The economy of most of Asia is booming. China came up with a system of government that allows a small amount of free enterprise capitalism, as did Viet Nam, and others. Asia looked around and saw Japan, South Korea and more nations modernizing at warp speed; medical care, diet, housing, transportation all entering the new century expanding and improving.The pure socialist nations observed the socialist “shining city on the hill;” for them Moscow turned to limited capitalism, as even Karl Marx preached that some capitalism (private ownership) was necessary as the engine of a nation’s economy. The Russian Federation gave it a try, and it worked. It also had the effect of irritating the American left, who are pushing us in the opposite direction, towards national socialism.
We now see the world turning away from socialism and embracing capitalism; enter the far-left wing of the socialist party in the United States. Even as the experiments in mass socialism have failed world-wide, they are moving to embrace socialist government as our savior.
The Democratic Socialists (DS) fail to recognize that we are a continental nation with more than 326 million people; they cite the small European nations as an example of how socialism is the answer, and socialism will fix all that is vile with the United States. None of the three European nations they cite are larger in land area or population than Texas; indeed they are mostly half the size.
The larger nations that embraced socialism during the period it was the fashion, 1917 to 1969, failed and are turning to capitalism.
What do the socialists say? Do they quote the failed systems around the world? No, no, they don’t they promise free stuff as the leaders in Venezuela have. Free health care, free college, free money, free energy, free transportation for all, they take from the rich and redistribute it to the people based on need, no effort necessary. It will work until they spend all the “rich” folks’ money, and then what? Just look to Venezuela, a wealthy country rich in natural resources (oil), with its people starving after 20 years of socialism.The Democratic Socialists fail to recognize the American safety net of social programs for the folks who have fallen on hard times. The DS folks fail to recognize that our states have the ability to provide social programs to their people who need them, or even just want them. If the good folks in California want free college, they can provide it, if they want free health care for all, even illegals, provide it, if they want to enact socialism in their state within the Constitution go ahead and do it, but leave the good folks in Hopkins, Martin, Moline, Dorr and Wayland out of it; if we want it we will move there or vote for it.
If the folks in New York City or state want to provide social programs, do it, if they want to ban private vehicles do it, if they want to ban meat, fertilizer, fossil fuels, cows and pigs that fart and belch get on with it. Folks and businesses are moving from the socialist havens of California and New York to the capitalist American South to escape punitive taxes and regulations.
As Ranger Rick has stated, money goes where it is treated best.
Do not forget the cold truth that the world cannot feed its population without fossil fuels and petrochemicals, no matter what the green folks say. The Earth’s population is scheduled to double in 30 years; think that over before you ban, limit and restrain agriculture.
Some states are rushing into socialism; good, let them. Socialism will fail as it always does and hurt only those unenlightened enough to choose that form of government, but do not ask the rest of us to bail them out of the disasters they create.
If the folks in New York need help repairing the damage socialism will do to them in years to come, don’t ask the folks in Martin/Moline to pay for it. If the folks in California need to be bailed out because they ran out of money in their state, the folks in Hopkins/Dorr do not need to pay the bill for their short-term greed. Sadly, they will fail over time, and you and I will be taxed to pay for their mistakes.
Many right wingers – I worked with numerous of them, some of whom were friends – defined socialism to include things like price supports for agricultural products, Medicare and Social Security, aid to disabled/blind folks, safety regulation in manufacturing plants, etc. as socialism. I don’t fear socialism, and I don’t fear capitalism. Both systems have merit, and drawbacks. To hold up kleptocracies as as examples of the socialism model is either ignorant or willfully misleading, and harkens back to McCarthyism. Working out the blending the systems is what we try to do in the United States, and it’s a difficult, ongoing task. The capitalist system has treated me well enough, but I went to a public university.
Sir,
Those who define things for the common good (good for the public) are not and never were defined as socialism…
When are people truly going to understand the differences between socialism, communism and capitalism? Services for the public good are not a form of government.
It’s hard to intelligently debate when your opponent knows not the subject or at least has a fair understanding concerning the socialist form of government.
Mr. Basura,
Sir
Socialism has always led to kleptocracies over time a single leader comes to power and they take over. Socialism gives absolute power the government and control of the economic system with no way to check and balance the leadership.
Please name us one socialist nation that has been around for 243 years (as our capitalist government has) after they became a socialist nation. Venezuela is a good example, over 10 to 20 years of socialism two dictators came to power with absolute power. The nation is falling apart, people starving, health care regressing, inflation rampant, productivity down, not a successful governmental system.
Thanks for the comment.
Some thoughts… You’re correct, Army Bob. Socialism as a civic philosophy and as a governmental system is completely irresponsible, unworkable, inconsistent and ultimately destructive for many reasons. As you’ve pointed out, historically socialism has never succeeded or appeared to do so in the real world for more than a relatively short period on the scale of time.
For one thing, socialism denies the natural right of the individual and of all voluntary corporate groups of individuals to self-determine and apply the use of their accumulated financial resources, efforts and risk-taking as they choose. Then, if and when there is a good result, the natural right to enjoy and direct as desired any resulting profits, fruits of labor, products, preferences, actions, contributions and assistance to others of choice. With socialism the individual and all corporate groups of individuals are compelled and legally required to work to some degree for the state and for others they will never know, whether or not they may choose to do so or think any given recipient worthy of free support coming from their efforts and hard work.
All such socialist “Robin Hood” benefits are then always inefficiently, often unwisely and wastefully distributed for the personal and political benefit to politicians and the countless nameless, faceless government bureaucrats and the unbelievably huge “overhead” of such state systems.
The forced pay-ins that are not immediately consumed and distributed are then redirected and spent for political purposes and interest payments on the debt while adding that ever-increasing obligation from such robbery to the crushing interest-bearing governmental debt that can now never be repaid. Such practices ultimately bankrupt all governmental bodies doing so while simultaneously taking down all vulnerable people with it while chasing away with their resources all those who can afford to escape. The golden goose will thus ultimately just fly away, leaving nothing but empty, broken eggshells.
Those who promote and even demand ever-increasing mandatory pay-ins to socialist programs that benefit some who have paid nothing for them but consume them freely while at the same time penalizing and burdening those who pay for them, speak out of both sides of their mouth. These voices who constantly say we “can’t tell someone what to do with their own body”, at one and the same time claim that such personal body sovereignty ends abruptly when it comes to socialism. In their view the government has a legal right to the personal and corporate fruits of labor of those very same “sovereign bodies”. Those bodies are forced to work for the state to some degree as well as for others they don’t know or may not want to support. In other words, in the socialist philosophy your body, the “tree”, is yours and you can do with your own tree as you please, except we all somehow have a legal right to some of the fruit that comes from your “sovereign tree”. Socialism is thus a subtle form of involuntary servitude and slavery whenever and wherever it is present.
Free enterprise and capitalism are based on sound thinking, human nature and good principles. They work, but of course they certainly do not always work perfectly. That’s because nothing at all in this world is perfect which involves imperfect people and governments. However, socialism is far beyond being merely imperfect. Even if implemented as well-meaning, socialism by very nature is intrinsically evil and it is ultimately destructive of life and liberty when it is employed and has worked its way to its logical and inevitable ends.
Terry, it’s good to know that you have concerns for the national debt. It seems like that was just in the news recently. I’m not sure how socialism, Medicare, for example, is “evil” and “destructive of life.”
Medicare and social security, whether one believes they are essentially good or not, are both represented to be provided in the nature of insurance programs. However both are based on forced participation premiums in huge amounts from some, but neither one requires premiums to be paid by many who will yet benefit from them. That’s not any kind of fair and equitable insurance system, and it certainly isn’t liberty. When the government requires involuntary participation in any such system by confiscating some of one’s earnings to do so, it is just another form of legally-protected robbery of one’s property. Earnings do not belong to any government. Any forced involuntary taking of anything of value from a productive person which was not produced by and does not belong to the taker or to any other recipient is by definition robbery, regardless of the fact that a government is doing the forced taking and some “overall good” may be pronounced as the purpose for the robbery. Such systems are evil by their nature due to the robbery and furthermore always unsustainable for several reasons. These Robin Hood social programs ultimately end up needlessly destroying lives in various ways of those who become dependent on them, as well as those who cannot any longer economically sustain due to the forced confiscation of their necessary productivity. Socialism becomes a race to the bottom.
Just think of how much money would be in a 401K account if you had invested all the withdrawals from your wages for Social Security? Instead of the small check each month from SS, you’d be sitting on a nest egg about 4 times more than paid into SS. To me, that would be over $500,000 for retirement.
Mr. Parks,
So true and expertly explained!
Capitalism is the only way to rise above grinding poverty, and an added aside, it can be used for evil, as in the most recent pay for admission into elite colleges scandel. That is why a morale and just society is required for Capitalism to function properly.
Man can be evil and only man can reform. Hopefully with the help and guidance from God can an America be truly equitable for everyone to be all they can be and enjoy the blessings this nation has previously been bestowed.