Only the "winners" of capitalism can enjoy freedom and democracy.
The "losers" either live at the edge of survival or fall into a hell devoid of freedom and democracy.
Yet, can we really say that competition is the essence of capitalism?
Recently in Japan, instead of addressing social issues like the economy, politics, inequality, and poverty, the news is dominated by stories about Shohei Ohtani.
Reading articles about his over 100 billion yen earnings or about someone stealing tens of billions of yen makes me feel hopeless.
I wonder what it means for the average Japanese annual salary to be 4.14 million yen.
Despite these feelings, many people might say, "What's wrong with a talented athlete being wealthy?" or "That's the essence of capitalism," or "It's just envy from the poor."
But I must say this:
As advocates of liberalism, we must ask, "How much inequality is enough?"
Japan, the U.S., and Western Europe are "liberal states."
"Liberal states" are supported by "democracy" and "capitalism."
Through "democracy," citizens can freely choose their rulers.
However, each citizen only has one vote.
The prime minister, the CEO, or even Ohtani only gets one vote.
But under capitalism, there's no limit to wealth.
A single person could own all of Japan's wealth without consequences.
Even if the government tries to curb the widening gap, capitalism, which fuels competition among citizens, ensures that inequality will never disappear unless capitalism itself is abandoned.
Now that capitalism has driven out communism and socialism, it has become the supreme ideology.
Capitalism offers citizens the fair chance to gain wealth through free economic activities.
As a result, thanks to these free economic activities, they can enjoy a dream-like life without social, political, or economic constraints—the essence of capitalism.
How wonderful.
Capitalism is great.
But that's only for the winners of competition.
For most people, the dream life promised by capitalism is just an illusion.
In a country of "freedom and democracy," only a handful of "winners" in competition can truly enjoy freedom.
Moreover, these winners now monopolize not only status and honor but also wealth.
Under the supreme ideology of capitalism, a new class society is forming, with the winners of competition at the top.
We might endure this if the competition were equal and fair.
But it isn't.
It's an unequal and unfair competition tainted by inheritance and nepotism.
The competition, which is the cornerstone of capitalism, is at least unfair if not entirely false.
Humans are not created equal in terms of race, gender, health, ability, body type, and appearance.
Even if we compete under the same rules, the outcome is predetermined.
Differences in health, ability, body type, and appearance are insurmountable, making inequality inevitable.
Moreover, the inequality resulting from this unfair competition is passed from parent to child, from child to grandchild.
In this context, inequality widens but never shrinks.
In youth, we struggle against these inherent inequalities and injustices.
But eventually, we become overwhelmed just by trying to live.
Realizing that cursing inequality is futile, we turn away from competition and resign ourselves to the fact that only the winners can enjoy freedom and democracy.
That might be a safe way to live.
But it's not right.
A liberalism that accepts "winner-takes-all competition with no second chances" is absurd.
And the competition is unequal and unfair.
Think about it.
If more citizens live in despair, the democracy and capitalism that support liberalism won't survive.
If we continue to ignore "inequality," liberalism will collapse not from external ideological challenges but from within.
Before it's too late, let's rise up and aim for a society where everyone can enjoy liberalism.
 |
なぜ、成熟した民主主義は分断を生み出すのか アメリカから世界に拡散する格差と分断の構図
渡瀬 裕哉
すばる舎
|
 |
オードリー・タン 自由への手紙
クーリエ・ジャポン編集チーム
講談社
|
 |
民主主義とは何か (講談社現代新書)
宇野 重規
講談社
|
 |
上級国民／下級国民（小学館新書）
橘玲
小学館
|
 |
1％の富裕層のお金でみんなが幸せになる方法――実現可能な「保証所得」が社会を変える
クリス・ヒューズ
プレジデント社
|
