1. Overview

From self go to self-government - it is a long way for mankind.
In the politics it was a long way with much and a hard opposition.
In the former centuries politics was the matter of a small minority. It was the same minority who were the owner of the ground. It was the era of feudalism. The proprietors of ground and politics were the members of aristocracy. In the Middle Age the aristocratic class was the owner of the streets, the jurisdiction, the knights and all other public affairs.
But at those times existed also in Europe a clerical class. This class was in many countries the owner of the registry offices, the schools in monasteries, the hospitals and of social affairs. The upper classes got their money because the lower class, who were working in agriculture or as manual workers or as traders had to pay the tenth of their harvest and customs duty as tax to the owners of the ground. The property of the secular class was hereditary in contrast to the clerical class.
Therefore privatization of public affairs is not the invention of the new economy. In the Middle Ages there was no public property and no regulation. But later after discovery of America many european people migrated to the new continent. The people didn' t find there a class of ground owners. The new communities established their own political management. In the new communities was no anarchy, they were not societies without property, because they had their own governments. Self-government was a necessary part of a society of people with equal rights and freedom. With elections they could find the governor and the representatives of a council.
For establishing those way of hierarchy many information, education and enlightenment was necessary. It was not possible to constitute self-government without a constitution because the representative forces are divided and limited in such a hierarchical system.
In those times industrialization was growing and also the tasks and requests for public affairs. But it was not easy to copy such forms of hierarchy in Europe. The change from feudalism to capitalism was sometimes very hard. Especially in France was the break only with many violence possible at the end of the 18th century. Since those times limited self-government in politics is a reality in the most capitalistic countries. But self-government in economy is only by self-employed people possible. If a firm is growing the polarization of the interests is unavoidable. Like the economist Adam Smith 1723-1790 described in his theory the workers and the capitalists will fight about the earned money of the firm. In later times the workers and the capitalists organized their coalitions in order to distribute the money for wages and salaries at one side and for profits on the other side.

The quotes of unemployment in different countries

The inequality of employment is the reflexion of the inequalities of money distribution and ownership.

Since those times it is also a political and a scientific problem how many privatization and how much socialization is the optimum for the prosperity of a developed country. Karl Marx 1818-1883 and Wladimir Iljitsch Lenin 1870-1924 are famous representatives of such disputes. After the european communism was broken, it seems to be that only the total capitalism can give a country an optimum of wealthy. Deregulation of monopolistic service providers seems to be the optimal solution of economic problems.
If there are problems with education, healthy, postal service, telecommunications service, railway, motorway, electric power supply, water supply or insurance business or banking services, jurisdiction, refuse or homes for old people or prisoners, only privatization and deregulation seems to be the solution. The individual partner, socalled customer, of such monopolists has to pay a charge or because of a contract. But in such an economy not all people are the winners. The winners are the owners of those monopolistic companies and their management.The leaders and the owners establish a coalition in opposite to the workers.
On the other hand are firms who earn their money without regulation, because they produce in competition and the consumers have the choice to make an agreement. This firms are working in industry, agriculture, forestry, fishing industry, building trade, trading, mining industry, travel agencies, tour operators, catering and hotel trade and so on. The partner of those companies has to pay a price because of an agreement.
But in the producing firms of competition we detect the same problem. The owners and the management establish a coalition against the workers. It seems to be unavoidable. But what are the true reasons of seperation? It is not possible to give the answer in a few sentences.

To understand more about this you should read the next chapter: 2 Introduction.