The Incompatibility of Democracy and Capitalism

Capitalism in and of itself is merely glorified competition. As economic policy capitalism can not be paired with democracy in any true sense, at least not in the manner in which the American mind perceives democracy. The standard definition of democracy can mean one of two things. Firstly, democracy can simply mean government by elected representatives with the consent of the majority. In this setting there is no intention of equal rights so long as the majority of those governed select the representatives to govern them. This is perhaps the cleanest cut and most basic definition of democracy. The American mind has come to perceive democracy as meaning equality and opportunity for all, as well as consent to be governed by the choices of the majority. This would create a second definition of democracy, although not necessarily one which exists today.

To attempt to integrate Capitalism with the later definition is impossible. Capitalism and competition are one in the same, and with competition there can never be equality. Any competitive behavior is exemplified by the inevitable outcome of a hierarchy. A capitalist economic structure will always create a pyramid effect with power and thus economic security being more prevalent the higher up the pyramid one finds themselves. This allows capitalism no option but to place the wealth of the many in the hands of the few. In American society as of the year 2001 the top 1% of the population, rating by income, owned 33.4% of the total wealth of the nation. If one were to look at the top 5% of the population in the United States you would find that they own 59.2% of the total wealth of the nation. With the bottom 40% of the population owning a meager 0.3% of the wealth, that fact alone shows how the few reap the benefits of the many.

In American society mass media is controlled by these upper echelons of society. They have the means to sway the opinions of the hard working people of America in whatever direction they should wish. After the typical American comes home from work they continue to work preparing dinner and attending to the most basic of needs. There is no possibility for quality time with family members or friends in the hectic life of Americans. So what do Americans turn to for their ounce of entertainment? Why nothing short of television which provides them with quick and easily attainable entertainment as shows segments are divided into thirty minute blocks. These networks are controlled by the top 1% of American society and they eagerly spoon feed the working classes with senseless and biased material. Frequent commercial breaks in programming allow the upper echelons another opportunity to market useless products in an attempt to gain even more money from the hands of those who sweat and bleed for the smallest percentile. Network news is just another means for the powerful to retain that superiority. News channels could care less about what they report. Instead they report anything which will gain viewers and thus further increase their profits. Instead of containing political debates on theory and attempt to answer truly difficult questions network television opts to discuss minuscule differences between the only two mainstream political groups. These news networks instill a sense of difference between the Democratic and Republican parties, which in reality differ only in the most negligible of instances.

Both political parties rely solely on the capitalist system to retain their power. Both have passed legislation making it nearly impossible for any other political party to take form and run against them. The simple use of the terminology of any party other than Democrats or Republicans being a "third party" gives a derogatory notion to these candidates and parties themselves. Where Microsoft and Wal-Mart created business monopolies the Democrats and Republicans have created Political cartels.

America being a capitalistic society forces inequality to be prevalent. In capitalism one individual is viewed as above the rest by being the employer. This employer does no more work than an employee, and quite often even does less. However, the employer will nearly always receive far more money than the employee. In America the average corporate executive makes 419 times the annual income of an employee. In a society centered around money how can that allow anyone to be equal? It is fairly obvious that the executive will live a much life with a substantially higher standard of living than those below in the corporate chain. Employers in larger companies rarely do any physical work related to their business. In some instances employers don't even know how to do the jobs they're paying others to do. When was the last time you saw a corporate executive from a waste management company physically picking up the garbage? Yet these individuals gain money from others doing the "lesser" jobs.

Individuals who have achieved a certain level of prestige in capitalist societies begin to look down on anyone holding a lesser job. The rich and famous never want to be around the working classes, the janitors and service workers who are so vital to society are looked at as less than human. Without these individuals that capitalist society views as "lower" society would cease to function. Many times people forget that without farmers sweating outside growing food and people working on sewage lines everyone would be living very different lives. Capitalism doesn't allow wages to be evenly distributed and does not offer any incentive to accomplish the jobs actually vital to societies function. Instead people holding jobs as lawyers or executives who do little more than sign on the dotted line to destroy workers rights get paid the most money. America has become a society where those who work the least, as long as they've obtained a certain threshold of "success" dominate. Image if some of the top members of society actually had to cook their meals and couldn't venture out to a fine restaurant to eat, or they actually had to worry about whether they could afford to purchase new clothes. It's quite easily seen that the things could cause a great deal of stress for individuals who are "too good" to perform or worry over such things.

America is a society where the gap between the wealthy and poor grows ever further. Technology is not so much bringing us together as pushing us apart. Corporations are expanding to encompass global enterprises, and their domination of markets is slowly eroding the quality of life for all workers. In the name of competition and "survival of the fittest" those with money retain their money and squash anyone who could remotely pose a risk to their grandeur. As companies consistently attempt to find ways to reduce the cost of producing goods numerous workers pensions and wages have dropped in an effort to increase profit. Companies now attempt to outsource jobs to locations were people are willing to work for less. This creates multiple problems and solves none, unless you view as more unrestrained wealth in the hands of the few a benefit.

Workers in these foreign countries are willing to work for a fraction of what their United States counterparts will. This keeps their standard of living low as they willing accept a lower pay as long as they make money. Few realize they could compete for these jobs at the same salary as what is already being offered and better themselves. In America workers must now face unemployment or reduce their standard of living to remain competitive with these outsourced jobs. While throughout all of this the corporations widen their profit margins and gain further wealth at the expense of everyone else. As technological advances continue to flourish more jobs will require fewer people to be physically present to accomplish these jobs. This will allow corporations to outsource their jobs anywhere they can find the cheapest source of labor and force people to continually reduce their requirements to obtain these jobs as they compete for the lowest wage. The steady increase in corporate profits from such systematic endeavors will further increase the discrepancy between the rich and poor to sickening levels resembling those of the nobility and peasantry during the Medieval Ages.

As the cost of technology constantly drives the cost of overall production down it at first seems everyone is to gain. One would imagine that the employee, using technology must now do less physical labor than he previously had to. One could also assume that as technology furthers itself it drives its own cost down, thus becoming less expensive to the employer. However not everyone gains from this advancement of technology. While the cost to accomplish something has now gone done society as a whole will seek to pay less for the product being produced. Thus, the corporation will sell it's product for a proportionally less expensive cost. However, corporations always wish to maintain their profit, as they only seek to gain wealth. In order to accomplish this the employer will now decrease the employee's wage. As his wage falls proportionally to that of the cost to produce a product and its value on the market nothing seems to change. However, the introduction to technology causing this problem means that while the employee may not have the same level of physical labor to do he must still work his typical eight hour day. Thus, in the time he spends working he will create substantially more products than previously making his time to the employer more valuable but receiving no further compensation for producing more products.

Let us look at this instance with values put in place. The said product initially sells for a value of ten dollars. The cost of this product to be created by the employer is five dollars, with two dollars going to the physical components and three dollars being paid for the manipulation by the employee. Each product takes a total of two hours to be constructed. A new technology comes along which allows for the physical components of such a product to be constructed more cheaply. At the same time the technology allows for the product to be constructed at a faster pace. The lowering of the physical component's price forces the market value to be decreased. The product will now only fetch a market price of eight dollars. Although the employer must now only pay one dollar for the physical components, the employer will also want to lower the employees wage to keep all lowering of prices proportionate. The employee will now only receive two dollars for his hour of labor. Now the employer will make a five dollar profit just as before, assuming only one product is created an hour as before.

It is with a heavy heart that the realization that our society's call for democracy is not what it has the potential to be. Our value on the goodness of an individual's competitive spirit leaves little room for the implementation of a truly functioning democracy. Perhaps with awareness of this grave concern we can rectify the problem facing us before it becomes too large a challenge.