On occasions I have had to talk with different colleagues and friends about the problems surrounding business activity, the entrepreneurial mentality and educational systems; and in a fertile discussion with Jorge Amoreo Casotti, a reference in the entrepreneurial world with a niche in innovation, we reached a drastic conclusion:
The coexistence of Marxist philosophy with the entrepreneurial spirit is impossible.
The argument is not based on simple postulates or anecdotal examples, but on a rigorous and systematic examination of the fundamental principles that govern both worlds. This elaboration is not limited to offering a mere superficial diagnosis, but delves into the intrinsic contradictions that make these two paradigms irreconcilable.
It has to do, not only with the obvious incompatibilities, but with the subtleties and nuances that often go unnoticed in more simplistic discourses. Instead of falling back on ideological conditioning, this position aims to reveal how Marxism and entrepreneurial philosophy operate under mutually exclusive premises; a challenging perspective that will force us to reexamine the viability and coherence of trying to amalgamate in the prevailing educational systems two traditions of thought that, at first glance and after a deeper analysis, appear to be “oil and water.”
Entrepreneurship and entrepreneurship is a way of life that only some personalities with a strong commitment to contributing and capturing value can address. This occurs due to the very nature of the setbacks involved in this noble activity that is the real creator of all goods and services as we know them, subject to the voluntary acquisition of people, who are usually called the “market” on a daily basis. The references of entrepreneurship require certain traits that are common among entrepreneurs and that are scarce globally, hence their need to try to shield themselves from antithetical ideologies that combat them; Some skills are, for example, the combination of a high degree of autonomy, risk tolerance, the search for achievement, creativity and the ability to innovate, among other virtues.
Below and in the form of a decalogue, the arguments will be presented to go deeper:
1. Disregard for property
Private property is the pillar on which the freedom to provide a good, a service and the subsequent entrepreneurship is built. Marxism, on the other hand, advocates the abolition of private property in favor of community property. This fundamental contrast undermines the possibility of entrepreneurship, and although without reaching the extreme of its abolition, the gradual attacks on this institution threaten to different degrees the objectives of every entrepreneur.
2. The destruction of incentives
Within the framework of Marxist theory, wealth and resources are distributed, ideally, equally, redistributing what was voluntarily assigned by a third party outside the market process. This situation tends to suppress individual incentives to innovate and take risks, key elements in the work of an entrepreneur, where benefits are allocated by voluntarily providing goods or services, but never redistributing.
3. Centralization vs autonomy
Marxism promotes planned and centralized economies using the political means, or the monopoly of force to accomplish the task, which is in contradiction with the autonomy and flexibility that an entrepreneur requires to achieve his goals.
4. Collectivism vs individualism
Marxism values the supposed well-being of the collective over individual aspirations. This is incongruent with the nature of creativity, which is an individual virtue of each entrepreneur, and which seeks personal fulfillment, as well as the contribution of value to others, capturing it by discovering, with dispersed information, undervalued prices compared to those of others. market
5. Uniformity vs competition
Competition is vital for innovation and improvement in the business world. However, under the paradigm of Marxism, competition is generally seen as a negative aspect that leads to exploitation, which is at odds with business values and with the actions that an entrepreneur is conditioned to in all cases.
6. “Redistribution” of wealth
In a Marxist system, the wealth generated by entrepreneurs or companies is redistributed through political power. This model discourages the creation of projects, and if they are profitable, the benefits do not accrue to the genuine ideologues of the initiative, but are dispersed.
This issue, even without having megalomaniacal intermediaries, as is often the case with figures from interventionist governments, is highly harmful since, in the entrepreneurial world, resources are not distributed, but are allocated voluntarily on a daily basis.
7. The false struggle between capital and labor
Marxism maintains that there is an intrinsic struggle between capital and labor, ignoring on the one hand how the entrepreneur can be both the capitalist investor and the worker, and the provider of resources; and on the other hand, ignoring the tacit partnership in the growth of employers and employees via investment rates, the only reason for salary increases in real terms.
8. Atrophy of innovation
The Marxist system does not have an effective mechanism to encourage innovation, which is a key element for any successful entrepreneur. The lack of incentives and the bureaucratic structure tend to create a hostile environment for innovative ideas; Hence, the nations that have tried to implement this philosophy in their cultures seem to be frozen in time, even decades more behind than other more open societies.
9. The denial of subjective value in voluntary purchase and sale decisions
Marxism, by advocating the elimination of the system of prices determined voluntarily by suppliers and demanders, destroys the only efficient indicator to locate the need (always relative) and the allocation of resources, which is vital for the success of everything. entrepreneur.
10. An ideological barrier
All in all, the “Marxist entrepreneur” tends to be fundamentally incompatible in thoughts and actions, due to their divergent principles and goals. Trying to combine both is not only contradictory, but also detrimental to the development of an entrepreneurial mindset and economic prosperity.
This type of ideological hybridization is not only unviable but destroys the very essence and objectives of an entrepreneur. The spread of Marxism in educational systems represents a tragedy in terms of the promotion of entrepreneurial mentalities, because it installs a false dichotomy between individual initiative and collective well-being that destroys value, consumes capital and deteriorates the consequent levels of access to well-being, mainly of the most neglected sectors.
Is it time to fundamentally rethink the established education systems to more openly address the challenges of this changing era?
Contact information:
WhatsApp: 0221 4097895
Tel: 0221 4241598
Instagram: @falcioni_bienes_inmuebles
You may also like
by CEDOC
