A Bite of Communism

    In a recent class activity, we learned about Capitalism, Socialism, and Communism by using an activity that involved Hershey's Kisses. Every student was given 2 pieces of chocolate, although 3 students were given 8 to begin with. Then, everyone got up and played rock-paper-scissors with another student. If you lost, you gave one piece to the person you played. If you won, they gave you a piece. Once you ran out of chocolate, you were out. The game stopped when there were about 5 people left who had all the remaining candy. This part was meant to represent Capitalism, where you take a gamble to try to make money, and you can make it big or get broke. The people who had no candy, meant to represent the poor, felt that it was unfair that only certain people had lots of candy. So, all of the candy was taken back, and everyone was evenly distributed the candy between everyone. This part was meant to represent when the poor would rise up against the rich and demand reform and money equality. This represents Socialism, where economic equality is achieved. We were then asked who would risk playing rock paper scissors again, and few people would. This means that in society, a classless society would be achieved, where nobody would risk trying to become rich because the poor would rise against them. They would agree to share all the resources, and since there is no government needed to regulate anything, this leads to Communism. This is Carl Marx's theory on Communism.
     Marx's theory on how the poor would help themselves is, in breif, that the poor would eventually rise up against the rich to try and make things more fair. After econmic equality would be reached, people would not accept sharp economic divisions anymore. Thet would create a Communism. However, another man at the time named Adam Smith wrote The Wealth of Nations, a capitalist book. Smith is recognized as the father of Capitalism. He used the metaphor "The Invisible Hand" in his writing. His theory is that people would to become rich by working, and by doing this, the country would also benefit. The government would not be needed in the economic stage because the invisible hand would guide people. This is very different fron Marx's theory.
    I personally believe that Smith's theory on the economy is better. It does not require a huge revolt after a long period of poverty, like Marx's does. Smith's plainly states that if you work hard, you will not only help yourself but you will help your country as well.