In his 2023 book "In Defence of Capitalism," Dr. Rainer Zitelmann chronicles in painstaking detail how much Western elites were enamored with Lenin and Stalinism—despite the naked violence.
And the irony is that Stalin loathed such "liberals" and, had he the chance, would have had them shot or sent to the camps: Trotsky, Kamenev, Zionoviev, Radek and every resident of Silver Springs, Maryland.
One form of democratic socialism that is often touted is the worker cooperative in which workers own the factories and vote on what to produce, how to make it, and how to distribute the profits. But factories not only produce consumer goods, they also produce components that are inputs for other factories. In the United States, there are about 270,000 factories. How would cooperation and coordination between over a quarter million factories be achieved without market prices to indicate what and how much to make?
One response is that representatives from each facility could be sent to a workers’ committee that would decide which factory made what, in what quantities, and where it would be sent. The committee would have the authority to override the democratic votes of the workers at any given plant, and the power to enforce its decisions. But then we’re back to a centrally planned, undemocratic system ruled by force.
Socialists love to 'cherry-pick.' They'll talk about how well socialism supposedly looks on paper, and to many, it looks well-organized in theory. They'll also give "instances" in which it purportedly has worked.
Not only will they refuse to talk about the near-universal negative implications of socialism; they'll pretend that, this time, they'll get it 'right' since what was tried before wasn't "real socialism."
But as we've seen time and again, there's a difference between theory and practice, and that goes beyond the economic sphere. In practice, mass starvation and murder are two of many negative outcomes of socialism, and they're common denominators in any country that's tried it.
The reasoning? It's a system that requires coercion as an ingredient, no matter how benign socialists pretend to make coercion.
As a lay student of WW2 history for 50+ years, I still remain amazed at how the western media and some politicos framed Stalin as Uncle Joe in an effort to get Americans to support the Russians in the war effort. Softening and humanizing that monster is a stain on the MSM that predates the current state of almost incomprehensible malevolance.
Very well written article. Socialism is a utopian ideology that seeks to force equal outcomes whether by class, race, or national identity and it’s not uncommon for socialists to kill each other over disagreements on how to obtain such a utopia.
It has been used most notably by Karl Marx to formulate Communism, Giovanni Gentile and Benito Mussolini in the creation of Fascism, and used to advance National Socialism by Adolf Hitler. Marx saw a world divided by class with the proletariat rising up in revolution, Mussolini was driven by Italian ethnic nationalism and collectivism, and Hitler’s vision was for a utopia for the strongest white people only primarily through genocide, eugenics, and other horrors.
Socialism’s goals can only be achieved through mass murder and/or persecution and starvation of the undesirables. It is also hostile to religion especially Christianity and freedom of speech as Antonio Gramsci leader of the Italian Communist Party and one of the creators of critical theory declared paraphrasing that socialism will overtake Christianity and be found in every institution especially colleges. The professors of the Frankfurt School of Critical Theory carried this out in the United States Herbert Marcuse especially with the theory of Communism from the margins which is being implemented today.
And the irony is that Stalin loathed such "liberals" and, had he the chance, would have had them shot or sent to the camps: Trotsky, Kamenev, Zionoviev, Radek and every resident of Silver Springs, Maryland.
Sorry Jon, Ben Burgis was right - true socialism has never been tried. As Bernie Sanders declared, we need “democratic socialism”.
Ha
One form of democratic socialism that is often touted is the worker cooperative in which workers own the factories and vote on what to produce, how to make it, and how to distribute the profits. But factories not only produce consumer goods, they also produce components that are inputs for other factories. In the United States, there are about 270,000 factories. How would cooperation and coordination between over a quarter million factories be achieved without market prices to indicate what and how much to make?
One response is that representatives from each facility could be sent to a workers’ committee that would decide which factory made what, in what quantities, and where it would be sent. The committee would have the authority to override the democratic votes of the workers at any given plant, and the power to enforce its decisions. But then we’re back to a centrally planned, undemocratic system ruled by force.
Socialists love to 'cherry-pick.' They'll talk about how well socialism supposedly looks on paper, and to many, it looks well-organized in theory. They'll also give "instances" in which it purportedly has worked.
Not only will they refuse to talk about the near-universal negative implications of socialism; they'll pretend that, this time, they'll get it 'right' since what was tried before wasn't "real socialism."
But as we've seen time and again, there's a difference between theory and practice, and that goes beyond the economic sphere. In practice, mass starvation and murder are two of many negative outcomes of socialism, and they're common denominators in any country that's tried it.
The reasoning? It's a system that requires coercion as an ingredient, no matter how benign socialists pretend to make coercion.
Hayek demonstrated in his book The Road to Serfdom how too much government management in what should be private leads to tyranny.
Coincidentally, I'm rereading "Why Orwell Matters" (Hitchens).
Orwell realized, AT THE TIME, that socialism usually led to despotism. Lefties back then refused to admit that, and they still do.
As a lay student of WW2 history for 50+ years, I still remain amazed at how the western media and some politicos framed Stalin as Uncle Joe in an effort to get Americans to support the Russians in the war effort. Softening and humanizing that monster is a stain on the MSM that predates the current state of almost incomprehensible malevolance.
Very well written article. Socialism is a utopian ideology that seeks to force equal outcomes whether by class, race, or national identity and it’s not uncommon for socialists to kill each other over disagreements on how to obtain such a utopia.
It has been used most notably by Karl Marx to formulate Communism, Giovanni Gentile and Benito Mussolini in the creation of Fascism, and used to advance National Socialism by Adolf Hitler. Marx saw a world divided by class with the proletariat rising up in revolution, Mussolini was driven by Italian ethnic nationalism and collectivism, and Hitler’s vision was for a utopia for the strongest white people only primarily through genocide, eugenics, and other horrors.
Socialism’s goals can only be achieved through mass murder and/or persecution and starvation of the undesirables. It is also hostile to religion especially Christianity and freedom of speech as Antonio Gramsci leader of the Italian Communist Party and one of the creators of critical theory declared paraphrasing that socialism will overtake Christianity and be found in every institution especially colleges. The professors of the Frankfurt School of Critical Theory carried this out in the United States Herbert Marcuse especially with the theory of Communism from the margins which is being implemented today.