In this mutli-part series, Sanat Mohanty discusses why we have to look for alternatives and what kinds of alternatives we should look for. This fourth piece of the series briefly describes Capitalism, Communism and their relationship to Free Markets in a broad fashion.

Part I: What is the point of this discussion?
Part II: Therefore Alternatives: Fundamentalism of our Societies
Part III: Therefore Alternatives: Survival of the Fittest

Working Definitions
Capitalism is an economic system characterized by private or corporate ownership of capital goods, by investments that are determined by private decision, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a free market.

In a broad sense, communism is a theory advocating elimination of private property, a system in which goods are owned in common and are available to all as needed. In a more narrow sense, it describes a totalitarian system of government in which a single authoritarian party controls state-owned means of production. In a more idealistic sense a final stage of society in Marxist theory in which the state has withered away and economic goods are distributed equitably

In the most ideal state, a free market is a state of society where every aspect of our lives is defined by supply and demand forces in the market. In a slightly more nuanced understanding, a free market society is one where governments have some limited role to ensure that certain human rights are not violated and every other aspect of society performs by the laws of the free market defined by the forces of supply and demand.

Implications of Alternatives
In saying that there are intrinsic problems with the current system, are you being critical of capitalism? Are you saying we should become a communist society, instead?

There is much to be critical of capitalism and the free market society – and we will discuss some of those aspects later. However, the alternatives do not suggest the installation of communist societies. In fact, the critique of capitalism also applies to communism. A quick look at the working definitions, as well as more in depth study of both systems will show that both are in fact isms based on a society that is primarily founded on and defined by ideas of production, distribution and consumption – the differences are only in the details of share of these resources (though the differences in details are significant). Thus, while communism talks about commons, its understanding of commons is an economic one. Both are tied to economic fundamentalism – just as Christianity, Islam or Hinduism can all be fundamentalist.

Both societies have perpetrated untold torture and violence to sustain their respective economic institutions. Both societies miss out on significant aspects of the human that transcend production, distribution and consumption (Karl Polanyi, “The Great Transformation”). And in discounting these emotional, social, cultural or spiritual aspects of the human in the founding of our societies, we marginalize these aspects of humans, as well as sections of society that find these aspects important, leading to violence.

Related Links
Deschooling Society
Shikshantar’s Explorations
Vernacular Values
Energy and Equity