Would "standard of living" increases portray what is good? If you evaluate modern society it is reasonable to claim that standards of living increased mainly because of technological advances. Under what system did these technological advances occur? I'd say largely under pure capitalism...
Equality is a utopian idea that will never become true. There will always be alphas, winners and losers... that's nature. I have to introduce Nietzsche again... do you know his argument against Christianity? He despises it because its a philosophy that supports the weak of society. Of course "poor" people tend to be more religious and believers in Christianity because it justifies their existence and motivates them to continue.
It is possible that if I was poor and a loser of the system then I would support socialism because it would help my situation. If I was a winner in the system, regardless of what system, then I would just support the status quo. The "success" of the system is thus largely dependent on one's perspective... I don't think we can debate it without admitting this point.
To the original point, what constitutes as "good" is subjective. Standards of livings increases, globalization, etc. are good for the majority of the earth's human populations. This "good" was probably not "good" for indigenous populations who lost their cultures as well as for other species and the environment. Too philosophical, yes, but you have to view the world as winners, losers, neutrals.
Last edited by 6cubed; 08-11-2011 at 12:19 PM.