Only the Wealthy Can Enjoy Freedom in a Liberal Society.
Unrestricted Capitalism and the "All-Powerful Free Competition" it Allows Should be Reconsidered.
Today, the Poor Masses Continue to Struggle for Survival in a Brutal Capitalist Society.
The United States and Western countries praise and support Ukraine, which fights against Russia for the sake of "freedom and democracy."
However, what exactly is the "freedom and democracy" that the United States and Western countries advocate, even at the cost of Ukrainian lives?
When the soldiers and ordinary people on the losing side of capitalism are shedding blood in Ukraine every day, the wealthy billionaires on the winning side of capitalism are casually going to watch the Titanic and losing their lives.
That is capitalism.
Undoubtedly, "democracy" is protected in the United States and Western countries.
Regardless of their social status, wealth, education, or knowledge, everyone has an equal right to vote with the principle of "one person, one vote."
This is the foundation of "democracy."
Moreover, this foundation of democracy is guaranteed through a fair electoral system.
It is a "true democracy" distinct from the superficial democracies of Russia and China.
Now, what about "liberalism"?
It is a political ideology that aims to create a "free society" by guaranteeing "individual freedom." It eliminated communism and socialism by combining with capitalism, which considers allowing winners of "free competition" to monopolize wealth as "justice."
However, in terms of the economy, liberalism seems to prioritize "free competition" over "individual freedom."
Perhaps "individual freedom" becomes inconsequential if it serves the purpose of promoting "free competition" and increasing national wealth.
If you have ever worked in a Japanese company, you have probably felt this.
In Japan, a capitalist society, criticizing the company can result in mistreatment or dismissal. Therefore, speaking one's mind is strictly prohibited within the reach of the company's surveillance.
Well, it's just enduring for the span of 40 years or so in the era of life expectancy reaching 100 years; it's not like your life is at stake.
Today, in the United States and Western countries, there are billionaires who possess hundreds of billions or even trillions of yen in wealth.
Although each citizen is given only one vote as their right to vote, there is no limit to the wealth one can possess.
This is liberalism.
Even in Japan, if a single billionaire were to own all the wealth of the country, there would be no consequences.
Moreover, they would be praised and admired. It's just too absurd.
There is no upper limit to the wealth that billionaires can possess.
This is liberalism!
If anyone suggests imposing limits, they will undoubtedly face opposition.
It's a strange phenomenon.
Furthermore, not all those opposing are billionaires. Even people who are not necessarily wealthy also oppose it.
They might say, "Capitalism's true allure lies in the ability of the capable to succeed in competition and amass enormous wealth." However, no matter how capable one may be and no matter how desperately they strive, only a very few can amass trillions of yen in wealth.
Out in the world, it is said that a salaryman earning 10 million yen per year is ideal.
Moreover, the average annual income for Japanese people is 4.3 million yen.
On the other hand, billionaires, especially American billionaires, are on a completely different scale. It can be described as an abnormal "wealth disparity." Is this what we can call a "liberal society"?
Now, we find ourselves in a world where the opposition between communism and socialism has disappeared, and unrestricted capitalism has turned into a "greedy capitalism" that no one could have imagined before.
Billionaires are emerging in unprecedented numbers, all accumulating even more wealth in the name of "freedom of ownership" and "free competition."
In a liberal society, only the winners of competition, the wealthy billionaires, can truly enjoy freedom.
The impoverished masses, on the other hand, struggle to survive in the dark realm of capitalist society, unable to express their thoughts at the brink of survival.
If the concentration of wealth among the billionaires continues to increase, along with the widening "gap" between them and the have-nots, it will inevitably lead to "distrust in liberalism."
To prevent such a scenario, it is necessary to reclaim the "unusable wealth" owned by billionaires under state control, just as liberal countries freezing the assets of Russian billionaires can do.
I am not denying liberalism or capitalism in any way.
However, the "liberalism" that permits unrestricted "capitalism" should be reconsidered.
