[비교 및 대조 에세이 샘플] Compare and Contrast Essay: A Comparison of Capitalism and Socialism Economic Systems Essay - by homeworkvan

안녕하세요!
이번 포스팅은 아웃라인에 이어서 A Comparison of Capitalism and Socialism Economic Systems: compare and contrast 에세이 (비교대조 에세이) 샘플을 올려드릴거에요!
에세이 읽어보시고, 학업에 많은 도움되시길 바랄게요!
이번 포스팅도 마찬가지로, plagiarism 부분은 신경안쓰셔도 되세요 :)
References Page 에 기제되어있는 출처부분은 모두 걸려야하는게 정상이기때문에 Plagiarism 과는 무관하세요!

가이드라인도 간단하게 올려드려요!
감사합니다 :)

Guidelines

The goal of a compare and contrast essay is to identify the similarities and differences between two or more items. In this case, develop a compare and contrast paper regarding two political systems. You are required to examine the topic in depth, and understand all facets concerning it. Use scholarly sources to support your assertions.

This essay will consist of three parts:

The first draft of this paper will be full outline of your essay.

The final draft will be a compare and contrast essay on two political systems.  

Requirements:

• Full outline draft
• 5 pages, double-spaced, Times New Roman 12 pt.
• APA format and citation
• Minimum 4 scholarly sources.

[COMPARE AND CONTRAST ESSAY SAMPLE]

Capitalism and Socialism Economic Systems

Capitalism and socialism are two inherently different political, economic and social systems that are adopted by countries around the world. While capitalism and socialism affect the political and social systems of a country, the two are mainly economic systems that affect how countries organize and allocate their resources in the distribution of goods and services within a society. On the one hand, capitalism is an economic system where the means of production are mainly owned by private individuals through corporations and the corporations make decisions over the distribution of resources. Moreover, under capitalism companies are motivated by making as much money as possible in a free market economy. On the other hand, socialism is an economic system where the means of production and other forms of capital are owned by the state and the public. Under socialism, everyone’s wealth is redistributed among other members of society. A socialist economy has no free market, and the government is charged with providing goods and services to the population. Capitalism and socialism economic systems are both crucial systems that affect the socioeconomic factors of a society because they determine the type of policies a government adopts to serve its citizens in terms of income inequality, personal freedom, class stratification and social justice.

The first distinguishing factor between capitalism and socialism is the level of personal freedom whereby socialism leads to government intervention of people’s personal liberties while capitalism offers autonomy to the people. As explained by Murtaza (2011), people living in capitalist countries have the freedom to assess what is to their benefit or their detriment. Therefore, capitalism allows for greater personal fulfillment because people have the personal responsibility for their actions. Moreover, under capitalism, the state guarantees individual rights and freedoms of its citizens. This, in turn, means that both majority and minority groups equally enjoy their freedoms under the law. In contrast, Bradley and Donway (2010) argue that under socialism personal freedom is constrained by the government. Freedom is aggregated whereby good is defined as “good of the collective,” which takes away personal autonomy to choose and reduces the “needs” of an individual to be less than the “needs” of the society. As a result, people living under socialism have to conform to certain rules. Socialists states usually restrict the freedoms of their citizens including freedom of the press, assembly, and speech. For the most part, respect for personal freedom is a subject which is mostly disregarded and the government interferes in virtually all aspect of its people’s lives. Essentially, a socialist economic system operates on the premise that what is good for one is good for all. 

In relation to personal freedom, political freedom is also influenced differently under capitalism and socialism. In a capitalist state where economic might determines the power someone has, political freedom of people without capital is damaged. For instance, a wealthy person in a capitalist state who runs for a political office had a better chance of winning simply due to his vast amount of "capital influence." In contrast, a socialist state is ideally meant to allow people to have the same opportunity to voice their opinions. However, the reality is that political freedom in a socialist state is still not guaranteed since the state usually has excessive power over citizens. 

The third difference between these two economic systems is that capitalism focuses on profit making through exploitation while socialism focuses on people working together to meet collective needs. The motivation for profit-making through any means possible makes capitalism exploit workers and resources to maximize on the highest profit possible. Exploitation is done by the wealthy to subjugate people and societies and extract surplus value (Nelson, 2016). An example of such an instance is the exploitation of minimum wage factory workers who are forced to work under harsh conditions while the corporation generates large amounts of profits. Nelson (2016) argues that profit-making motivation under capitalism has led to the compulsion of corporations to expand resulting in an uneven modern world system. Moreover, the same exploitive nature of capitalist activities has made life on Earth unsustainable due to depletion of natural resources. On the contrary, under socialism, the wealthy ruling class cannot enrich themselves at the expense of ordinary people because the society makes decisions together on an equal basis. According to Murtaza (2011), in a socialist state, production is vested with a central authority usually the government with the economic affairs of the society belonging to the public and not private entities. Therefore, members of the society decide whether or not to expand the enterprise or to distribute profits to members of the communities (Murtaza, 2011). Under socialism, the non-profit aspects of life are considered which is why the treatment of people in society is important. 

Another main difference between capitalism and socialism is the level of income inequality between members of a society. Socialism reduces income inequality because individuals are no longer held back by class restraints such as poverty (Exner, 2014). Therefore, socialism presents opportunities for the disempowered. In addition, socialism reduces income inequality because it does not allow concentration of capital by certain groups of people; instead, socialism redistributes wealth to everyone in society. For instance, in a socialist system, a corporation would have all excess profits diverted to its employees so that workers could have a fair share of the profit they helped generate. On the other hand, capitalism creates a huge income inequality in society because it favors people of a certain class status who have access to opportunities. The 1% who own corporations earn hundreds and even thousands of times more than the 99% who work for the corporations, yet the 99% do the hardest work for the 1%. Essentially, capitalism makes the rich 1% population richer while making the 99% poor population poorer. This pronouncement is because, in a capitalist state, corporations have free reign to control workers’ pay. The inequality in a capitalistic society is produced by the wealth gap initiated through capitalism. Finally, it is also worth mentioning that although capitalism creates income inequality between members of society it also improves the overall fortunes of the country’s economy. In fact, Exner (2014) argues that the most striking feature of capitalism is its success in implementing technological advancements that expand the supply of goods and services available for consumption. This is because capitalism emphasizes unrestricted economic activity and limited economic restrictions.

Moreover, capitalism leads to class stratification which determines how individuals are treated while socialism advocates for a classless society of equal participants deserving of equal treatment. Capitalism divides people into classes that are predetermined by access to opportunities in society whereby high socioeconomic status affords individuals better treatment than their lower socioeconomic status peers. In contrast, socialism is a classless system where everyone is treated equally. Related to class stratification, is the striking difference between socialism and capitalism in regard to social justice. Capitalism places money and profits above moral judgment and ethics by promoting greed and promoting the subversion of human rights (Fagerberg, Srholec & Knell, 2007). Often times, the exchange of goods and services under capitalism is in the self-interest of both parties involved. For instance, a company such as Apple which recently crossed the Trillion-dollar mark in valuation has been known to subvert human rights of workers in their Chinese factories. Moreover, GAP the clothing company was once fined for human rights abuse in some of its factories in the Middle East. Such examples show how the capitalist systems allow private individuals and corporations to steal money from the poor to benefit the rich. On the contrary, socialism places some degree of moral compass to the activities of individuals and corporations and promotes human rights. Specifically, socialism is concerned with ensuring that the disadvantaged people in society are taken care of by the government and by society as a whole. To expound on the issue of social justice under the different economic systems, one needs to evaluate how the entirety of the lower class survives from hand to mouth while corporations reap all the benefits. 

Capitalism and socialism economic systems are inherently different systems with the main differences being in the level of income inequality, personal freedom, class stratification and social justice. These differences affect the socioeconomic factors of a society because they determine the type of policies a government adopts to serve its citizens. On the one hand, capitalism is a system based on the right to private property, personal liberty, and free market where the motive of businesses is profit. On the other hand, a socialist economic system is a criticism of the capitalist system because it advocates for social ownership of production, eliminates class division and exploitation while promoting principles of social justice and welfare. Despite the stark differences between capitalism and socialism, the reality is that most countries have mixed economic systems that have elements of both capitalism and socialism. The control of production, resources and other forms of capital requires that a certain amount of public control should coexist with a certain amount of private ownership. 

References

Bradley, R. L., & Donway, R. (2010). Capitalism, socialism, and “the middle way”: A taxonomy. The Independent Review, 15(1), 71-87.

Exner, A. (2014). Degrowth and Demonetization: On the Limits of a Non-Capitalist Market Economy. Capitalism Nature Socialism, 25(3), 9-27. doi: 10.1080/10455752.2014.882963

Fagerberg, J., Srholec, M., & Knell, M. (2007). The Competitiveness of Nations: Why Some Countries Prosper While Others Fall Behind. World Development, 35(10), 1595-1620. doi: 10.1016/j.worlddev.2007.01.004

Murtaza, N. (2011). Pursuing self-interest or self-actualization? From capitalism to a steady-state, wisdom economy. Ecological Economics, 70(4), 577-584. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2010.10.012

Nelson, A. (2016). “Your Money or Your Life”: Money and Socialist Transformation. Capitalism Nature Socialism, 27(4), 40-60. doi: 10.1080/10455752.2016.1204619

Justification

The essay is a good model for an compare and contrast essay for several reasons:

1.       Essay Mechanics

The essay is logically arranged into 3 key section: Introduction, Body, and Conclusion sections.  This logic placement carries onto the arrangement of each section. 

The introduction is clearly split into three sections: A hook, background, and a thesis. The hook used is a definition that serves as a starting point for the essay. Following, is several sentences that give background on the topic of animal testing. Finally, there is a thesis statement that makes an attempt to summarize the key arguments to be discussed in the body section into a single statement. 

The body section consists of several paragraphs. This compare and contrast essay adopts a block format whereby comparison and contrasts are arranged in one paragraph block. An alternative would be to use a point by point format whereby the organization would begin with comparisons then followed by making contrasts. 

The conclusion section ties off the essay. It consists of three broad sections. A restatement of the thesis, a summary of the key arguments, and a takeaway. It must be restated that no new information should be included in the conclusion which only serves to summarize the essay.  

2.        Coherence

Besides the structure of the essay, vocabulary, and grammar, the essay is a good model for an argumentative essay based on its coherence. This refers to the flow of arguments from one idea to the next. Foremost, this is achieved by having each argument have its own specific paragraph. Secondly, coherence is achieved by using transition phrases such as “however”, moreover” to connect ideas or sentences within a paragraph. Third, coherence is achieved in the pattern of organization where the essay starts off with the strongest arguments as the lead paragraphs. Finally, the essay ensures each body paragraph ends with a brief conclusion to provide a transition from one paragraph to the next.

=========================================================

The following is PLAGIARISM REPORT for 'Compare and Contrast Essay: A Comparison of Capitalism and Socialism Economic Systems Essay - by homeworkvan'.

COPYRIGHT © 2018. All Rights Reserved by homeworkvan.

A Comparison of Democratic and Totalitarian Political Systems - Compare and Contrast Essay Sample by homeworkvan

A Comparison and Contrast of Democratic and Totalitarian Political Systems: Compare and Contrast Essay

A Comparison and Contrast of Democratic and Totalitarian Political Systems

A political system is a set of formal legal institutions that interact with other nonpolitical systems such as the legal, economic, social and cultural systems. From a sociological perspective, political systems are concerned with who holds the power within the relationship of the state and its citizens and how this power is used. Two common systems that have been used time after time are democracies and totalitarian systems. A democracy is a rule by the people and for the people, which implies participation of both the public and the government in public interest. It is a system in which the majority of the population possesses the right to share in the exercise of sovereign power.  On the other hand, totalitarianism is a system in which the government is controlled by a governing branch of a highly centralized institution characterized by limited mass mobilization and limited pluralism (Gentile, 2004). Democratic and totalitarian political systems are both institutions of authority that demand active and enthusiastic participation from its people; however; the key characteristics that distinguish the two political systems are control of power, degree of participation in politics, the rate of freedom and the economic system.

One of the distinguishing factors between a democracy and totalitarian regime is the control of power whereby democracies rely on the separation of powers whereas totalitarian regimes rely on consolidation of powers. Democracies believe that absolute power corrupts absolutely, such that if the powers of government are not restricted, then there is a risk of tyranny or corruption of powers. For this reason, democratic governments divide their powers into three: the executive, judiciary, and legislature (Khan and Muhammad, 2016). A good example of such a case is the US whereby the the head of state holds the executive power, Congress holds legislative power and the Supreme Court holds the judicial power. By contrast, totalitarian regimes centralize all their power to a single person or a small group of people. With such monopolistic power, totalitarian governments can fully exercise their authorities without limitations. The Soviet Union was a prime example of a totalitarian regime. Adolf Hitler centralized combined all three powers together and had strict control of both the state and society. It is worth noting that some totalitarian government establish institutions that resemble separation of powers, but more often than this is normally an illusion since the powers are actually consolidated in the hands of the regime.  

A democratic regime is characterized by political equality whereas a totalitarian government is characterized by political inequality. Democracies typically pursue laws that allow free formulation of political preferences and free competition for political power. The ruling government, therefore, acquires its ruling power and legitimacy through the law. According to Przeworski, Stokes, and Manin (1999), elections give the public a chance to have a say in the political process and decisions. Democratic systems conduct regular elections after every five to ten years and this allows people to express their confidence in certain parties and influence the political scene in the years to come. Provided one has attained the age of majority, everyone’s vote is equal regardless of race or socioeconomic status. By contrast, totalitarian regimes limit the political participation in which their citizens can engage in political activities. For most totalitarian regimes, there are no opposition parties, and only certain people have the right to vote, meaning that some people are more influential than others. For totalitarian regimes with opposition parties, the ruling parties are known to manipulate the electoral process in order to repress any opposing parties. Common examples of countries that have political inequality and limited political participation include Egypt, Iran, and Burma.

Another distinguishing factor between a democratic government and a totalitarian one is the extent of freedom it guarantees it citizens. In democracies, the state is expected to protect and guarantee the individual rights and freedoms of its citizens. Ideally, this means that both majority and minority groups equally enjoy their freedoms under the law. Most democratic countries such as the US and Canada rank highly in democracy ratings such as those conducted by Freedom House (“Freedom in the World 2018”). By contrast, totalitarian regimes restrict the freedoms of their citizens including freedom of the press, assembly, and speech. There is no division between the private and the public, and the government can interfere in virtually any aspect of its people’s lives. For the most part, respect for human rights is a subject which is mostly disregarded. A case in point, North Korean government dominates political campaigns and uses its power to limit the space for civil action, control the press and stifle any public criticism.

Another difference between democratic and totalitarian regimes is the mode of production. In most democratic societies, the economic system is based on individualization, such that economic decisions are made by individuals as opposed to being made by collective institutions. This economic system places a strong emphasis on private ownership and a free market. Democratic societies can also be supportive of government regulation to a certain degree; however, most draw the line when government intervention inhibits open competition and free trade. The rationale behind this is that if the state were to intervene, it would do so to serve the interests of the dominant powers and hence distort the market to their favor. By contrast, totalitarian regimes preserve a capitalist mode of production which takes the direction of monopoly capitalism. In monopoly capitalism, monopolization of the companies is maximized, and the competition in the market is reduced. The monopolies that remain in the market are often merged with the government, and through this, they acquire political power as well as economic power. With the help of the government’s use of ideology, competing interests in the market are turned to common national interest. Thus the individualization is crushed.  

Regardless of the differences, one of the elements that both democratic and totalitarian share is the demand for enthusiastic and active participation of its people. To this end, active participation is evidently one of the key principles of democracy. As much as totalitarian regimes restrict the individual rights and freedom of their people, they can also create active and voluntary participation through ideology. According to Sviličić and Maldini (2013), totalitarian regimes have an elaborate ideology that the ruling leader identifies and uses it as a basis for their policies. For most totalitarian societies, the leader or ruling party typically has a sense of ideology that they share with the citizens. Mass education and mass communication are crucial for mass participation, and therefore propaganda serves for the absorption of the ideology. The use of propaganda is used to mobilize the masses even further by creating and enhancing loyalties and a sense of inclusion to the political sphere. For instance, Adolf Hitler used propaganda during the World War II as a vehicle of political salesmanship in a mass market (O'Shaughnessy, 2009). Art propaganda was used to glorify the state and attack those who were considered the enemy, effectively taking control of public opinion. At the end of the day, the person in power a theological tyrant as opposed to being just a mere individual. This sense of being divine out shadows the perception of being a power hungry ruler.

Democratic and totalitarian governments are also similar in the sense that they are both institutions of authority, and therefore both have the potential to oppress people. As the government, both political systems are in charge of managing their people, and this includes managing the allocation of resources, developing laws and legal procedures and taking charge of the internal and external security of their people. With all this power, both political systems have the potential to oppress their people. As much as a democracy separates its powers, it is possible for a majority of the citizens to elect a single party, who can then overtake and corrupt the system of equality that should be typical of democracies. In the recent past, some governments have disrupted the original system for one that has allowed them to extend their terms. A case in point, the ruling party of Azerbaijan, has been in power since the mid-1990s. For all these years, the country has been controlled by the Aliyev family and its circle of connections, making it difficult to have a democracy whereby the all the citizens have political equality (Sultanova, 2014). In fact, while in office, the government held a controversial referendum that allowed the family to run for another term. 

             Democracies and totalitarian political systems are very distinct, with the main differences being how power is controlled, the extent of political equality, the freedom that the government guarantees its people and how the economic system is set up. Unlike democracies which separate their powers into the executive, legislature, and judiciary, totalitarian governments consolidate their power and limit the individual rights and freedoms of its people. However, it is also evident that democratic systems are not perfect since they can also be corrupted. The type of political system also influences the economic system whereby democratic system gravitate towards liberal free market economies whereas totalitarian governments gravitate towards monopolist economies. In addition, despite the strict control of state and society, totalitarian governments are able to unite their people through ideology. Both political systems. All things considered, democracy seems to be a better political system because it represents every citizen equally regardless of ethnicity, race, or socioeconomic status. Democratic rule may have its flaws, but it remains to be a very stable form of government.

References

Gentile, E. (2004). Fascism, totalitarianism and political religion: definitions and critical reflections on criticism of an interpretation. Totalitarian Movements and Political Religions, 5(3), 326-375.

Khan, M. I., & Muhammad, A. (2016). An Evaluation of separation of powers: A case study of Pakistan (2007-2013). South Asian Studies (1026-678X), 31(1), 257-274.

O'Shaughnessy, N. (2009). Selling Hitler: propaganda and the Nazi brand. Journal of Public Affairs (14723891), 9(1), 55-76.

Przeworski, A., Stokes, S. C., & Manin, B. (Eds.). (1999). Democracy, accountability, and representation (Vol. 2). Cambridge University Press.

Sultanova, S. (2014). Challenging the Aliyev Regime: Political opposition in Azerbaijan. Demokratizatsiya, 22(1), 15-37.

Sviličić, N., & Maldini, P. (2013). Visual persuasion and politics: Ideology and symbols of the totalitarian regimes’–Case study: Hammer and sickle. Collegium antropologicum, 37(2), 569-582.

Freedom in the World 2018. (2018, February 14). Retrieved April 05, 2018, from https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/freedom-world-2018

Tomasi, J. (2012). Free market fairness. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

=========================================================

The following is PLAGIARISM REPORT for 'A Comparison of Democratic and Totalitarian Political Systems - Compare and Contrast Essay Sample by homeworkvan'.

COPYRIGHT © 2018. All Rights Reserved by homeworkvan.