MAPLETON, UT | 17 April 2008 | In the kibbutzim of Israel, as in communal societies around the world, an entire generation attempted to live by the ideology of collectivism. Years later, all such social experiments have ended with one choice: adopt capitalist principles or cease to exist. The consequences of collectivism have resulted in two critical failures – economic bankruptcy, with communities unable to sustain themselves, and moral bankruptcy, with new generations rebelling against the oppression of communal sacrifice for parasitic consumption. The result has been deserted colonies, lacking resources, and devoid of the renewal of youth who abandoned them for the promise of individual freedom abroad.
Readers of Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand will remember the account of the 20th Century Motor Company, whose heirs decided to turn the company and its employees into a communal “family”. Rand describes a Marxist society that few today would consider plausible – yet the socialist kibbutzim are the literal ideological descendants of the axiom, “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.” To learn the economic history and hear the personal tales from the kibbutzim is to witness Rand’s fictional community come to life (with the exception that many modern kibbutzim have chosen reform).
Kibbutz Yasur, founded in 1949, serves as an example. Though it began with high ideals, textile and toy factories, they were unprofitable, and soon closed, leaving many without a means to provide for their future. Homes eventually sat empty, as children left town and no new members joined the community. Today, those homes are nearly filled, and old farmland is being sold for new real estate development.
“The new kibbutz is not perfect, but economically things are improving,” said Mr. Kilon, who manages Yasur and another kibbutz nearby (many kibbutzim are now run by professional managers rather than by popular vote). “The incentive to work has gone up, and after changes in the management, we are standing on our feet.”
Boaz Varol was born on a kibbutz in the far north, but he left at 18. “My parents worked all their lives, carrying at least 10 parasites on their backs,” he said. “If they’d worked that hard in the city for as many years, I’d have had quite an inheritance coming to me by now.”
Key Points:
Conclusion:
What has emerged in the social consciousness of the kibbutzim is a newfound appreciation for the principles of prosperity – if not a total embrace. After decades of reaping the starving harvest of collectivism, the kibbutzim, in an attempt at self-preservation, have re-introduced the concepts of private property and wages based on productivity. The results have spoken for themselves.
The kibbutzim have traded pure socialist collectivism not for capitalism, but for a modern mixed economy, where individuals are free to work for themselves, generating private profits that are then taxed in order to fund communal socialist programs. Many assets are still owned communally, though housing is often owned privately. Such a policy is usually termed “privatization”, though leaders prefer to call it “renewal”. Allowing people to own property, produce value and be compensated for it has resulted in a surge in productivity and profit among the kibbutz members. Finally, the prosperity promised by marxist illusions is beginning to appear where free exchange is honored.
Such a society, however, is still not a free society, but a parasitic one. The socialist strategy over the past century has evolved pragmatically from one of total collective control (which, as the kibbutzim demonstrate, has always resulted in economic failure) to a parasitic co-existence with the private producers of value. Such an arrangement has allowed the socialists to remain on life-support, sustaining their moral bankruptcy as long as they allow just enough freedom for their capitalist hosts to produce the profits they are unable to produce for themselves.
The modern residents of the Kibbutzim are enjoying some of the benefits of capitalism, and their prosperity has attracted the attention of outsiders, resulting in increased demand and waiting lists for membership. While the changes have increased incentives to work and reduced the parasitic tendencies of the past, it remains to be seen whether the people will fully embrace the ideology at the core of their newfound prosperity. Their future depends on it.
Action Steps:
MRFC Principles:
(2,3,5,6,7,8,10,11,12,13)
References:
The Kibbutz Sheds Socialism and Gains Popularity
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/27/world/middleeast/27kibbutz.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all
RSS feed for comments on this post.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
April 28th, 2008 at 5:14 pm
It’s eerie that people are now “lining up” to enter these communities (according to the article). It seems that the most anxious would be those looking to feed off the production of the few. Aside from desiring employment I can’t see why an individual capable of producing more than he consumes would want an existence controlled with socialist rules. It seems that whenever an organization or group begins to be successful there is no end to people lining up to feed off the benefits of that success.
April 30th, 2008 at 6:08 am
I agree that these types of communities attract the moochers of society. They seem to give incentive for idleness. However, idleness will destroy any society or community.
However, I disagree with the assertion that someone who produces more than he consumes would never want to participate in this type of community. Our happiness is not dependent upon the productivity of others. For a producer, one who sees income as creating value (giving), and expenses as consuming value (receiving), then it only matters that the other person is being hurt when we allow them to receive something for nothing from us. A community like this, however, can also be the coming together of producers. If such a society is full of true producers, the amount of value that they can create from combining their ingenuity can never be surpassed. Such a society would not support a moocher, because the predominant culture would make any free-loaders uncomfortable.
I think Stephen Covey’s maturity continuum is a perfect explanation of how such a society could be a very productive venture. First, the participants must overcome dependence through independence. Only then can they choose to be interdependent and experience synergy.
I think it’s important that we remember King Mosiah’s council to his people regarding the treatment of the poor. “For behold, are we not all beggars? Do we not all depend upon the same Being, even God, for all the substance which we have, for both food and raiment, and for gold, and for silver, and for all the riches which we have of every kind?” Let’s remember this before we make any final judgements on those whose human life value is so low that they feel that they have to depend on others for their support, rather than create value themselves.
May 15th, 2008 at 10:21 pm
You have disagreed with a point that I did not make.
My statement was “Aside from desiring employment I can’t see why an individual capable of producing more than he consumes would want an existence controlled with socialist rules”
First of all, I stand 100% behind this statement. Even after reading your response I still cannot see why a producer would want to live in an existence controlled by socialism. Now I absolutely believe that a Producer would want to live in a community of producers. Synergy as you have called it is the natural byproduct of producers exchanging. If you are attempting to describe a community where people choose to be benevolent and charitable I agree with you. But I absolutely do not agree with any kind of socialist law being the driving force behind the “caring for the poor”. You stated “A community like this, however, can also be the coming together of producers”. I disagree that a community “like this” could be the coming together of producers. I agree that producers could come together and create a community that I would want to live in. In fact this is my desire and goal.
May 17th, 2008 at 4:26 am
The socialist kibbutz served a vital purpose when they were created. And it worked. It served to provide work, purpose, and a home to Jews beaten down by the Holocaust. It helped to create a new nation (with G-d’s help!). But it works only in those conditions and then it’s time to move on.
May 17th, 2008 at 4:47 pm
I’m sorry you felt I was disagreeing with you. That was not my intention. I never claimed you made the point with which I disagree. I was just saying that I disagree with the assertion. My statement was “However, I disagree with the assertion that someone who produces more than he consumes would never want to participate in this type of community.” Meaning the Kibbutz type of community.
I also stand by what I said. I believe that a producer could very easily submit himself/herself to such a community. I also agree that in order for him/her to do so, it would need to be a community based off of free trade, but also strong in their assistance and supporting of one another when they make mistakes or foolish choices. Just as the mentality that the government should solve all problems, and that financial problems are the result of exploitation leads to the destruction of a society; so also does the mentality that the only way for people to learn is by suffering the full consequences of their mistakes and unprincipled choices.
All long term financial struggles are the result of violation of principle. I don’t think any Capitalist would argue against that point. But they are also opportunities for those who have a better understanding of principle to increase their HLV assets by helping them to overcome the consequences of their violation of principle. This is the entire point of the Atonement of Jesus Christ, for “are we not all beggars?” What is Christ’s self-interest in helping us overcome our mistakes and shortcomings? It is the accumulation of HLV assets - us - in his HLV balance sheet, which gives him more potential HLV income - service to others - which gives him more HLV assets.