Political power.
Before we go further, let’s define what we mean
by “socialism”. The idea of socialism has been around for hundreds of years,
at least since the original communist, Plato. The goals and principles of
socialism can be and have been pursued and adopted in a variety of ways,
including through voluntary associations. When we speak of socialism in the
modern sense, we mean it in the full, political, totalitarian Marxian
sense--the total subordination of the individual to “society” as represented by
the state.
Democratic socialists are of the latter, Marxist
sense. That’s why democratic socialists turn to politics. As a leading disciple
of Karl Marx understood, “Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun.” And so
democratic socialists seek political power: Democratic socialism grows out of
the barrel of a gun. It is, of necessity, totalitarian. Adding “democratic” in
front of “socialism” changes essentially nothing. Freedom is not the right to
vote. An elected dictator is still a dictator. Freedom is the right to live
your life regardless of the results of any election.
Let’s examine a rising “star” of the Left,
Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez. The 28 year-old Cortez could have gone into a money making career, where she would have
spent a lifetime earning a real living by creating real value for people
willing to voluntarily pay her. Instead, she went into politics. What motivates
an obviously ambitious, smart, talented young person into a “career” in
politics? Raw, naked powerlust, as a reflection of an utter disregard of the
rights of others to live by their own judgement and values--the power to legally
force her values on everyone else.
So, given the choice between the field of
economic power, which derives from voluntary, mutually beneficial trade, and
the field of political power, Cortez and her socialist ilk choose political
power. They bring nothing of economic value to the trade “table”; not goods or
services, not jobs, not investment opportunity. The only thing they bring to
society’s “table” is a gun—and a vision for how to run other people’s lives.
Rather than choose a productive career, they opt to control those who produce.*
One can observe in concrete terms exactly what
Democratic Socialists want by examining the avalanche of legislative bills
they’re proposed or advocated since the midterm elections. All involve
increasing economic controls and taxes that go well beyond the redistributive
welfare state “safety net.” To “grease the skids” for their agenda, they seek
more concentration of power in the federal government by demolishing the checks
and balances put into place by the Founding Fathers to restrain government
power.
But when you cut through the veneer of slogans,
what you find under the surface of a socialist, democratic or otherwise, is naked
powerlust. If this were not true, they wouldn’t choose a political “career.”
Not content to solve what they see as problems by private means, with
like-minded people, leaving those who disagree free to go their own way
unmolested as other socialist-minded Americans have done in the past**, democratic socialists
seek to force dissenters into subservience. Modern democratic socialists
are more clever than their 20th century communist predecessors. They play the
“long game,” sneaking in socialism piecemeal, in stages, and without--yet--the
wholesale confiscation of private business and property. Their approach is more
fascistic--that is, they seek control of business and the economy by regulation
and taxation, rather than state ownership of “the means of production.” They
are national socialists, not international socialists. But their
essential collectivist goals are the same as the communists, driven by the
age-old dream of all Marxists--some utopian vision for the wholesale reshaping
of society by naked force, without regard for human nature and the consequences
for actual individual human lives and their inalienable rights to life,
liberty, property, and pursuit of happiness.
* [As to the millions who
vote the socialists into power, they are more concerned with running other
people’s lives than in preserving their rights to govern their own lives. Their
motivations run from greed to envy. See my Quora answer to “What makes someone a socialist?”]
** [ See, for example, The
Communistic Societies of the United States; Harmony, Oneida, the Shakers, and
Others by Charles Nordhoff and
History
of American Socialisms by John Humphrey Noyes. Consider also the Israeli Kibbutz.]
*** [Quora is a social media website founded by
two former Facebook employees. According to Wikipedia:
Quora is a
question-and-answer website where questions are
created, answered, edited and organized by its community of users. The company
was founded in June 2009, and the website was made available to the public on
June 21, 2010.[3]Quora aggregates questions and answers to topics. Users can
collaborate by editing questions and suggesting edits to other users' answers.[4]
You can also reply to other users’ answers.]
