place a greater emphasis on the equality of individuals while liberal democracies believe that equality is found within liberty. Alexis de Tocqueville, a theorist for liberal democracy argues that, “Democracy and socialism have nothing in common but one word, equality. But notice the difference: while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude.” As evidenced in the social democracies economic regulations, they would rather restrict the freedom of a business or industry if it means greater economic equality, than to give that industry more freedom and have businesses compete with one another.

The protection of rights and liberties plays a much larger role in liberal democracies in comparison to social democracies. Whether in economic or social circumstances, liberal democracies believe that liberty is an essential part of the common good (not just one of its benefits). As a rights restricting government, if citizens begin to feel as if their liberties are being unjustly infringed upon, it is time to check the government’s power and position. While there are many examples of citizens keeping the government in-check, the most significant occurred over the issue of slavery and sex discrimination within the United States. It is because of the liberal democracies commitment to liberty for all people that made equality within these circumstances possible. Whether it is responding to tyranny and oppression or securing the basic human and civil rights to all people, the liberal democracy ideology is steadfastly resolved around the protection of liberty.

Even though liberal and social democracies share the common good as a goal, they institute significantly different means to achieve its accomplishment. If society were ordered as utopia, then democratic socialism would, without question, be the ideal political ideology. However, today’s world is far from a utopia. Liberal democracy is realistic about politics and understands the true nature of society. When pursing economic prosperity, it realizes the importance of privately owned industries and economic competition. It strives to give individual freedoms and liberties to all people while additionally promoting equality. Liberal democracy exemplifies a government that relies on the consent of the governed instead of the governed relying on the government, which makes it the best political ideology for practice today.