The Myth of Capitalism

[Comrade Corinna]

Many believe that capitalism is what a nation needs to move forward in the world, and that socialism and/or communism cause stagnation.

First of all, the satement "Capitalism allows society to move forward."
Move forward in what? Capitalism is certainly not progressivism, because Right Wingers today want to move back to the stone age, with a government that tells people what there "morals" should be.
But what exactly is it that capitalism allows to progress? The global market?
"The Market," according to Libertarians, is something that can correct itself.
News flash: "the market" is not a living, breathing thing. It has no regard for people. As much as they would like to belive, "the market" cannot control itself. Someone has to be, and is, in control of it, and that would be the CEO's, the capitalists, the rich people, the upper class. "The Market" which dictates so much in the world is inherently corrupt, and dependant upon the corrupt individuals in charge, thus making Capitalism the flawed system, not Communism.

Second of all, I'm going to have to throw a couple lame analogies at you. The "progress" made in capitalism is comparable to an opulent mansion built of plywood. A cake made out of carboard decorated with fancy ice cream. A sports team with three all stars and twenty amateurs.
The point is, Capitalism makes a nation look great on the surface.
With a "good economy," the capitalists are making a high profit, new products are being made, more money is circulating thus making the standard of living much greater and everything is fine, right? Wrong.
The truth is, the economy does not have a sturdy foundation. Eventually, it gets to the point that you cannot build so much on nothing. This is what caused the stock market crash of 1929. Without a thorough, equal distribution of wealth, the economic system shows its true colors, the ugly side. All the moving "forward" we have done takes all the way back to the dark age.
Lesson learned? a nation cannot move forward until everyone has legitimately reached the same level.
Example: Why should a select few have plasma TV's, SUV's, and a million dollar home while some haven't yet come to afford an apartment big enough to fit a family, and a single automobile?

[red team]

Capitalism like all social systems has a energetic, progressive beginning, a stable and steady middle age and a decrepit and senile end. Although there are people who stick to Capitalism like it is a religion, future technological development would make it so unstable as to cause the very currency it uses for valuating commodities to become worthless. Picture Germany during its currency collapse in 1929, but in a grander world-wide scale because globalisation has made economies more tightly integrated than in the past. People with wealth and power derived from this system will nevertheless fight to the bitter end even if this situation develops. Newcomen's steam engine was developed at around the 1760 and was replaced with Watt's steam engine 65 years later. The steam engine and the increase in productivity it allowed quickly made Feudalism obsolete in the West as the new technology compromised the stability of the Feudal system. As it was with Feudalism it will also be with Capitalism. Initial steps in automation made under the present could be compared with Newcomen's steam engine preceding the Bourgeois revolution and the accompanying increase in productivity made in the industrial revolution. Capitalism wouldn't last the next 50 years given the pace of technological change. Money which base its value on human labour power will eventually collapse and would not be worth the paper it is printed on.