Right Wing Liberarianism is better than Left Wing

Rebuttals. Firstly I would like to say that I am not altogether opposed to a society that works off the definition of capitalism, though it would need responsible government that was poerful enough to conduct it properly. This is the misunderstanding I think between people of your philosophy and people of mine: if a monetary system really did take into account human worth, and was a true meritocracy, then I'm sure things could work. But the reality is very different, at least in the capitalism of today, and this is why we believe a movement to the 'left' is essential for for human satisfaction and any attempts to make things more beneficial for the rich (or right-wing ideology) is detrimental to human happiness. You say: "It's much better to teach someone how to fish so they can provide for themselves the rest of their lives than to give them free fish taken from someone else." Yes, but I'm suggesting we find the most efficient way to fish- then delegate what little work is needed to those wanting eat fish (not exactly like this). Capitalism results in one man owning all the fish, then setting the economy to make people have to work far more than is needed to use the fish-resulting in fish being thrown away by the wealthy, and the poor people starving. Do you know where all your capitalist goods come from? Let me tell you that it's slave like conditions and extreme poverty that drives the machine that fuels the consumer addicted, capitalist culture. You might not know about the darker side of capitalism, which is more like the entirety than just a side: look at these statistics; according to Wikipedia, 99.9% of the world have 19% of the wealth, and the top 0.001 have 30%. Is a corporate C.E.O, (human being) who knowingly makes policy that kills people (such as poisoning water for oil, poisoning the rivers of third world countries) more valuable to society than a man (human being) who spends his time educating people for free who need it? Moreover, is he millions and millions of times more worthy? Because capitalism would say he is, I ask you: Is that fair? You say your a strong individualist, what does that even mean? Of course individuality is key to happiness, but how does giving people the right to make it so we have to work 5 days a week until we are 67 do this? I mean, I know a few people get jobs they like, but these are in the minority according to statistics. Also, we live in the richest country on earth, look at the 99% of other people capitalism effects. How does capitalism encourage their individuality? Seriously, I mean apart from the previous feudal system, which I think is what you mean when you say individualty has increased. Think about most people's lives in the UK or America: do they express their individualty through their work? Do they wake up everyday, itching to get to work? Do they hold strong community values and persue spiritual growth and learning? No, the consumer market requires you to be addicted to their food, addicted to their drugs, bereft of community values an thus a feeling of loneliness that they fill with consumer goods. We are not necessarily the happiest nation in the world, even though we are the richest, and many countries have dictators and poverty. Because studies done on tribal people find that they are in fact happier. The study of Psychology (im a student) widely accepts that's social bonding is not only the most important thing to a human, but is in fact essential-without we actually die as babies-even when fed and kept warm. So tell that to indivualism. Also, don't you think now that we have 'grow up' as a society we need to be more responsible? Your philosophy isn't too bad in ancient days and monkey tribes, but now with our capacity for destruction and sheer size, don't you think we need to think collectively? I don't mean be like ants! Like we are now, but collectively decipher the best way for us all to live. Preserving the environment, making life easy and good and preserving what should be preserved. If some people refuse to work, they will be social recluses as a result, now that's a worse deterrant than being on social welfare nowadays is it not? For how could you have friends in your community, whose work-load is made bigger by your laziness? Work would only by a few hours a week. People would dislike you, so only few people would do it. And as Ghandi said-just because there are a few dirty drops, doesn't have to make to whole ocean dirty. You mention your power supply. Mate you have to think bigger than your living room when discussing the world affairs of 7 billion people on a finite planet with huge issues facing it. Technology can be improved in the renewable energy market if it had money, our government tax renewable energy companies more than other companies also which doesn't make it easy for them. This is a result of capitalism also, as the monopoly the oil companies have on the market gives them such power to quell competition. I notice you didn't mention the water car, why so? This is quite important when talking about the environment. It is never good for the environment to allow powerful organizations to exploit it freely for profit, I don't understand you logic here. Organizations could only do this responsibly with government regulations, which would be contrary to right-wing philosophy. We have not evolved to want consumer goods, we have evolved to want freedom, comfort, mastery and strong social bonds. Capitalism, and your philosophy can only work if: 1. Public worth (wage) is determined fairly, meaning nobody is to rich. 2. Government take authority, have complete authority, and are not at all linked with elitism. They have the public good in mind as their sole agenda, and can make or break corporations, or change them individually as they please. This system reflects socialism more than a right-wing society. Humans have a tendency to be selfish and greedy, right-wing philosophy rewards this.