During the course of a nation's development, serious analysis of issues in political debate will rarely receive frontline billing among the masses and will invariably take a back seat. Very rarely will the actual ebb and flow of important issues and ideas trickle down to the man in the street. Generally speaking, therefore, in underdeveloped societies, one could draw the conclusion that mainly through a lack of awareness by the people, political parties will very rarely get elected because of a particular set of core political values or beliefs, but rather because of the more rudimentary interaction with the people, of appearance, speech, charisma and promises made, etc.

In spite of this, however, and hidden beneath the bluster and rhetoric of electioneering, there still remains a political spectrum of ideas from left to right to which most, if not all political parties will adhere, and which determines their underlying political and economic philosophy.

In today's community of nations, some countries do very well economically; others will trudge along barely making it, while others again will become and remain basket cases. In any cursory glance at these countries, it is sometimes difficult to identify those special qualities that differentiate one country's level of success from another's. And it's only through very astute economic and political analysis that the underlying reasons for this success or failure can be determined.
Without going into the finer nuances that distinguish varying types of political ideology, it's fairly easy to draw reasoned conclusions about these differences from empirical and some anecdotal evidence around us, regarding the reasons for the success or failure of each country.

Generally speaking, the capitalist or free-market economies occupy the right of centre on this ideological spectrum, while the socialist countries occupy the left. The right will normally accommodate the pragmatic hard-nosed approach of free-market, free-enterprise, pro-business politics, while the left will have more in common with a people-oriented approach. Both the left and the right carry their own distinct roster of ideas and beliefs from which they can be easily identified and very often from which the eventual economic success or failure of a country can
be determined.

In its early stages, at the beginning of the 20th century, capitalism was seen as a system that benefited a few who got rich while exploiting the poor. In time, however, and through more enlightened governmental policies to take care of the poor, indigent and helpless, along with aggressive trade union policies, the more obvious inequities of the past in the rich capitalist nations have by and large been addressed.

Today, with their vast opportunities for wealth creation and accumulation, it has often been said, and perhaps rightly so, that capitalist economies produce an unequal distribution of wealth. It is equally true, however, that socialist economies with their muted ability to produce such wealth will produce instead an equal distribution of poverty. A rising tide, however, will raise all boats, and even the people at the bottom of the economic ladder in a capitalist economy can experience hope and an improvement in their condition compared to the socialist countries where opportunities are less abundant.

From an economic standpoint, capitalism has proved to be an unparalleled success in providing growth and development to new and upcoming nations. Historically, it has brought many nations from the bowels of poverty and catapulted them into the dizzying heights of wealth, development and prosperity. Most socialist governments, on the other hand, have not been able to distinguish themselves as very good models of economic success.

The hidden hand of Adam Smith has stood the test of time; and for an economy to thrive and become vibrant and successful, it must provide powerful incentives for companies to become profitable and for individual people to succeed and have the opportunity to become wealthy. This is what will become the driving force for people to build, create and expand. To do this, there must be minimal governmental intervention, enlightened levels of taxation and active programmes to minimise cost.
This brings us then to the question of control. Socialist parties will always aspire to the control of the commanding heights of the economies of their respective countries to consolidate their resources, and hence their own power. Here, control is the overriding sentiment, and any extraneous build-up of private wealth in these socialist countries outside the ambit of government control would erode their power base and therefore be anathema to their mode of governance.
For this reason, very often in these countries, unbridled success in business and the creation of large pockets of private wealth are often met with oppressive resistance and excessive taxation.

The conventional wisdom is that too much control produces too many layers of bureaucratic red tape, and hence too little incentive to produce. Wealth creation then takes a back seat and is replaced by over-taxation and borrowing for purposes of national development. This is the classic socialist quagmire in which Jamaica now finds itself.

Socialism, because of its populist appeal, has become nothing more than a great tool for winning elections. For mending broken and non-performing economies, however, it has proved to be abysmal.

In Jamaica we are faced with two choices: a continued embrace of the highly socialist policies which we have inherited to date, but out of which has come very little by way of either economic or social development or a renewed path of free-market, free-enterprise economics that has the promise of successful and vibrant growth and development. Our ability to differentiate between the charisma that is now being offered as leadership and a sober and enlightened assessment of the issues will make the difference and determine our future.

- Lance Robinson is a freelance journalist. lrobinson22@gmail.com

Executive Class

Gardens with Gravel

Death to the Mullet!