“The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings. The inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of misery.” — Winston Churchill, 1945
For 250 years, the American system of government has delivered an unmatched track record. Its unique approach—clearly articulated at the nation’s founding—has generated a level of innovation and growth that has lifted more people out of poverty than any other system in human history.
Yet, this foundational American approach is now under attack. As much of the world follows an alternative path, that alternative is actively seeping into the core of American governance, threatening the very engine of prosperity.
To understand this conflict, we must look back to the origins of this ideological divide.
🏛️ The Two Systems: Open vs. Closed
President Lincoln’s chief economic advisor, Henry Carey, famously framed the global economic struggle as a choice between two diametrically opposed systems:
- The English System (Closed): Designed to centralize power and wealth, serving the elite and oligarchs. In modern terms, this closely resembles democratic socialism.
- The American System (Open): Designed to empower the individual and “elevate the condition of man.” This is what we define today as democratic capitalism.
Carey outlined the profound differences between these two worldviews:
| English (Closed) System | American (Open) System |
| Focuses on increasing people and capital engaged in trade and transportation. | Focuses on increasing people and capital engaged in producing commodities to trade. |
| Goal: Maintaining commerce; ultimately under working the average person. | Goal: Increasing the necessity of commerce; raising the standard of living with good wages and owner profits. |
| Outlook: Looks toward universal war and population management/control. | Outlook: Looks toward universal peace and embraces technological progress as a driver of growth. |
| Method: Centralized planning and elite institutions (e.g., World Economic Forum) and Malthusian control based on population limits. | Method: Constitutional Economics; creating internal improvements and large-scale infrastructure for continued, unlimited growth (e.g., JFK’s focus on energy, transportation, and aerospace). |
📉 The European Experiment: A Warning
Over the last few decades, we have seen these two systems play out in stark contrast between the United States and Europe.
The European model largely chose the English System path, characterized by heavy government regulation, high taxes, and expansive social services. The result, according to investment analysts like Alexander Green, has been decades of:
-
Economic stagnation.
-
Low wage growth.
-
Abysmal stock market returns.
The economic gap in 2023 is staggering considering:
-
The U.S. median household net wealth is $192,084.
-
The Eurozone median household net wealth is only $19,800.
Furthermore, individual American companies—symbols of our open, capitalist system—now often dwarf entire European stock markets: Microsoft is larger than the Paris exchange, Amazon is bigger than the Swiss exchange, and Apple is larger than the London exchange. The economic dynamism of the American System remains undeniable.
🏛️ The Lesson of History: Optimism and Confidence
In his book Peak Human, Johan Norberg chronicles seven “golden ages” of civilization, from Ancient Greece to the Anglosphere’s rise in the late 19th century. What did they all share?
A culture of optimism and freedom, encouraging exploration, experimentation, and the exchange of ideas. Citizens were free to innovate without the interference of centralized governments, feudal lords, or ravaging armies. In essence, these were open systems that prioritized the individual’s elevation over the elite’s control.
Norberg’s study also reveals the path to decline: every one of these golden ages collapsed when they lost their “cultural self-confidence.”
🚨 America’s Crossroads: Losing Self-Confidence
America chose to be an open system 250 years ago in an act of profound self-confidence—breaking free from the oppressive British monarchy. Today, that confidence is fading.
We are witnessing a rise in Democratic Socialist influence, driven by a message that is fundamentally anti-American, anti-capitalist, and anti-individual success:
-
The Socialist Doctrine (Closed): Claims wealth is limited and therefore its equal distribution is moral.
-
The Capitalist Teaching (Open): Claims wealth has unlimited growth potential and is distributed based on individual labor, raising overall wealth for everyone, with the most industrious rewarded.
This ideological infiltration—now visible in Congress, Governorships, and mayoral offices—has dangerously polarized our nation. Individuals dedicated to the Socialist Doctrine are now occupying the very institutions designed to promote and safeguard our capitalist Republic.
As we approach the 250th anniversary of our founding in 2026, the challenge is clear: We cannot inherit a tradition; we must earn it. We must rebuild our self-confidence in the American, Capitalist System. This requires breaking free, once again, from the oppression of those who promise the “equal sharing of wealth,” but who, in Churchill’s chilling assessment, are more likely to deliver the “equal sharing of misery.”
What are your thoughts on Henry Carey’s description of the two systems?