Q&A: Capitalism and Socialism
Capitalism and Socialism
Question
I heard that the Rabbi wrote that capitalism and socialism are connected to right and left. At first glance I don’t see the connection. Seemingly, this is a question of which value is greater: equality or human freedom (and not of collective vs. individual, which seemingly is what stands behind right and left). Where can I find an orderly treatment by the Rabbi of this topic? And is the political right and left connected to analytic and synthetic?
Answer
Clearly, the connections are complex and not unequivocal, but there are such correlations.
My claim is that capitalism fundamentally places the value of freedom at its base, whereas socialism places equality there. And that is also one of the differences between right and left on the political level. Likewise, the difference between individualism (the freedom of each individual) and collectivism (= equality among individuals) is connected to the matter.
True, in practice the political right is more collectivist than the liberal left, but this is collectivism in thought, not necessarily in practice. In my column about Feiglin I explained that the national dimension (collective) is part of the definition of the individual and his freedom. But in matters that do not concern the character of the public sphere, there will be no coercion in right-wing thought.
This is also connected to analytic versus synthetic, because the analytic accepts only the result of observation or a logical argument, and the existence of collectives is not accepted by it. Sensory perception shows only individuals, not collectives.
As best I recall, I dealt with this at the end of this series:
https://soundcloud.com/mikyabchannel/sets/y7bf7zt3bcib
Discussion on Answer
In “Two Carts” I explained that equality can come from two different sources: an unwillingness to make preferences and distinctions between one thing and another (“everything is true and everything is beautiful and everything is just”), which is exactly analyticity. That is negative equality. And there is positive equality—which is actually right-wing.
Ah, nice. Now I understand. And the other side? Freedom and liberty? Is that connected to syntheticity?
And by the way, in the lesson you mentioned you didn’t talk about the economic right and left (which was mainly what I was asking about), but about the diplomatic-political one. Do you remember where you spoke or wrote about the economic side?
Someone who advocates freedom opposes equality (both negative and positive), and in that sense he is synthetic. From his perspective, some are better and some are less so.
I don’t remember anymore.
Thank you
I understand that entities like a people are not accepted analytically. I don’t understand why the value of equality comes from an analytic place, and similarly why the value of freedom comes from a synthetic place. That’s what’s hard for me.