Found this on FB. Commentary below.
"A Democratic Socialist is not Marxist, Socialist or Communist, A Democratic Socialist is still a capitalist, just one who seeks to restrain the self destructive excesses of capitalism and channel government's use of our tax money into creating opportunities for everyone. Democratic Socialists believe that both the economy and society should be run democratically to meet human needs, not simply to make profits for a greedy few."
Leaving aside its grammatical deficiencies, there isn't single true statement contained in this poster. Not one. The author demonstrates an appalling ignorance of politics, economics, and law in a mere two sentences. Either that, or the author is deliberately attempting to obfuscate, as socialists are wont to do. This is known as agitprop.
Either way, we cannot allow this mess to pass without comment. Here we go:
1) "A Democratic Socialist is not Marxist, Socialist or Communist..." Wikipedia tells us that democratic socialism
"is a political ideology advocating a democratic political system alongside a socialist economic system, involving a combination of political democracy with social ownership of the means of production."
It is different than a social democracy, which
"...is a political ideology that supports economic and social interventions to promote social justice within the framework of a capitalist economy, and a policy regime involving welfare state provisions, collective bargaining arrangements, regulation of the economy in the general interest, interventions to promote greater equality in the distribution of income and wealth..."
Democratic socialism, however,
"...is committed to systemic transformation of the economy... that the issues inherent to capitalism can only be solved by a transition from capitalism to socialism, by superseding private property with some form of social ownership..."
Thus, democratic socialism intends to transform capitalism into socialism. In actual fact, the statement from the poster defines social democracy, not democratic socialism!
2) "A Democratic Socialist is still a capitalist..." No, not true. The name doesn't even include "capitalist." Democratic socialists don't even like capitalism. They hate it. They blame it for all of society's ills. They want to get rid of it.
3) "... just one who seeks to restrain the self destructive excesses of capitalism..." And replace it with a whole different set of excesses. But in actual fact, there are no "self destructive excesses of capitalism." Capitalism is simply the voluntary, legal exchange of value. Anything that violates that is not capitalism. Theft violates capitalism. Cheating violates capitalism. Misrepresenting, lying, making a shoddy product, all these are violations of capitalism.
And certainly the democratic socialist is not telling us the truth when he tells us he wants to "restrain" capitalism. We just learned that he in fact wants to eliminate it.
4) "...and channel government's use of our tax money into creating opportunities for everyone." I almost laughed out loud at this one. This is what has been happening in America for 80 years, and yet wealth inequality has never been greater. We have an example of where this leads us right before our eyes. It is a failure, an unmitigated disaster. Poverty is not solved, the economy continues to languish, race relations are at an all-time low, and government wastes trillions on failed programs.
Welcome to democratic socialism.
5) "Democratic Socialists believe that both the economy and society should be run democratically to meet human needs..." No, social democrats believe this. But anyway, once again we need to note that our society is already run this way and is failing. Democratic socialists, news flash: Your ideas DON'T WORK!
6) "...not simply to make profits for a greedy few." It is interesting to me that the Left loves crony capitalism (aka "public/private initiatives") on one hand but hate the results on the other. It is also interesting how they supported the bailouts and stimuli, which largely went to banksters and Wall Street fatcats. It's the big government they favor that has produced the income inequality they decry.
In addition, one would think that no one has any money besides the rich. No one has jobs or houses or cars or cell phones. Only the rich have these. But even the poorest among us have flat screen T.V.s, air conditioning, and laptops. Our poor are extremely well off by world standards. Our middle class is rolling in dough compared to Africa or the Philippines. And our upper middle class is filthy rich by the standards of North Korea or Mongolia.
Socialist agitprop dies hard, if at all. After the ruinous policies and pogroms of socialists all over the world, we still have pie-in-the-sky idealists who think the it will still somehow work. But we do not have the proletariat vs. the bourgeois anymore. The Labor Theory of Value has long been debunked.
This is an ancient, failed ideology which needs to be relegated to the scrap heap of history. The author's sad remnant version of it smacks of envy and greed for what others have that you think you deserve. This is nothing more than envy.
All that remains of that is a shriveled corpse, a mere shadow of what might have had some relevance decades ago when steam trains traveled the land. But no more. Socialists, you've not only failed, you are irrelevant.
You twist the the result of abject failure of unregulated capitalism which, among other things, nearly collapsed to the economy in 2008, and blame it on socialism? We really don't know what result could have materialized under a more socialist agenda, as in administration of FDR, until the fascist Republicans lose their grip on American democracy, and learn to compromise and quit filibustering everything and I mean everything that comes up for consideration.
ReplyDeleteLike the meme I examined above, every statement you make is false. There is no such thing as "unregulated capitalism." Capitalism relies on the rule of law to enforce contracts, prosecute thieves and swindlers, and to provide the framework for its function.
ReplyDeleteThe economy didn't collapse in 2008 because of "unregulated capitalism," since we have been living in a highly regulated quasi-socialist environment for decades. It collapsed because of heavy-handed government intervention into the economy, coupled with cronyism and sweetheart deals with fatcats. The fault belongs to government.
Actually, we do know what the result of FDR-style socialism, because that is the reason things failed. After all the regulation, laws, and programs installed after the Great Depression, the economy still failed in 2008.
Since I'm not a Republican, I feel no burden to defend them. However, I cheer their opposition to Obama's failed presidency. I wish they actually showed more backbone.
They don't need to "learn to compromise" until the political Left learns to compromise. It's been an inexorable march leftward, whether little steps or big ones.
We have more and and more of what you want, and things get worse and worse. Income equality is the highest ever. Racism is endemic. Poverty is up. Food stamps are up. The National Debt is soaring, personal debt has never been higher.
You have noticed these things, haven't you? You've actually gotten what you want, and this is the result. And you want more?
Yes it did collapse becuase of unregulated capatilism and lack of government oversight.
ReplyDeleteWe removed the laws that prevented Banks from taking certain undo risks and allowed them to engage in predatory behavoir giving loans to people they knew could not afford it while siumulatenously investing in credit default swaps that paid them off when those inevitable failures occurred. This is the result of DE_REGULATION not regulation.
Every major regulation that exists today exists out of a deficiency capatilism could not provide. Socio-economic-political systems are complex, there is no pure anything. Capitalism is not a form of government it is an economoc approach. No candidate has EVER advocated for the state ownership of the means of production. Look past labels and read the ideas.
Lol....Wikipedia researcher.
ReplyDeleteIf the material I quoted from Wikipedia is incorrect, then note the deficiencies.
ReplyDelete"There is no such thing as "unregulated capitalism." Capitalism relies on the rule of law to enforce contracts, prosecute thieves and swindlers, and to provide the framework for its function."
ReplyDeletePlease refute the statement.
"Lack of regulation" is not the same thing as "unregulated."
Banks were FORCED BY LAW to take those risks. Again, the fault for the crash must be laid at the feet of government.
Capitalism, in its current form, will not provide for a just society as we enter a jobless economy caused by technology such as artificial intelligence, robotics, etc., that will eliminate possibly 40 percent of jobs. I'm not knocking technology, but rather the fact that we are doing little or nothing to meet the challenge of a jobless economy. Capitalism is flawed and needs to be carefully regulated. The U.S. is already a hybrid economic system, with both capitalism and socialism. We need both to have a just society, but the balance today that favors capitalism will need to change in socialism's favor. We will soon find that we need more socialism, not less socialism, and that movement, which has just begun with some gusto, will be disruptive and perhaps worse.
ReplyDeleteWe do not have capitalism. You admit as such when
ReplyDeleteyou say we have a hybrid. Therefore, you are criticizing something that is not in operation. We do not need to have more of what is not working. Socialism and all its blends have failed.
Capitalism is not flawed. I quote myself: "Capitalism is simply the voluntary, legal exchange of value. Anything that violates that is not capitalism. Theft violates capitalism. Cheating violates capitalism. Misrepresenting, lying, making a shoddy product, all these are violations of capitalism."
Technology is another subject. It is not specifically capitalism. It is not a problem for capitalism. It is a problem for socialism, because socialism want to control things, and it can't.
By the way, are you in favor of government having the power to restrain technological developments, like computers? Look at all the people who lost jobs in the paper and pencil industry. The accountants who now have no jobs because of Quickbooks. The scientists who no longer have work because they don't sit at desks and do calculations.
You might want to look up "luddite fallacy." Technology doesn't take jobs, it simply shifts jobs.
The flaw is not capitalism, it is with those who want to make our system even more socialist, and things keep getting worse and worse.