Here we'll be talking about ideologies - from left wing to right wing; from radical to reactionary and everything in between!
Over the course of the semester, I'll be posting articles and ideas on this blog that you will be expected to read and comment upon. Sometimes these postings will relate to a specific concept or case study from the course. Other times it will discuss a current event that deals with ideological values and beliefs.
I won't always be telling you when I've posted something new, so check often! Your comments will be used at the end of the course to help me evaluate your knowledge of course content and ideas. I will use this to help determine your mark. For many students in the past, this has had a big effect on their final grade!
Here's your first blogging opportunity - comment on this post by describing one ideology that you subscribe to. An ideology is a system of beliefs and values held by a person or a group of people that helps them to understand and interpret the world around them. Your ideology (or world view) helps to explain the past and determine a path towards the future. We all have many ideologies that help define who we are:
- political (communism, democracy, elitism etc.)
- economic (socialism, capitalism etc.)
- social (libertarianism, liberalism, conservatism. environmentalism, feminism etc.)
- religious (catholicism, Islam, protestantism, atheism, agnosticism etc.)
You might want to think about what political party you would vote for (especially given the recent federal and provincial elections, or the presidential election in the U.S.) or whether you believe in the rights of individuals to live their lives without government influence (individualistic values) or the rights of the group to be safe from problems such as poverty, fear and hunger through government policies (collectivist values). You may want to focus on a non-political ideology (such as religion) that reflects your beliefs.
It is very important that you discuss an ideological world view that you currently subscribe to rather than one that you think 'might be nice' based what you read in the textbook.
Here is an example of an excellent comment made by a previous student on this question:
I subscribe to the ideological belief that the utopic society would be comprised of a balance between capitalist and socialist values. Socialism inspires the idea of a perfect society, where every individual is treated equally regardless of how contributing to that society they may be. However I believe human nature is selfish in it's core, and as a result of that, a socialist society could never truly function. For example if a research scientist position pays the same amount as a grocery store cashier, an individual would likely choose the easier career. For it is human nature to choose the path of least resistance. A person who is naturally individualistic, will not willingly work towards collectivism if there is no incentive. Socialism is beneficial though in it's value of taking care of everyone. Capitalism is an effective societal alternative, on the merit of it's ability to take advantage of our natural pre-disposition to 'look out for self'. Capitalism often creates a spread of wealth from the successful entrepreneur, to the workers, and eventually to the surrounding communities and businesses. However the wealth differences between the rich and the poor become very problematic, and foster resentment between the opposing economic classes. I believe a society should have at it's core capitalistic values for economic prosperity, yet socialistic systems should be in place to provide everyone with equal opportunities to access education, healthcare, security, as well as an equal say in government.
IMPORTANT: Remember that you will need to have created a Google account with your last name in the ID in order to comment.
Comment Rubric:
Here is the rubric that I will be using to provide feedback for you on your blog comments/responses. It measures the following elements:
- How insightful your comments are.
- How well your comments demonstrate understandings of liberalism and other ideologies.
- How much effort was dedicated to discussing the required issue(s).
Comments are thoughtful, perceptive and insightful. Comments reflect considerable effort directed at understanding issues connected to liberalism and other ideologies described in the blog entry.
Proficient: Comments are accurate and interesting, but general. The author demonstrates a solid understanding of issues connected to liberalism and other ideologies described in the blog entry.
Satisfactory: Comments are brief and lacking depth but are connected to the issues
surrounding liberalism and other ideologies described in the blog entry. Effort is very basic, but no more.
Poor: Comments are scant and/or unrelated to the blog entry. The entry may be inappropriate in content and/or style and vocabulary. Required understandings are insufficiently demonstrated. Effort is unsatisfactory.
Poor: Comments are scant and/or unrelated to the blog entry. The entry may be inappropriate in content and/or style and vocabulary. Required understandings are insufficiently demonstrated. Effort is unsatisfactory.
The ideologies that I subscribe the most with would be liberal-socialism which is similar to how I see Canada as a whole. The socialist value I most subscribe to would giving individuals every opportunity to succeed, however, individuals can choose whatever advantages they see fit to better themselves and their lives. Liberalism would benefit those that invest heavily in gaining knowledge not only to benefit themselves but also to find economic prosperity in whatever profession they choose. I also believe that in a utopia there should be no “freeloaders”, those that miss their opportunities will not be “bailed out”. Liberalism means that all individuals should be accountable for their decisions whether they broke the law or made poor life choices. Socialism and its focus on making everything fair and equal would benefit individuals who want to advance prestige and give even more diversity in the workforce. Liberalism also allows anyone who works hard to prosper; diligence allows them to overcome any social barriers they may face. This liberal-socialism would facilitate the perfect climate for a society where all individuals can find prosperity in any form through freedom to carve their own path in life and an abundance of equal opportunities to do so.
ReplyDeleteProficient.
DeleteThis is interesting, Goodwin, but somewhat contradictory. The classical liberal position that you take (individual self-interest, personal responsibility, belief that 'handouts' encourage laziness etc.) are in direct opposition to the socialist view favoring the collective, government aid to those in trouble and so on. I'm also not sure what you mean when you say that socialism "would benefit individuals who want to advance prestige and give even more diversity in the workforce". Could you expand on that?
Manbir Dhaliwal
ReplyDeleteThe ideological belief that I subscribe the most would be socialism. This is how I see Canada in years to come. Some of the main characteristics of socialism are Planned Economy, Equal Opportunity to all, and State is responsible for basic necessities of life. In socialism a planned economy the state if responsible to plan all the economic activities like production, exchange, and distribution. Since the laws to demand supply do not operate in this system and since the state is solely responsible for distribution of wealth , the society as a whole prospers. Every potential individual will take into account as per the skills, talent, ability and how much are they willing to work to improve their skills which will determine their success. Thus, their economic is right are protected by their duties and no one is deprived of their basic needs. There are six basic needs in life and there are promised by the stat. Those needs are food, shelter, clothing, health, education, and employment. In this economic system stated needs will be provided without any discrimination. This socialism would be the perfect climate for a society and its individuals to grow and develop and find their own path in life which will be determined by their skills and talents and everyone no matter race, gender and religion with be given equal opportunity and basic right and needs to live.
Proficient.
DeleteYou seem to have a good understanding of the arguments in favor of socialism, although you really should edit your work before publishing it because it was, at times, hard to understand. Your position seems to be an extreme one - almost to the point of communism. Was that your intention?
Chantel Sanche
ReplyDeleteI believe that each form of political ideology should be considered to some extent. For example, socialism creates an environment where society is stronger together because there is no class discrimination. Although this ideology does not promote prosperity for individuals which contradicts human character to compete with each other. On the lines of liberalism I subscribe to the fact that everyone has a right to freedom and to have their basic needs met. My ideologies define this as fairness. I believe that individuals should have the opportunity to work to their fullest potential and compete for equality. This keeps the classes in society from separating to a larger extent which could lead to an unhealthy environment. Liberalism keeps the impression of humanity and gives the individual the freedom to become more successful. There is a point to where the government should assist an individual to fulfill their basic needs but only to a length where they will need to obtain a better lifestyle. liberalism creates a standard for society that encourages development for a better world and quality of life.
Proficient.
DeleteGood work. I like how you accept that ideologies are not black and white - we live in a world full of shades of grey. Some of your statements seem odd, however. How does one "compete for equality"? Seems the same as saying one should fight for pacifism or work hard to be lazy.
Addison Gugenheimer
ReplyDeleteThe ideological belief that I subscribe to would be environmentalism due to its efforts in creating a suitable and sustaining environment for upcoming generations to live in and holding major production companies accountable for excess emissions. Although this is a big issue to collectives or populations it has to be pressed upon the majority of our production companies and all countries. For example, the pollution of air, water and soil require millions of years to recoup. Therefore, industry emissions and motor vehicle exhaust are the number one pollutant in the world. One representative from a major oil company or production line may say that they have cut back significantly on the emissions their organization has produced recently, but in reality with the growing population and their need to accommodate for the rise in demand for a specific product, there will have to be reasonable benchmarks for them to comply and meet. The matter of correctness is not to displace these manufacturing companies but to provide constant awareness of the arising issues (global warming, water contamination) and their effect on the overall environment. However, when government intervenes it constructs emission committees, national summits, and underlying guidelines for all businesses and people to follow. I believe in a society that sets its benchmarks high will produce achievable deliverables and ultimately help achieve emission reductions. The challenge with the summit benchmarks in reality are that there will be moderate cutbacks to carbon and other emissions to help ease their attention in the media and generally be cautious about the environment as a whole. I believe that some action is better than no action at all thus the world’s leaders challenge is to hold each nation accountable to the same standards for world environmentalism, protection and sustainment. We have one earth and it is all of our responsibility.
Excellent.
DeleteThis is very well-explained and reflective of the series of values and beliefs that are the foundation of the environmentalist world view.
I don't really subscribe to one ideology without any context. On every issue I have a different opinion. This is an extremely difficult question to write about because it is too general. The only thing I'm certain about is that I'm a secularist. I value a secular government because I don't think that a book written 2000 years ago should dictate our modern worldview. Especially with our discoveries in the scientific field many of those passages have been rendered obsolete. Religion has a special place in society because it's old and people don't dare question it because the church has a lot of power and followers. Religious freedom needs to viewed a lot more critically than it currently is. No one should have the right to deny making a wedding cake, providing a marriage certificate or blowing someone up under the name of religious freedom. As a society we should be trying to unify with everyone and social constructs like religion keep us segregated.
ReplyDeleteExcellent.
DeleteDespite the disclaimer in your first few sentences, you have described a very well-defined ideological position. My question is related to why you feel that having different opinions on different issues means you lack a foundational ideology? Are you suggesting that you are contradictory in your interpretations of the world around you? That you sometimes interpret something you see and experience one way and then in a completely different way at another time, even if what you see is pretty much identical? I doubt it. I think you are probably more ideologically consistent than you think!
I subscribe to the ideological belief of capitalism. I believe in hard work, and the right to reap the rewards of ones work. Socialism is a good theory, but not a good practice. Why should one give up their hard earned wages to another who won't get a job simply because they are lazy? Capitalism creates hard working people and our society needs a lot more of them. We need people who are going to do their in our government, school systems and social programs to better our societies. They should be given the proper payment, and they should be able to retain it, instead if giving huge amounts back to the government, like we are doing now in Canada. I know that the government uses taxes for our benefit, but I think that more privatization should occur. If more privatization occurs that means more businesses, and more businesses means more jobs, and more jobs means that people have more money to spend, which in turn that more people will be able to live in comfort. In some cases this means that crime will also go down because if more people have money to spend, and they can afford what they want, then crimes such as stealing will plummet. With this in mind, I also believe that it is very important to help others in our communities that are not as fortunate, however, humans by nature are selfish beings, only interested in 'me, myself, and I' and being charitable can be difficult. I believe, however, that this nature can be changed. The concept of being charitable and helping 'your fellow man' needs to be better taught and reinforced in the schools and in the home, to the point of where it is able to weed out the selfish nature. By having a society that is taught to work hard, and to give what you can to those less fortunate, I believe that we can have a better chance of having a more utopian society.
ReplyDeleteExcellent.
DeleteThis is a very strong defence of capitalism. Very convincing. A socialist would argue, however, that your basic assumption that the unemployed receive welfare or UI because they are lazy is flawed. Many people are in financial trouble due to no fault of their own - they were laid off by a business, they are bankrupt through sickness, they suffered an accident or they are unable to find work because of an economic recession. In a capitalist society, such people are thrown to the wolves. Thus there needs to be government programs to support such people until they get on their feet again. How would you respond?
I subscribe to the environmentalism ideology that encompasses the idea that if we work to preserve the earth and its abundance of resources for generations to come, we can build healthier, happier societies and thus be healthier and happier ourselves. I am inclined to believe that humans are intrinsically selfish, therefore I also believe that this is why we have allowed environmental destruction to spiral out of control over the last century. Currently, we live in a "I want it and I want it now!" society, our constant consumption of mass produced, wrapper-covered foods, gasoline for our inefficient cars, and our lack of large-scale innovation in finding new, sustainable sources of energy all come together to create a diseased environment. The problem with this is that humans value survival, but we also value luxury and, most importantly, money. The reason the environment has been in decline since the industrial revolution? Money. We want to live in the most inexpensive luxury we can and while this leads to innovation through competition for business, it also leads to issues like 'the race to the bottom', and environmental destruction to meet our ever-growing material wishes. That said, I believe that once humanity as a whole opens their eyes and understands the full effect we have on the environment and it's influence on generations to come, whether humanity eventually realizes this or is forced to realize this due to environmental pressures such as unbreathable air, flooding, fires, climate change, and natural disasters, we will need to innovate and find ways to clean up our messes even if it costs more in the short term. In the long run, the most important job of each generation of humans needs to be preserving the earth for the next generation. Money is constantly in circulation and while a shift to emphasize environmentally friendly growth will hurt many economies, it is a necessary step in creating a healthier world. While we may lose some of the luxuries we currently have, in the long run, a cleaner, sustainable way of life will lead to healthier people and a global society that does not have to fear for the future of their children and grandchildren.
ReplyDeleteExcellent.
DeleteThis is another very strong expression of environmentalism. You indicated that human beings are basically selfish (a belief held by individualistic capitalists). Do you see a way that capitalism could encourage environmentalism? Typically, environmentalists oppose capitalism due to its sole focus on profit. Can it be argued that the pursuit of profit might lead to a healthier planet instead? At least at this point in history?
The ideologies that I would think what's best for the world and in my opinion the one I subscribe to would be Socialism, but it would never work in our time. On everything, people will still be treated the same no matter what profession they have. In whole, the truth about human nature is that we are never truly giving, and are all competitive in some aspects, which includes rivalries and competition in businesses. In the world we are living in right now, the ideology that I believe in would never truly work. Everyone would choose the easier job like a cashier and they would still be equal to a person that per say, owns a large company. People would most likely do things more better where they are rewarded for in return. In an all socialism society, no work would ever be done, and it would be minimal at best because people who do nothing would get something, and people who do everything for society gets as much in return, they would definitely revolt to the government . People would want to be respected as what they deserve. In the opposite side of the spectrum, capitalism provides everything for the people that work for what they do, but give nothing who can't work. It would be very difficult world to live in. What society needs is an equal spread of both socialism and capitalism that would benefit the workforce and government involvement. Yet, it will not happen in our world today because of greedy corporations and inequality of humans, but it would be a nice concept to look at and discussing ways to make our world a utopia.
ReplyDeleteExcellent.
DeleteI like how you recognize the problems of various ideologies. Remember that ideologies are not necessarily extreme. You describe a world in which all have the same standard of living, regardless of profession and that would lead to stagnation due to the lack of a profit motive. That is the problem with extreme socialism - what we call communism. But is that the only way? There is a third way - a mixed economy or democratic socialism - that we see in countries like Canada or Sweden which have proven quite successful.
ReplyDeleteGraham Lunt
The economic ideology that I connect with the most would be a more right-winged version of socialism. I believe in socialism because there is a enormous need for the public sector to be able to provide essentials like law enforcement, education, health care, etc., but I also believe that socialism sometimes goes too far providing too much support to those with little income. This is where I believe that the economic structure should be shifted farther right. Without the competitive structure of right-wing economics there would be less desire to attempt to achieve more in life resulting in a decline in hard-working individuals and an increase in those who wrongly benefit from others hard work. This would create an economy where competition exists and workers are taxed moderately to support public services but not taxed to bring those with proper jobs to comfortable living standards. With this system people are pushed to try to excel in life but not left with absolutely nothing if they find themselves in a tough situation.
Excellent.
DeleteWell thought-out and demonstrates understandings of problems and benefits of both sides of the spectrum. (BTW, no need to provide your name in your comment as it appears that your name is in your Google account name).
Jheel Shah
ReplyDeleteAn ideology that I subscribe to is religious pluralism. Religion is a sensitive topic but according to the ideology of religious pluralism it should not be one to cause conflict. Religious pluralism is one that builds tolerance and understanding allowing for different religions to coincide. Building tolerance towards other people's beliefs and perspectives is taking a step towards ending extreme actions taken in the name of religion. These actions result in separation of people whereas religious pluralism is a step towards uniting people. This is also linked to liberalism because this allows individuals to follow their own religion without the influence or pressure of other religions. Religion has always been an area of conflict throughout history and currently and a way to prevent these conflicts in the future would be to accepting the idea of religious pluralism. Thoigh the idea of implementing religious pluralism in society seems nearly impossible if curtains step are taken there is some hope that it will be a possibility in the future.
Excellent.
DeleteThis is very interesting, but I needed to see more explanation of the values and beliefs underlying this ideological position. What would such a society look like and how could it be created? Love the accurate connection to modern liberalism.
This is an extremely difficult question to answer because it is impossible to agree with one ideology one hundred percent of the time. However, I believe in several ideologies to an extent, and that extent differs based on the issue or situation. For example, every political system has its issues, but some have greater problems than others – and of course the one you believe has the least problems is the one you accept as your political ideology. One ideology I believe in is atheism – but I don’t completely scorn everything in religious writings. I think all religions have some very good guidelines to live life by and some excellent lessons and teachings. Religion also gives you strong morals or “code of conduct” which is invaluable. But I believe that’s all religion should be taken as; a book of good rules and guidelines to follow for life. When people start to turn it into more than that, horrible things are done in the name of something that does not exist. Horrible things such as the Crusades or extremist terror attacks. Yes, I completely believe in the right for someone to practice their religion, freedom to discuss it, believe in it, but only to the extent that nobody gets hurt over it. I also feel that atheism should be taken to that same extent. To those who strongly believe in religion, I completely respect that choice. There are many positive thing to religion but I strongly feel some take it too far. However, I cannot see the logic in believing in everything written in a 2000+ year old story, even when much of it we can prove never happened or is impossible. I also don’t feel as if there is a greater something watching out for us or in the “everything happens for a reason” mentality, honestly I just think some stuff just happens and we’ve got to accept that. But that’s just my religious ideology, and although I feel it is “correct” many others will disagree – that’s just the way we are, and if we all agreed we’d never make any progress or see any faults.
ReplyDeleteExcellent.
DeleteVery interesting - and certainly well-considered. It is certainly true that nobody follows any particular ideology 100% - even fanatics. That is one of the problems with the political and economic spectra: they are 2D and thus fail to allow for the infinite variety of positions reflecting our individual ideological footprint. But the existence of ideological characteristics makes it easier to understand ourselves and explain our beliefs to others. Saying you are an 'atheist' allows others to understand you without you saying anything else other than the unique attitudes towards atheism that you explain above. It's an important symbol for us to use in our personal identities.
Ryan Nowakowsky
ReplyDeleteWhile this seems like a simple question, you can not simply subscribe to an ideology. You must first understand what your ideology means and most importantly how it interacts with other ideologies. For example, you might support a political party because your parents did and you are okay with that parties values. However, when you look at the way they view the other parties you will probably notice that the two parties do not get along very well with the other parties. Sometimes your political party will argue against the other party just because they can, even if the idea is a good one. The political party will do this because they would not want their opponents to do something positive even if it slightly agreed with their ideologies. This might seem counter-intuitive to go against your ideology, by doing this they are supporting another part of their ideology. Basically, some parts of a ideology are more important than others. In some cases people will disagree about which part of the ideology they support more, making it impossible to just pick one ideology to follow. That being said, you can easily pick the ideology that best suits your values, because they are all fairly different.
Satisfactory.
DeleteWhile all that you say is, I think, accurate (although its a bit confusing), you didn't really do what you were asked to do. Certainly, no person, party or institution is a perfect fit for any particular ideology. The description of an ideology describes an ideal which nobody can be perfectly reflective of. Yet we can still find ideologies that, as you say, "best suits your values". This assignment was for you to describe one that fits that description. Reply to complete it and improve your grade if you wish.
Jessica Moore
ReplyDeleteThis question was extremely broad which made it more difficult for me to answer. However, I strongly subscribe to the ideology of environmentalism; the idea that we are trying to sustain our earth for future generations. An environmentalist is defined as 'a person whom is concerned with, or advocates the protection of the environment'. While we have many environmentalists and people who spend their lives to ensure a happier, healthier future, many people ignore the fact that every single day our planet faces pollution, natural disasters and plain negligence from us as humans. The emissions from factories are ruining our planet, just for us to have material things which leads to the argument that we are humans are selfish by nature.
If we could all step up and do our own part in keeping our earth sustainable and healthy, we ourselves would have more to look forward to and more for our future generations to have and more beauty to see.
Proficient.
DeleteWell done. How do you deal with the opposing issues that environmentalism faces? Why do people 'ignore the fact that every day our planet faces pollution...'?
The social ideology I believe in the most is feminism. Every person regardless of their sex should be treated equal. Whether it is being treated equally at home, at work, or on the streets, one of the sexes should not be considered “superior” to the other. The ratio of males to females in the world is 1:1 so there shouldn’t even be a superior sex. Feminism does not mean that women should be better than men, but to rather raise the female privileges so it is equal to male privileges. An example of why feminism is necessary is because of the assumption of male superiority unless there is a significant age gap between them. We think like that because of how society set the norm for us. That is why the US possibly having the first female president is such a big deal. There is also verbal and sexual harassment that women have to deal with. Men think that catcalling and such are compliments toward females when in reality it makes them uncomfortable. Women are taught to watch their drinks instead of teaching men not to put date-rape drugs in drinks. These are few of the reasons why feminism is needed. Furthermore, this shouldn’t just be about cisgender people, transwomen should also be considered into this ideology. So if we were all treated the same despite the different genders, hopefully we can understand each other and work together to make the world a better place.
ReplyDeleteExcellent.
DeleteOur first feminist! Well explained and justified. I was very interested in your decision to include transgendered women and would have like to have seen an explanation given for why you wanted to include them (as they should be, for sure).
Nicolas Troncoso
ReplyDeleteAn ideology that I myself subscribe to is religious agnosticism. Although religion is a very touchy subject I believe in agnosticism. Being agnostic means that I neither have faith nor disbelief in God. This being said I can understand why some people have such a faith that they should worship a higher power such as God. One religion that I strongly admire is Buddhism because it demonstrates that in my opinion being aware. It follows some points that I strongly agree with such as 'The Four Noble Truths' which describes how we as humans go about in life (the cycle of life). The reason I am agnostic is due to the fact of the unknown in the sense that we as human beings create this illusion (some might say) of a religion. I want to believe in a higher power and an after life but I cannot rap my mind around the fact that all religions are man made.
Proficient.
DeleteVery interesting. A question: what do you mean by "because it demonstrates that in my opinion being aware" in relation to Buddhism? Is it the lack of a 'god' that makes Buddhism an appealing religion for you? Yet, being agnostic suggests that you find the existence of a mystical or supernatural set of rules to be unknowable. Wouldn't this also apply to the 'Four Noble Truths'? If you "strongly agree with" them, you are making a leap of faith, are you not?
Joel Ramnath
ReplyDeletePersonally, I am not bound by the principles of one singular ideology. My worldview is shaped by my values and beliefs which in part have evolved from my faith. My unique identity is a product of my upbringing as well as my bi-racial, bi-cultural, and bi-socioeconomic heritage. Therefore, my personal ideology would reflect my unique identity and would encompass several different ideologies rather than just one. Describing me as having one specific ideology would marginalize my present and future contributions to society as well as unnecessarily label me. Furthermore, I see ideology as a fluid concept rather than a static form. For example, in 1947 The Communist Party of China came into power; for decades China held a communist ideology (an extreme form of socialism). However, following the economic revolution led by Deng Xiao Ping, China started slowly implementing capitalism. Today China, is still technically a “communist” country, however it has 213 billionaires, second only to the capitalist United States.
As a dual citizen of the United States and Canada, I embrace my freedoms given to me under the United States Constitution and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. I appreciate both countries which allow for the freedom to express a wide spectrum of ideologies. I can embrace capitalism and still be true to social justice issues that concern me because my personal worldview supersedes any one ideology. I believe a combination of ideologies brings depth to society.
Excellent.
DeleteOf course, every person is a construct of a variety of different views - no one ideology defines who we are. That said, humans seem to need labels to help symbolize dominant features of their world view. Note that the assignment asked for a description of one ideology that you hold - not to suggest that this is the only one that you ascribe to. I love your suggestion that ideologies are fluid - they most certainly are. Liberalism itself is hugely different than it was when it first appeared during the Industrial Revolution. Originally, liberalism was basically what we now view as conservatism. It was highly individualistic and critical of government involvement in people's lives. It has obvious evolved a great deal as modern liberalism is far more collectivist and accepting of the role of government in protecting our freedom. Well done.
The political ideology that I reside with the most would be democracy evidently because it has a number of advantages, foremost among which are safeguarding and representing the interests of the people. I strongly support political freedom as it is a big concept tied to liberalism. Equality is key to democracy, and this includes equality before the law and equal rights to power. When discussing issues in a debate every idea must be looked at as being neither wrong nor right. Equality before the law essentially means that no person should be discriminated against because of their race, wealth or connections. Similarly, these factors should not prevent any person from being elected as an official representative of the people. Democracy also seeks to safeguard freedom. However the question of how free individuals are under a strict government body is a reoccurring discussion. I believe in a society that keys on the idea of equality and ultimately supports a democracy. The idea of an equal nation that can pass by discriminative tendencies and come together as one encourages democracy. As a political doctrine, it accepts the need for a government but states that it is the job of the government to promote peace and unity. In theory, democracy should be driven by public will, thereby eliminating the need for and likelihood of sedition or revolution. The principles of democracy in theory remain inherently advantageous to citizens, and democratic governments remain answerable to the people. We all have a voice and as a nation we create one.
ReplyDeleteExcellent.
DeleteThis is a very good analysis. I was wondering when somebody was going to bring up democracy, the liberal political system. I'm curious about one claim that you make. You write that, in democratic systems, "it is the job of the government to promote peace and unity". I question this. All governments seek unity - whether dictatorships or democracies (although I would suggest that unity is far more important in dictatorships, where alternative viewpoints are repressed). However, democracies encourage discord (non-violent, of course) as it permits dissent and infinite political and social differences as part of its reason for existence. If you are defining peace as being the opposite of war, this is also not necessarily true. Many warlike democracies have and do exist (arguably, the U.S. chief among them).
Ujala Batool
ReplyDeleteI subscribe to the ideological beliefs presented by the religion of Islam. Although not extremely religious, these ideologies help me establish a foundation of the kind of individual I would like to become. Islam to me is almost like a guide. Despite what it is portrayed as, the religion of Islam promotes peace and equality amongst all individuals which I personally value. For example, the Quran has countless statements and verses advocating the need to treat society’s members with the upmost respect regardless of how they come off towards you. Due to Islam being my primary base of ideologies, I am able to react to situations with sympathy and grace. Recently I vacationed to Iraq in which I unfortunately witnessed two children quarrelling for a morsel of food. Since I was with a group, I was able to witness the abundance of ignorant and generous reactions towards the children. Personally, I felt sympathetic towards them and decided to buy them both a bag of chips and juice – this case is a little on the extreme side though. Virtues such as patience, respect, attentiveness, and generosity come into play in my everyday activities due to the fact that the basis of my personality is built on those Islamic teachings. All in all, the religious ideologies of Islam accentuate the decent qualities in me, making me appear as and become a better person.
Excellent.
DeleteStrong descriptions here - I particularly liked the personal anecdote that helps to define the values and beliefs underlying your ideological position. Well done.
A political ideology which I closely identify with is social liberalism. This ideology helps to shape my view that individuals in today's society are all deserving of dignity, respect and equality regardless of their race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs or socioeconomic standing. Social liberalism strives to protect the rights of individuals to live their lives as they choose, while ensuring social justice at the same time. I believe that those who have more should contribute more, in order to support those who are unable to provide for themselves. Within Canada, the progressive tax system is one example that I support, and internationally I strongly support countries that are aiding in the refugee crisis, by welcoming many refugees into their country and promoting tolerant views toward them. I fully support the basic social liberalism principle that is the obligation to act for the benefit of society as a whole. Social liberalism helps to give a voice to the voiceless, and empowers those without means and resources. This is where I feel a liberal government can "even the playing field" by ensuring that the social needs of all members of society are being met.
ReplyDeleteExcellent.
DeleteA very strong discussion of the basis of modern liberalism and its collectivist tendencies. I'm curious why you call yourself a social liberal rather than a socialist. The descriptions you provide could also be applied to socialism. Why do you stop short? What is it about socialism that you reject?
Mufei Sun
ReplyDeleteThe ideology I think is best for the world is communism but the one I subscribe to is capitalism. I think in this day communism is still only a good theory. Humans are selfish and lazy by birth. Overcoming nature is the true greatness of human. Communism is a world where everyone overcomes the nature successfully, works hard and cares about others which I think it is impossible in my time. Capitalism is the ideology I believe in because it creates hard working people who are necessary to the society. Everyone will need to work to earn what they want. If various personal businesses exist, more people will have job opportunities which means they will have money to afford what they want. When the economy becomes good, crimes like stealing and robbing will go down and the society will be more stable. At that time, people who are less fortunate and cannot work can also get better help.
For liberalism, I subscribe to equality, choices and values of individuals. These can also be linked to capitalism because both capitalism and liberalism emphasize individuals. Sometimes the two ideologies are the support of each other because liberalism mostly encourages people to have more freedom and choices of life and capitalism asks less involvements from the government on economy. Capitalism can be defined as a form of economic liberalism and more choices of life cannot exist without the economic foundation.
Proficient.
DeleteWhile your discussion reveals some strong understandings, there are some contradictions that get in the way to a certain extent. It seems to me that you are suggesting that communism is a nice idea but, since it contradicts human nature, it can't work. But that would also suggest that your personal values align with that ideology (you think it is "best for the world". But the rest of your comment strongly suggests otherwise. Good job demonstrating the benefits of captialism (classical liberalism).
Kelsey Dupuit
ReplyDeleteThe economic ideological belief I subscribe to most is a balance between socialism and capitalism. I believe that while socialism provides fair opportunity for society, capitalism works in the belief that non-state ownership provides profit. Socialism allows a greater percentage of citizens to have a better quality of life, while capitalism favours entrepreneurs, offering benefits to those who have earned and worked towards their high quality of life. Although a socialist society would create benefits for every citizen, our world would not be able to function properly as a strictly socialist society. Capitalism provides a sense of self-worth and achievement to those who work their way to what they have earned. The more effort put into school or a job, the more likely it is that the individual will receive greater benefits and be able to create a better quality of life. To some extent, those who put in the effort to succeed should not have to share their earnings with another individual who has not worked to better his own life. In some circumstances, an underprivileged individual may not be able to provide for himself and some support may be needed, although a wealthier person should be able to benefit from their efforts by keeping a larger proportion of their earnings, as the difference in quality of life is often a result of lifestyle choices. For example, education provides many individuals with the opportunity to work for type of lifestyle they wish to live. With education, the difference between poor and wealthy is often as a result of the effort one decides to apply to his own learning. With a lower level of education, comes a lower income and a lower quality of life. Socialism provides the opportunity for all to succeed, while capitalism rewards those who are able to use opportunities that have been provided in order to better their lives. Overall, balance of both socialism and capitalism is needed in our society today.
Excellent.
DeleteCanada would seem to be a perfect place for you to live - given that our system attempts to find the balance you seek.
An ideology I agree with is feminism, more specifically intersectional feminism. I don't believe anybody should be treated differently because of there gender but If we only look at the struggles of cisgender, heterosexual white women we are not truly fighting for equlity to quote Kimberle Crenshaw "women experience opression in varying configurations and in varying degrees of intensity" and I think it is important to recognize this. My personal experiences with sexism are different to a women of colour or a trans women because I have never lived those narratives but I think the only way to truly fight the patriarchy is as a collective. If your feminism is not inclusive, it's flawed to the core.
ReplyDeleteProficient.
DeleteThis is very interesting - I just wish it had gone further into explaining the concept of intersectionality and how it fits with your personal experiences.
An ideology that I subscribe myself to would be religious ideas that are brought up into the Sikhism religion. This particular ideology helps to define myself, and aids in guiding me to make important decisions that affect me daily. Following this religion also helps me to connect to others who have the common ideology as I do. The religion Sikhism teaches you to forgive others, and to be kind to people of all races and genders and that all are equal. Understanding these concepts and embracing them have guided me to become the person I am today. Another thing the Sikhism religion teaches you is the belief of what goes around comes around, in other words karma. The idea that if something bad is done to you by an individual, that the individual will have something bad done to them back. This has taught me that although someone can do something negative and get away with it doesn’t mean that it won’t come back to them another day. This also aids in how I, as an individual should treat others, that kindness is rewarded with kindness, and forgiveness is rewarded with forgiveness. This certain ideology also connects me to others who also have the same ideology. Talking about it and connecting with others help to establish strong relationships with others. Common values and beliefs help us connect to each other and understand and help each other if advice is needed as someone goes through difficult times. An interesting idea about ideology is that when you discuss your specific ideology compared to others who have different ideologies. Discussing the beliefs that one has grown up with compared to another individuals beliefs helps to understand the different ways that religion can impact a person life. Its interesting how two people who live in the same city and go to the same school can grow up in the same environment but have completely different beliefs. Interesting how certain ideologies can completely change the type of person that one will be when they grow up, whether you follow it strictly or occasionally, it provides a guideline to how you make your decisions and how you interact with others.
ReplyDeleteGurbir Mann
Excellent.
DeleteYour personal experiences with Sikhism connect well with the more general discussion of ideology. Super job!
Jordan Tao
ReplyDeleteThe ideology that best fits my beliefs and values is classical liberalism. Socially, I personally believe that people should be allowed to be make their own choices and able to live the life that they deem appropriate. As I believe in absurdism, I see no consequence in being able to live my life the way I want to, and it is only fair to afford this right to others. Economically, I tend to favour capitalism as I believe people should be rewarded for their own efforts. While this is a nice ideal to strive towards, realistically not everyone will always make the “right” choices and that is where government comes into play. It is my belief that anarchism, the purest form of freedom, is doomed to failure due to humans’ lack of foresight as dictated by their nature. People tend to choose a path which they find easiest in the moment or in some cases try to force their own ideology on society at large, thus a system based in anarchy is unsustainable. While I hold classically liberal values at heart, the current framework in which our systems and society exist makes my values unrealistic.
On the other hand, we cannot take government control to the extreme as has been demonstrated in several instances throughout history, such as: Nazi Germany, USSR, Maoist China, and continuing onto modern day, North Korea. Therefore the only reasonable solution in realistic terms would be a society grounded in capitalistic values with some socialist leanings, exemplars for such a system include the Scandinavian nations and Canada. Not only do these nations provide a large degree of freedom, both social and economic, they also provide safety nets for people who get unlucky at no fault of their own, such as getting injured (public healthcare) and not being able to afford education (public education). Additionally, there are certain aspects which are better entrusted to the collective than the individual outside of these safety nets, such as national safety. While this requires some sacrifice of individual rights and freedoms in accordance with the social contract, it provides a greater return for the community as a whole, and ultimately benefits the individual.
Excellent.
DeleteNice reference to the 'social contract', Jordan! You provide a fantastic rationale for democratic socialism.
An ideology that I could best subscribe to would be a modest centre-left position on the political spectrum. Economically speaking, in my opinion a centre-left placement would allow a healthy balance between both conservative and liberal policies and agendas.
ReplyDeleteFor example, in my opinion, I feel that everyone should have access to firearms and should be permitted to use them for any purpose (that doesn't violate another persons liberty) they choose. With that being said, it is irrational to advise such a liberal stand-point on the matter. There must be a healthy middle ground where we can restrict use of firearms in certain cases. Perhaps classifying certain firearms under descriptive sub categories, for instance, we could label shorter barrelled firearms under a subcategory that allowed an organized system in which we could restrict the subcategory to an individual who required an easily concealable object. A longer barrelled firearm could be labelled under a subcategory that is more liberal to who can posses this variety for hunting or sport - being that it is less easy to conceal.
Another instance that I admire a centre-left political position is when we evaluate the environment (more specifically global warming, climate change and environmental degradation). I'm always intrigued as a young person living in the province of Alberta, specifically speaking, a province with such a lack of economic diversity that if we are not careful, this province could be dead (economically speaking), but I digress. It is interesting to hear the previous Conservative government discuss their balanced and astute approach to the environment and economy of Canada. Where they display their plan to improving the Canadian economy versus destroying the planet, and falling down somewhere in the middle. Where we have half the amount of jobs beside half the amount of "burning" the planet and somehow this appears sound and logical to the former government members. So when you have an enormous drought like the one they had in New Zealand in 2013 that wiped 1.5 billion dollars off of the New Zealand economy, that was jobs lost. That is the cost of climate change. In 2015, Whangenui suffered from enormous floods. Previously, every year up to 2015 and following, there are increasing droughts, storms, fires and floods. Many forget that this comes at a cost to the economy and the jobs many claim they are "protecting". These are consequences to a liberal strategy to pollution and other leading factors in climate change. Now if we took a look at a truly centred policy, we could evaluate a declining global environment and the global economy. We let things go as they will and we intervene if a certain environment destructing factor increases in presence.
The centred "va et viens" approach I mentioned above can be applied to a religious stand-point as-well as a social one. Where we allow things to happen as they will, naturally - and we intervene only when necessary. I strongly disagree with other people's conservative versus liberal ideologies because it is unhealthy to subscribe too much into one ideology. There must be a healthy and adaptable middle ground where we can have policies and laws that protect people but could be loosely enforced with certain exceptions.
Excellent.
DeleteYou bring up many important aspects to ideology, most particularly the fact that nobody fits neatly into the box of one particular world-view. We are the sum total of many different ideologies. I would be very interested in hearing more about your view on gun control, especially given the catastrophic carnage resulting from gun 'freedom' in the U.S., where the wide availability of firearms kill and wound over 90 000 people every year. What beliefs and values underlie your position that guns should be more freely available in Canada?
My father and I both hunt and use firearms for sports as-well. I am not a fan of the firearm restriction as a whole because I feel that individuals that want to do damage will find other methods of that. Also, if we make firearms illegal to posses, the group of law-abiding hunters suffer.
DeleteFair enough. Would you be willing to ban non-hunting firearms? I'm not sure that there is any excuse for assault rifles or handguns - both of which are about hunting people, not animals. As for finding other ways to harm people, the issue is ease. If I can't get a semi-automatic rifle with large-capacity magazines, I'm forced to use a knife or some other weapon that makes it difficult to kill a large number of people in a short period of time. Sure, I might kill one or two, but then I'd be overpowered before I could go any further. This isn't true with such firearms.
DeleteI currently don't know where I stand on non-hunting firearms. On one hand, it's pretty damn fun to shoot a rapid-firing rifle for sport and for fun. On the other hand, there is no real NEED for them. Currently, all concealable firearms and automatic-firing firearms are prohibited by law unless inherited or unless you have previous military or law enforcement background. Bottomline is that I don't think that it is in anyone's position (not my government, not my father) to tell another person what they can and cannot do. "L'état, c'est moi".
DeleteOne ideology I subscribe to is Liberalism. An ideology based off liberty and equality is important because as human beings, we all should have the right to live freely as other human beings. If one person has a right that another citizen does not, that causes tension and will not result in a peaceful civilization and as well as separate others as equals. I also agree with most of the ideas the Liberal Party of Canada had displayed during the federal election. From their platform and views on helping the middle class to having an open and honest government. They based their platform on exactly what Liberalism is; equality and liberty. They treat us citizens with equality by opening their doors to us and being truthful with on what they do behind the scenes so to speak. For everyone to be treated equally, people should realize that their opinions are not the only right ones, others see the world differently and not everyone has to agree with everyone. That is what makes us who we are as a person. Having liberty or freedom gives you allows you to have a voice to make a difference in the world, and it also allows you to stand up for what you believe is right. Having that right allows you to vote for whatever political party you want to vote for, follow any religion you desire and be who you want to be. Liberalism is what I subscribe to because having liberty and equality are the two helpful things that will bring people together and show them that they are not so different after all.
ReplyDeleteExcellent.
DeleteI'd be interested in hearing which liberalism (modern or classical) you subscribe to. It sounds somewhat modern to me...
Sinead Ho
ReplyDeleteI subscribe to the ideological belief of liberalism as it promotes freedom, human rights, and equality. Rather than favoring the rich and large businesses, liberalism supports the general welfare of society and encourages progress that would benefit the majority of people and not one particular group of people. But in exchange for a more equal and just system, the government needs more power in order to control the people and the economic system so that it would help the community as a whole, which could bring economic difficulty and would discourage competitiveness in business. Socialism is in a way similar to liberalism and appears to be ideal, but it is difficult to accomplish especially with the increase of millennials who are not interested in working. To be honest, it is difficult to answer this question because it is not only what ideology I subscribe to, but is also a question of freedom or order and peace or justice. It is difficult to create an ideology that would satisfy everyone because one would have to give up something to get the other, thus making it very difficult to achieve a balanced system that can make a country successful and keep its people happy.
Excellent.
DeleteYou will discover that you are referring to what we call 'modern' liberalism - which is center/center-left on the political/economic spectrum, as opposed to 'classical' liberalism (the original liberalism) which is what we call conservatism today and which is individualist and opposed to government intervention. I'm interested in what you mean by "especially with the increase of millennials who are not interested in working". Are they lazy? Do they define work differently? How does this make socialism less viable? You are very correct when you point out the difficulty of making everyone happy. Politicians face this problem every day!
Amaar Atwal
ReplyDeleteThe ideology that I subscribe to the most would likely be liberalism. I strongly head towards liberalism because it fits right in the middle, by that I mean that it doesn’t push more towards government but at the same time it doesn’t go to the polar opposite direction. I feel that when there’s too much government involved (dictatorship) it brings along more and more laws, bylaws, etc… Because of these people’s rights and freedom get trampled on, this deeply affects peoples way of life. But on the other hand I also believe that we should have a limit to how much freedom we have. The reason for this is because that I feel that human nature tends to lead us down an uncivil path (in my opinion). If we don’t have a limit we usually try to push our luck till some bad falls upon us, this intern can sometimes lead to chaos which can also heavily affect people’s way of life. But I stick more towards liberalism because I feel it has a good balance of the two sides. People have a fair amount of freedoms and rights which can provide a greater experience of life and can lead to more opportunities. As well it has a reasonable quantity of the government’s involvement, making sure that we are safe and protected but still giving us a good amount of independents. The government also gives more opportunities for us like health care, education, etc… With this balance I believe that there would also be fewer riots and less people upset about how the system works, if there’s too much government control people could feel furious which obviously can lead to riots (same thing goes for the opposite side like mentioned before). Liberalism (in my opinion) has a reasonable balance of government and the right amount of independents people have; it gives and takes a good amount from people which overall benefits them as a whole.
Excellent.
DeleteWell argued. The balance is a difficult one to find. Where is the limit on either side?
An ideology that I would most subscribe myself with is catholicism. My beliefs and values have been heavily shaped by a catholic background and have guided me in making countless decisions. This ideology has quickly become something I define myself with and having a group of people to connect with from these same beliefs has made it easier. Having peers who have the same ideology as I enables me to create an even deeper understanding on the church's teachings. Catholicism has taught me some fundamental rules on how I should interact with others depending on how I, myself, would want to be treated back. Those same rules are what I keep as a reminder to myself whenever I talk to someone. Although I must say, that while I believe in some values and teachings from the church, there are some beliefs that I would not partake in being "catholic". For example, leaders in the Catholic hierarchy have spoken against LGBTQ+ rights and same-sex marriage wether civil or religious. This is a belief that I completely do not support and I continue to voice despite the consequence of others belittling my means to believe in the ideology of catholicism.
ReplyDeleteExcellent.
DeleteIt is often difficult to be bound by the entire structure of rules present in any religion. I appreciate your critical examination of your catholicism - looking at both the benefits you see to your faith and those elements with which you disagree. This is, as you point out, the nature of ideology. It is rare that someone is able to subscribe 100% to the values and beliefs of any one particular ideology.
As I’m sure many people have pointed out this question is hard because there are so many ideologies that I subscribe to, but probably the one that I know about that is the most influential on who I am today would be socialism. I believe that a society should be lead with the idea that everyone grows together instead of the richest 1% owning 50% of the world's wealth. If society continues in this path then more people will end up homeless, middle class will turn to lower class and the upper class will continue to distance itself from the rest of society. I have these beliefs because of my experiences in taekwondo and as an instructor and what I have learned is that you must spread your love through helping others especially the less fortunate. To quote the great Dr. Seuss “unless someone like you care a whole awful lot, nothing is going to get better. It's not.” So it is probably quite obvious but I very strongly believe in social services as well as volunteering. I also believe that everyone deserves equal opportunity in society to make a living which not every receives in a capitalist society. I think the best way to achieve that is through more social services that not only feed or temporarily house the less fortunate but also educate them and support them. I also think that I socialistic society where income is controlled would have much higher job quality in the sense that people would not choose their careers based on how much money they would receive but instead be making those important decisions based on what they genuinely enjoy doing which would make people more inclined to do a better job for whatever their job may be. There are obvious flaws in this thought/dream of mine one being that people would take advantage of it and choose a job that is very easier like grocery store cashier for example. Another being that there would be a lot less people doing jobs other people do not like or can not handle like plumber or doctor. So in conclusion I believe very strongly in the idea of socialism but I think the ideal society thrives in a healthy combination of socialism with a sprinkle of capitalism.
ReplyDeleteExcellent.
DeleteThis is a very strong defence of socialist views. I appreciate how you have included your own experiences in explaining how you arrived at your beliefs. The potential flaws you point out are interesting. It almost seems as though communism was what you were supporting since the concerns you mention are largely present there, not in a democratic socialist state where all incomes are not equal (thus doctors wouldn't earn the same as cashiers and thus there is incentive to become one).
The ideology that I subscribe to the most would a mix of socialism and capitalism. Communism may sound like a good idea but people can be lazy and selfish so it's not good in practice. Socialism provides us with government run services such as health care and education, and capitalism allows us to make our own decisions on what we buy and sell with the money we earned. In a society like this we pay for our services through tax so we all get health care and education run by the government instead of these services being provided by private companies focused on profit. The government should be involved with some services but should not be involved with everything as people's freedom will be threatened. I believe that a mix of capitalism and socialism is the best system for society.
ReplyDeleteProficient.
DeleteWell done - the mixed economy you describe seems to be the most popular choice for countries in the 21st century. The question that arises is how to find the right balance. The U.S. is far more capitalist than Canada is. You mention that we should get some services from the government but other things should be left alone in order to preserve freedom. What is the dividing line for you?
An ideology that I strongly subscribe to is environmentalism. Although some believe that environmentalism is just about creating a sustainable environment for future generations I believe it is also about finding a balance between humans and the huge ecosystem we are part of. Although lots of pollution and GHG emissions comes from large production companies, our day to day actions contribute to global warming, ocean acidification, and many other environmental concerns. Not only should people advocate for the decrease in emissions from production companies but also continue to find sustainable energy sources, replace petroleum powered cars, decrease household garbage and do anything they can to create a greener earth. Not only has being a part on an ideology such as environmentalism impacted my position on issues but it has also impacted my actions. My family and I regularly hold community wetlands clean ups and respect the animals and environment we are a part of. As Gwyneth pointed out humans are selfish and they will often look at the initial cost to them rather than the final bigger picture. People continue to value money and luxuries when if they just sacrificed little of what they have we would be able to begin to repair the damage we have done.
ReplyDelete-Sarah Wankiewicz
Excellent.
DeleteYou must be excited by the recent NDP announcement that they will be committing to 30% renewable energy for Alberta by 2030! How do you believe that the problem you bring up at the end of your post can be solved? If we are naturally selfish, how do you get people to change their habits before disaster strikes?
The political ideology that I reside with the most would be democracy evidently because it has a number of advantages, foremost among which are safeguarding and representing the interests of the people. I agree with freedom within individuals, but I also agree with government involvement and protection. Equality is key if you as a nation want to be kept peaceful, when there is a balance of power tied in with citizens, there is no power to abuse. I also believe that if an individual earns their own power the chance that they will abuse it will be a lot lower than when a person is given power. Freedom of speech is very important because it gives every individual an opportunity to express their values and beliefs which are the two very big factors which influence an individuals ideology. I also believe religion is an ideology I find very important in my life. I am a Christian, but I also believe anyone should be able to worship any god they choose. No one should be stopped from worshiping a certain religion or god. My worldview is shaped by my values and beliefs which in a way has evolved from my faith. My unique identity is a product of my upbringing as well as my bi-racial heritage. My life now that I am thinking about it is accompanied by multiple different ideologies and not just a single one. Ideologies are what creates our vast society and what makes everyone in this beautiful country unique and makes them special. If everyone had the same ideologies this world would be a boring place with people who had similar beliefs and values. I believe a combination of ideologies brings depth to society.
ReplyDeleteProficient.
DeleteSome great ideas here, but sometimes they are not well explained. For example "Equality is key if you as a nation want to be kept peaceful, when there is a balance of power tied in with citizens, there is no power to abuse". What do you mean by equality? Equality of condition? Of opportunity? Under the law? What do you mean by a 'balance of power tied in with citizens'? What do you mean by 'earning power' instead of being 'given it'?
I totally agree that the diversity of different cultures and ideologies is what makes life exciting and our society rich and successful. Well done.
Kjeryn Soetaert
ReplyDeleteAs many people have mentioned this question is particularly hard to answer as I do not 100% believe in any one ideology. Personally, I believe in a healthy balance between socialism and capitalism. I completely believe that socialistic ideologies would allow for a more equal society and benefit everyone. However, socialism lacks the competitive aspect of capitalism which makes people strive for success. For example, if all jobs were to pay the same, than as a result of human nature people would lean towards choosing the easier less straining jobs. This would lead to a lack of people who work in more strenuous environments. Although socialism helps minimalize the wage gap and division of classes in society, it fails to provide those who sacrifice their time and energy with any reward. In a capitalist society those who have dedicated themselves to their studies and their jobs receive a higher wage than those who put in less effort. I believe this is reasonable to some extent. If there was no reward for hard work it would be hard to convince people to put in said work and ultimately society would be unable to function. I certainly believe in helping those less fortunate and support any organizations who are dedicated to this. In comparison, people who have made the lifestyle choices that have led them to be less fortunate should not be making the same wage as someone who has genuinely put in effort to achieve high levels of success and wealth. Though I know this is not the case for everyone, in a socialist society there would definitely be people who take advantage of this and chose the job that requires less work. Someone who has worked hard their whole life should not be paid the same as someone who does not wish to put in the effort. Ultimately, I believe socialism provides equal opportunity to the entire society, however capitalism provides society with the competition which allows it to thrive. Therefore, I believe in a balance between a capitalistic society and a socialistic society.
Excellent.
DeleteVery strongly argued - remember that an ideology does not have to be formalized. You can have a personal ideology that is unlike that of anyone else. Blend together whatever features of whatever ideologies you want. It's just as valid as a 'labelled' worldview.