Socialism

Socialism

socialism \ˈsō-shə-ˌli-zəm\ n. 1. a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state; 2. a way of organizing a society in which major industries are owned and controlled by the government rather than by individual people and companies; 3. any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods; 4. a system of society or group living in which there is no private property; 5. a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done. ¹

                                  *                                   *                               *

Slice it, dice it, blend it, and mix it any which way you want but, at the end of the day, socialism is not commensurate with the American way, nor is it compatible with the Constitution of the United States. Simply put, socialism is an anathema to what it means to be an American, and anyone, ANYONE who advocates the introduction of socialism into the American way of life is either ignorant, ill-informed, or bent on the destruction of the United States of America.

Consider the fact that the United States- a nation built on self-sufficiency and capitalism- has achieved, by all meaningful measures, the highest standard of living in the entire world. Indeed, it was capitalism that created what we now know as the middle class. Yes, there are those who will toss about examples of smaller, MUCH smaller Nordic countries, like Finland, Norway, Denmark and Sweden as  socialist “utopias”, but these countries are racially and culturally homogeneous, with populations equivalent to a few of our largest cities combined. Comparing these countries to the United States- countries which spend barely a farthing on national defense- is like comparing soldier ants to draught horses, because the United States is, in reality, augmenting and ensuring their own defense with our own taxpayer’s money, and not theirs, based upon their membership in NATO, which ceases to exist without the United States paying the tab.

It is amusing, to a point, that Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) attempts to re-define socialism as “democratic socialism”- amusing, because it is an obvious dodge to the fact that what he is advocating is nothing less than socialism, pure and simple. He very clearly indicates that what he wants to do is tax the wealthy at 90%, in other words, for every dollar the wealthy earn, he wants to take ninety cents, and use it to fund social programs which he says is necessary to achieve what he deems to be “fairness”- essentially confiscating money from those who earn it, and distributing the proceeds, as he deems fit. He calls this “democratic socialism”. A more honest term would be “theft”.

The point to which it is not amusing is the fact that there are millions of people, particularly young people, who buy into this “horse hockey”. This is particularly true with regards to college students, who are too young, or too ignorant, or too brainwashed by their aging professors, to remember that socialism in Germany during the 1930s and 1940s, China since the 1940s, Russia since the 1910’s, combined to result in the deaths of well over 100 million people in the 20th century- and that doesn’t include socialism in Viet Nam, Cambodia, North Korea, and a host of countries in Africa and Latin America, where socialism resulted in the deaths of many hundreds of thousands, as well. Simply stated, socialism kills, eventually, because once the rich have been liquidated, financially and otherwise, the populace becomes insatiable for the meager benefits to which they have become accustomed, and the well runs dry. British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher so famously once said, “The inherent problem with socialism is that, eventually, you run out of other people’s money”.

In the end, socialism results in an economic system where everyone, except those in power, becomes equally poor, equally deprived and equally miserable, which might be pleasing to the likes of Bernie Sanders, and his Democrat allies, but strikes this writer as nothing more than the recipe for failure and the basis of a lie- a cruel lie which would have people believe that all fortunes were made as the result of someone getting screwed. Socialists, and those who advocate socialism, want to sell people on the concept that the only way to right that wrong is to forcibly take money from one person, and have the government give some of it to another which, once extrapolated, means that innovation, technological advancement, medical and scientific discovery, all comes to an abrupt halt when the profit motive, and the desire to improve one’s own lot in life, becomes dis-incentivized to the point of cultural regression. But don’t tell this to a wild-eyed young liberal, bent on achieving social and economic justice, lest you be branded as a “hater” insensitive to the needs of others.

-Drew Nickell, 20 October 2015

¹ reprinted from Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary, an Encyclopaedia Britannica Company

©2015 by Drew Nickell, all rights reserved