‘Tiñosas’ are ‘vultures’ in Cuban Spanish. In the countryside there are many of them. The word ‘tiñosa’ acknowledges their beauty. ‘Tiñosas hermosas’ one could say. But it is a morbid beauty, if such a thing exists. The word ‘caruña’, used in Sto Domingo, expresses their disgusting morbidity much better. Now, they are creatures of God, of course, and serve a useful purpose. The morbid flavor is a human invention, which only proves our ignorance. However, this is the way we feel. And our feelings, emotions, are a reality which cannot be ignored. But they should always be carefully scrutinized for their validity. After all, solidarity, too, is an emotion which nevertheless is vital in any community.
But ‘tiñosas’ have not a grain of solidarity in them. Like most animals, they look after their offspring, but that’s it. No love, not even consideration, for each other. The strongest eats most. It is not particularly complimentary to be compared to a vulture. We don’t know who coined the term ‘vulture-capitalism’, but it is likely to have been a socialist intending to make an accusatory point. A point that is, however, only one third true. The other two thirds are ignorance and a deliberate false play on negative emotion.
Solidarism is a free market system, respecting the profit principle
Now, we can and should criticize capitalism for valid reasons. As explained earlier, it concentrates economic power, leaves the masses impoverished and causes economic crisis after crisis. Even war. So there is reason to characterize it by comparison with vultures and casino’s. Part of capitalism is that. But not all. If the people and companies in capitalist countries were nothing but vultures and casino-players with no solidarity at all, there would be no civilization. There would be no art, no museums, no schools, no hospitals, no public utilities, no organized State. And there would not be the material success the U.S.A., for instance, was able to produce in a short period of time. That is why Solidarism, despite all negative emotional rhetoric by socialists, does not reject all capitalism stands for. Some elements of capitalism are good and useful. Others are unavoidable, although emotionally we might feel dislike.
Among such useful elements are the free market and the profit principle. Until something better has been invented that works, the market is the best way to fix prices and allow for reasonable profit. Perhaps prices for raw materials should be fixed by an international body to give the economy a stable basis, but this is by no means a generally accepted solidarist point of view. In principle, the free market is its basis, but as nothing is absolute, deviations are thinkable and should be debated.
Solidarism accepts as unavoidable the reality of life, particularly that at some point it ends. When seeing the ‘tiñosas’ circle in the sky, we can tell them: ‘Not yet!’, but death is part of life. Companies that are weak, outdated and unprofitable, must die, i.e. go bankrupt. And then the vultures come to feast on the carcass. This is Nature’s way of cleaning up and ensuring progress. Man cannot change that, no matter how hard socialism tries. But we can co-operate with Nature and restructure the economy in such a way that life becomes easier for everybody and society more just. And this is what Solidarism promises to do.
This rather long introduction serves to explain why only productive investments by ESOP- or similar companies should be financed by the Cuban Central Bank with newly created money (Rules 1 and 5 for safe money creation). Only viable productive investments, because only those are capable of being repaid with the profits generated by them. And only those will thereafter continue to produce goods and services for the community thus raising the general economic level of society.
And only ESOP- or similar companies, because only those create economic democracy and a degree of equality and prosperity that is justifiable and acceptable to human nature. And only those companies will strengthen political democracy and reverse the dangerous trend toward fascism and war, which is inherent in traditional (‘vulture’) capitalism. And only those companies diffuse economic power which stimulates the economy in ways traditional capitalism never did and never can.
Solidarism respects freedom. Any company wishing to reject its basic principle of participation for whatever reason, should be free to do so. But as such companies tend to concentrate economic power, create privilege and lead to war or to a police state (in short are undemocratic), there is no sane reason for a democratic society (via its Central Bank) to support or stimulate them. Crudely put: vultures should not be helped by the ones they exploit. That would be insane.