Socialism

by Tom Kando

Paul Krugman wrote a recent article, Socialism and the Self-Made Woman. He points out that Ivanka Trump is the last person in the world who should be writing about “self-made women,” since her entire “success” is derived from the fact that she is the silver spoon fed daughter of the billionaire President of the United States. Krugman then reminds us of a painful truth: Contrary to the myth that the US is the land of unlimited opportunity, the country where the “American Dream” provides upward mobility to an unparalleled extent, the truth is that America has LESS upward mobility than most other advanced industrialized countries. The children of poor Americans are LESS likely to move up the economic ladder in the US than in Canada, Scandinavia and other Western countries.

At the same time, in all those countries, the government plays a LARGER role in the economy than it does in the US. By and large, those countries are SOCIAL DEMOCRACIES. That is, they are more “socialistic” than America.

I scrolled down the first few dozen comments made on Krugman’s article. It’s sad. Many, perhaps most of them, show APPALLING ignorance. Readers clamor that “socialism” is a disaster in countries such as Holland; that Venezuela proves that socialism sucks; that the standard of living and the quality of life are far superior in America than in places like Canada and Sweden, because those countries are too socialistic.

It’s enough to make one despair! Is it even worth trying to shed some light on this issue, in the middle of such cacophony? Let me try once again, quixotically:

You see, “Socialism” can be defined in a nearly infinite number of ways. In the US, it is used largely as a cuss word by right-wing politicians such as the President.

As Fried and Sanders note in their seminal book Socialist Thought: A Documentary History, defining socialism is an impossible task, particularly in the United States.

Google defines it as follows: a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole. (in Marxist theory) a transitional social state between the overthrow of capitalism and the realization of Communism.

Wikipedia offers the following definition: Socialism is a range of economic and social systems characterized by social ownership of the means of production and workers' self-management..... Social ownership can be public, collective or cooperative ownership, or citizen ownership of equity. There are many varieties of socialism and there is no single definition encapsulating all of them, with social ownership being the common element shared by its various forms.

Let me add Webster’s New International Dictionary’s definition: “A Political and economic theory of social organization based on collective or governmental ownership and democratic management of the essential means for the production and distribution of goods....Socialism aims to distribute income and social opportunity more equitably than they are now believed to be distributed.”

The history and literature of socialism are vast. Marxism and Communism are merely one of many forms of “socialism,” one of its more extreme variants. It is true that in its “pure” form, socialism dictates public ownership of the means of production. However, what the knuckleheads at Fox News don’t understand is that the vast majority of “socialisms” around the world are not pure. Even Lenin had to deviate from his principles when he introduced his New Economic Policy. But when you define socialism as requiring the total ownership of ALL means of production, and also mandating total economic equality in terms of consumption, you equate socialism and communism, and you limit your understanding of socialism in its many forms.

Conservatives like to cherry-pick cases to buttress their positions: Venezuela proves that Socialism doesn’t work? Well, what about Sweden? Obviously, one has to look at the SPECIFICS. What are they doing, exactly, in Venezuela, as opposed to Sweden? This is not the place to do such an analysis. I am merely pointing out the absurdity of ad hoc arguments. I might as well reply that Somalia proves that Capitalism doesn’t work, or some other such nonsense...

With regard to Socialism, the fact is that most countries have MIXED economies. That is, they have adopted elements of Capitalism AND Socialism. The question is not whether a country is socialistic or not. It is the EXTENT to which it is socialistic.

Nowhere is this clearer than in the affluent social democracies of Western Europe, Canada, Australia and elsewhere. These countries are all Social Democracies. For example, one of Britain’s two major governing parties is the Labour Party. In Germany it’s called the Social Democratic Party. In France, Holland and elsewhere, they are the Socialist Parties.

The millions of ignorant people who use the word “socialist” as a cuss word don’t realize that socialism is a matter of DEGREE.

And yes, America has a lot of socialism already. Maybe not as much as some other countries, but plenty nevertheless. America started to become socialist the moment it instituted a government that dispenses services at taxpayer’s expense, for instance the postal service, public schools, public safety, public utilities, Social Security and Medicare. The public sector IS socialism. The armed forces ARE socialism, as is the IRS. Because the Democratic Party favors a greater public sector, it can be viewed as America’s socialist party.

The single most important political question is whether we want MORE socialism, or LESS socialism.

I personally favor an increase in socialism in the US.

Why?

Because my experience and my research both indicate that the most successful countries in the world are social democracies. They have mixed economies. They have more socialism than we do. By “most successful,” I mean that life for the overwhelming majority of the people in those countries is better than it is for most Americans: They live longer, healthier and happier lives. Simple.

© Tom Kando 2019;All Rights Reserved

leave comment here