God-given rights perpetuate humanity’s ability to ambitiously grow, freely succeed, and live with purpose, but unsettling socialistic concepts challenge these natural entitlements. The capitalism vs. socialism debate poses an ethical contest between either executing potential to the highest degree, or maintaining all humans on an equally shortened harness.

Incentives function as the fuel for growth in any and all situations; a dog rolls over to receive a treat, a student studies to get the A+, and a human works harder to succeed further. What if the treat, the A+, and the earned success did not exist in a society? Socialism thoroughly demonstrates the results of stripping the incentive that makes the world go ‘round.  

“In capitalism, you can live your life. You can take the risks you want to take, and see an outcome. In socialism, you just exist; you’re just waiting to die,” Awtrey Middle School history teacher, Kennesaw State University Philosophy professor, veteran and entrepreneur George Cronin said.

Cronin’s parents arrived to America seeking opportunity from the poverty and famine-stricken country of Ireland. Rather than practicing socialistic ideals by complaining about their economic disadvantages and expecting full governmental support, the ambitious immigrants put capitalism to the test and thrived. Shortly after returning from the Vietnam War, Cronin took advantage of the opportunity offered by the American economy and sold his multi-million dollar restaurant after decades of hard work, something unreachable in socialism.

Socialism stands as the non-radicalized brainchild of Marxism; any hint of class identity or economic uniqueness ceases to exist for the sake of equal opportunity. When proposed for governmental implementation, equal opportunity fails to consider a key factor when trying to function: reality itself. Humans receive various opportunities throughout lifetime, some more impactful than others. The socialistic perspective of equal opportunity essentially insists that all people must initiate life with no economic, mental, physical, or social advantage over one another; such a demand simply does not coincide with reality.

Socialists such as Bernie Sanders see the top 1% as rich, greedy capitalists that withhold no right to their hefty earnings, but this 1% includes entrepreneurs Steve Jobs and Bill Gates that began in a garage and used capitalistic opportunity to create some of the largest and most successful companies in the world, Apple and Microsoft. On the surface, the fantasy of all humans being given equal opportunity seems tolerable, but when analyzed, one sees that socialist ideals simply promote breaking down successful, hard working humans to a feasible, lower level rather than actually working hard to achieve a favorable outcome.

The most infamous quality of capitalism that socialists fabricate concerns the upper class economically “enslaving” the lower class. According to anti-capitalist ideals, the wealthy only impose harm and deserve the blame for economic deficits in capitalistic societies. Such resentment towards wealthy, successful capitalists thoroughly portrays the absence of an ambitious work ethic in socialism. In laymen terms, capitalism allows a child to enjoy the candy he earned trick-or-treating, while in a socialistic Halloween, the ambitious trick-or-treaters must distribute the hard earned candy to the other children who simply did not have the motivation to earn their own candy. Since working hard to reach economic prosperity does not fit into the agenda of socialists, they, instead, attempt to feed off of and chastise those who do financially thrive.