Bret Stephens on Bernie

 

BERNIE-SANDERS-YOUTHRecording the podcast this morning, we asked Bret Stephens what explains the ecstatic support Bernie Sanders is eliciting among the young. I found Bret’s answer so striking — so insightful, and so disheartening — that I made notes. To wit:

I’m now hiring young college graduates who have no living memory of the Cold War. None. Now, they’re smart, and they know what the Soviet Union was. But that’s all they know.

After our victory in the Cold War, we as a country never took the trouble to educate young Americans about what communism and socialism were — not the way we educated Americans about Nazism after World War II. There was never instruction at high schools and colleges explaining why socialism always ends up being autocratic and giving you the kind of economy we’re now seeing in Venezuela.

That’s a large part of the Bernie Sanders story. Twenty-three and 24-year-olds hear the word “socialism” and think it’s cute. It’s not cute. It’s a horror on the same order as fascism, but they don’t know that.

One generation — we’re always just one generation away from losing all we value.

Published in General
Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 67 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Rightfromthestart Coolidge
    Rightfromthestart
    @Rightfromthestart

    ‘To return to the words of Mark Steyn (and John Derbyshire), why are we such pansies?’

    You could also add inarticulate pansies, why do they never make the point that the Democrats are the party of slavery, Jim Crow and the KKK and that the Republican Party was founded to end slavery? And that all the famous racists of the past were Democrats? Or that all the long time Democrat stronghold cities are crapholes?  Or show the famous night map of Korea? Or point out that all of the boats are fleeing Cuba and none are going the other way?

    And who says no one is allowed to bring up all of Hillary’s other unresolved scandals that were allowed to just fade away? The press declares these things off limits and the Republicans go along , why?

    All of these things and a lot more are brought up here and at other sites, but you never hear them from Republican politicians .

    • #31
  2. Freesmith Member
    Freesmith
    @

    Weeping:

    In part, I think it’s because we’ve become much more a culture of feeling and doing what makes the individual feel good rather than a culture of responsibility and doing something because it’s the right thing to do.

    All you’re doing is describing the victory of the Left, not the why. The Left has converted a nation of cowboys and tough guys into a nation of pansies and pajama boys. But how did that happen? More importantly, before everyone gets all Gramsci and/or “God is Dead” on me, how has it been able to persist? Why haven’t conservatives been able to do a thing to reverse the drift of the culture?

    I was listening to a radio advertisement for a Christian K-through 12 private school earlier this week. After declaring that the school would provide God-centered education, the administrator making the pitch added that the school would do so in an environment that was “peaceful, loving and kind.”

    Bernie Sanders’ supporters come from and want to continue to live in exactly that environment. And who would disagree with such a lovely sentiment?

    • #32
  3. Freesmith Member
    Freesmith
    @

    Rightfromthestart:‘To return to the words of Mark Steyn (and John Derbyshire), why are we such pansies?’

    You could also add inarticulate pansies, why do they never make the point that the Democrats are the party of slavery, and that the Republican Party was founded to end slavery? And that all the famous racists of the past were Democrats? Or that all the long time Democrat stronghold cities are crapholes? Or show the famous night map of Korea? Or point out that all of the boats are fleeing Cuba and none are going the other way?

    The press declares these things off limits and the Republicans go along , why?

    All of these things and a lot more are brought up here and at other sites, but you never hear them from Republican politicians .

    What you are listing are debating points. It might be nice to make them, but they only work in Debate Club, not in union halls or sports bars.

    A better question is why conservatives, including on Ricochet, never say anything about affirmative action, so-called fair housing laws and black-on-white crime.

    Or why so many conservatives favor continuing the Great Society policies of legal immigration, which have augmented the power of the  elite/dependent axis and threaten to displace the children of the plain men and women of America.

    Or why there have been so few prosecutions for wrong-doing of bankers and bureaucrats.

    Don’t you think those are winning political issues?

    • #33
  4. BrentB67 Inactive
    BrentB67
    @BrentB67

    Aaron Miller:Agreed with DialM. One trouble with equating socialism with communism is that the former exists by degrees while the latter assumes total, undisguised domination of citizens.

    Another trouble is that socialism is a beloved term throughout Europe, among our allies and the peoples Americans first look to for close comparisons.

    It is a mistake to identify socialism as unnatural, extreme, or obviously wrong because it evidently appeals (at least in part) to various peoples. In fact, phrases like “American exceptionalism” and “the American Experiment” should remind conservatives that the strong preference for individual liberty codified in our Constitution (once upon a time) forces us to swim against the common currents of history.

    America as it was founded is the extreme position. The natural state of Man is to be ruled. To be free in the political sense requires constant battle. Peace was never an option.

    It is more clear every day the majority including some self professed conservatives have given up the constant battle.

    Freedom is hard work.

    • #34
  5. Look Away Inactive
    Look Away
    @LookAway

    This is why I always invest in Defense oriented stocks. They will always have a market for their wares.

    • #35
  6. The Cloaked Gaijin Member
    The Cloaked Gaijin
    @TheCloakedGaijin

    Peter Robinson:BERNIE-SANDERS-YOUTHRecording the podcast this morning, we asked Bret Stephens what explains the ecstatic support Bernie Sanders is eliciting among the young.

    I would stay away from such people.  No other t-shirts available such as…

    “I’m With Stupid”

    “Che Guevara”

    “Karl Marx”

    • #36
  7. J. D. Fitzpatrick Member
    J. D. Fitzpatrick
    @JDFitzpatrick

    Another way of looking at this: War is a good thing. While it might destroy property, it also creates values.

    • #37
  8. Don Tillman Member
    Don Tillman
    @DonTillman

    The Cloaked Gaijin:

    Peter Robinson:BERNIE-SANDERS-YOUTH

    I would stay away from such people. No other t-shirts available such as…

    “I’m With Stupid”

    “Che Guevara”

    “Karl Marx”

    I’m thinking… Business Opportunity!

    A line of Ricochet brand subversive t-shirts would be an excellent source of revenue.  An example would be this wonderful image EJ put together a month ago or so:

    marx-bernie

    • #38
  9. Robert McReynolds Member
    Robert McReynolds
    @

    Instinctively they know that socialism is bad and always ends in tyranny. How do I know? Because much of our education system focuses on teaching these kids how wicked our free market democracy is (I know we aren’t a democracy). They have to discredit the best system with notions of racism, sexism, and bigotry because when socialism starts being examined there is a bit of moral relativism to fall back on. And in the end, at least socialism tries to help the poor.

    • #39
  10. Percival Thatcher
    Percival
    @Percival

    Don Tillman:

    The Cloaked Gaijin:

    Peter Robinson:BERNIE-SANDERS-YOUTH

    I would stay away from such people. No other t-shirts available such as…

    “I’m With Stupid”

    “Che Guevara”

    “Karl Marx”

    I’m thinking… Business Opportunity!

    A line of Ricochet brand subversive t-shirts would be an excellent source of revenue. An example would be this wonderful image EJ put together a month ago or so:

    marx-bernie

    Ricochet: The counterculture is Right over here.

    • #40
  11. Lucy Pevensie Inactive
    Lucy Pevensie
    @LucyPevensie

    Rightfromthestart:‘To return to the words of Mark Steyn (and John Derbyshire), why are we such pansies?’

    You could also add inarticulate pansies, why do they never make the point that the Democrats are the party of slavery, Jim Crow and the KKK and that the Republican Party was founded to end slavery? And that all the famous racists of the past were Democrats?

    Since the famous racists of the present are now supporting the leading contender for the Republican nomination, this has recently become a much harder argument to make.

    • #41
  12. Ed G. Member
    Ed G.
    @EdG

    Because, granted some assumptions conservatives generally don’t grant (because we’re right and wise and humble – kinda humble), socialism makes sense and is moral.

    I think most people begin to see the weaknesses of the assumptions required as they get older. The trouble ensues when the failures of the assumptions can be masked or deferred. Further trouble ensues from mistaking socialism for the nuggets of truth it partially rests upon.

    For instance, just because there is such a thing as community apart from individuals which has a collective interest apart from the interests of its constituent parts, doesn’t mean that the collective is automatically superior or of higher priority or trickles down to fulfillment for all individuals.

    Other examples are “it takes a village” and to a much lesser extent “you didn’t build that”. There is some fundamental truth in both of those statements. That’s why so many people scratch their heads at the right’s reaction to them – even recoil sometimes. Yet the left uses that truth and applies fallacies, errors, and manipulation to it in order to come to some really wrong and terrible conclusions and lessons. They start with some truth and distort it and depart from it, and it’s not always easy to distinguish or articulate the points of departure.

    • #42
  13. barbara lydick Inactive
    barbara lydick
    @barbaralydick

    I was talking the other day with a young (20-22)-year old from Utah.  She told me about the long lines – mostly her age – at the polls and that most of them were for Bernie.  I asked her why so many of them were drawn to him and her answer didn’t really surprise:  He has the answers.  Moreover, she said that because the US is the richest country in the world we should try socialism for a few years and if it didn’t work here, we could always change back to our present system.

    Now here was a lass who was very interested in history and was reading everything she could get her hands on. So your comment  “…we as a country never took the trouble to educate young Americans about what communism and socialism were…” is spot on.  Even those with their noses in books haven’t been exposed to both sides of the story and continue on with their blinders firmly in place.

    I didn’t argue with her or try to change her mind , but every so often dropped a comment such as after the socialism experiment, there probably was no going back.  Or Thatcher’s comment about socialism and running out of OPM.  I did suggest a few books that might be interesting to peruse.  She said she’d get back to me after some reading.  I’ll be interested to see if she follows through on that.  I certainly hope so…

    • #43
  14. Ed G. Member
    Ed G.
    @EdG

    Lucy Pevensie:

    Rightfromthestart:‘To return to the words of Mark Steyn (and John Derbyshire), why are we such pansies?’

    You could also add inarticulate pansies, why do they never make the point that the Democrats are the party of slavery, Jim Crow and the KKK and that the Republican Party was founded to end slavery? And that all the famous racists of the past were Democrats?

    Since the famous racists of the present are now supporting the leading contender for the Republican nomination, this has recently become a much harder argument to make.

    Ugh. That’s only if you assume that only whites can be racist. Otherwise, the Democcrats have had all kinds of racists supporting them right up to this day: white (Robert Byrd), black (Al Sharpton, Cornel West, Ta-Nehisi Coates, BLM), and hispanic (Luis Gutierrez, La Raza).

    Besides, do you really think this is the first election that David Duke and that type have supported the Republican candidate? Should we refrain from forthright talk about immigration simply because white supremacists incorrectly think someone is finally winking at them for the first time in a few decades?

    • #44
  15. Marion Evans Inactive
    Marion Evans
    @MarionEvans

    Our children are taught about wealth redistribution without being taught about wealth creation.  I made the case here two years ago: When is Capitalist-American History Month?

    • #45
  16. Umbra Fractus Inactive
    Umbra Fractus
    @UmbraFractus

    Freesmith: To return to the words of Mark Steyn (and John Derbyshire), why are we such pansies?

    Because our policies hurt. You and I and everyone at Ricochet understand that the pain is temporary, but most people aren’t open to the “It’ll be better in the long term,” argument, but politicians whose job security depends on keeping people happy right now frequently chicken out.

    • #46
  17. Umbra Fractus Inactive
    Umbra Fractus
    @UmbraFractus

    Ed G.: Besides, do you really think this is the first election that David Duke and that type have supported the Republican candidate? Should we refrain from forthright talk about immigration simply because white supremacists incorrectly think someone is finally winking at them for the first time in a few decades?

    It’s the first one in my lifetime where the candidate made no effort to distance himself from those endorsements.

    • #47
  18. BuckeyeSam Inactive
    BuckeyeSam
    @BuckeyeSam

    What does this site do now that it’s favorite traitorous, amnesty-shill candidate is out of the running?

    • #48
  19. Larry3435 Inactive
    Larry3435
    @Larry3435

    BuckeyeSam:What does this site do now that it’s favorite traitorous, amnesty-shill candidate is out of the running?

    I guess we spend the next four years whining about President Hillary, pretending not to notice the people who threw the election to her.

    • #49
  20. Mona Charen Member
    Mona Charen
    @MonaCharen

    William Fehringer:So what books would best go into an anti-socialist curriculum? Is there a book of sufficient academic rigor that would help me explain to my pro-Swedish socialist friends how it always ends in failure?

    I would recommend The Black Book of Communism — a detailed tally of the history of communist regimes worldwide with body counts, tortures, man-made famines, the lot. Also, for a short history of how badly wrong our own dear liberals were about the Cold War, I humbly mention my own book, Useful Idiots.

    • #50
  21. Tuck Inactive
    Tuck
    @Tuck

    Roberto: …The idea that it has anything to do with educating the youth of America is pure fantasy, when such occurs it is mere good luck, happenstance….

    I think you misunderstand what public education is about.  When my daughters were younger and I was discussing homeschooling them, the continuous refrain was that they wouldn’t be “socialized”.  I’ve come to understand that that term is a classic Leftist double-entendre, like the Soviets wanting Mir, when Mir means both Peace and The World.

    • #51
  22. Spin Inactive
    Spin
    @Spin

    I wrote a post on Ricochet about the definition of the word socialism.  It seems that most young people think socialism means “the government doing something.”  The other day, I had a discussion with a woman who believed that the being a socialist meant, primarily, being charitable.  Caring about the poor.  When I asked her about the actual definition of the word, bringing up things like abolition of private property, and government ownership of business, she had no idea.  That is not socialism to her.

    • #52
  23. Tuck Inactive
    Tuck
    @Tuck

    Spin: Caring about the poor. … That is not socialism to her.

    Classic NewSpeak: You’re not a socialist?  Don’t you care about the poor?

    Only socialists care about the poor, therefore we must all become socialists.

    • #53
  24. Fake John/Jane Galt Coolidge
    Fake John/Jane Galt
    @FakeJohnJaneGalt

    Ed G.:

    Lucy Pevensie:

    Rightfromthestart:‘To return to the words of Mark Steyn (and John Derbyshire), why are we such pansies?’

    You could also add inarticulate pansies, why do they never make the point that the Democrats are the party of slavery, Jim Crow and the KKK and that the Republican Party was founded to end slavery? And that all the famous racists of the past were Democrats?

    Since the famous racists of the present are now supporting the leading contender for the Republican nomination, this has recently become a much harder argument to make.

    Ugh. That’s only if you assume that only whites can be racist. Otherwise, the Democcrats have had all kinds of racists supporting them right up to this day: white (Robert Byrd), black (Al Sharpton, Cornel West, Ta-Nehisi Coates, BLM), and hispanic (Luis Gutierrez, La Raza).

    Besides, do you really think this is the first election that David Duke and that type have supported the Republican candidate? Should we refrain from forthright talk about immigration simply because white supremacists incorrectly think someone is finally winking at them for the first time in a few decades?

    Only whites can be racist.  This is a given that can not be questioned in this country.

    • #54
  25. Lily Bart Inactive
    Lily Bart
    @LilyBart

    Freesmith:

    Kozak

    “Marc Steyn is correct, we are doomed to fail if we think winning an occasional election makes a difference in the long run, when we allow the Left to dominate every aspect of our culture.”

    Ah, yes, but why does the Left dominate every aspect of our culture? How do they maintain that dominance decade after decade?

    Why have today’s conservatives proved themselves over years and years to be incapable of dislodging the Left from any of the commanding heights it has seized, other than from political institutions?

    And why, even when conservatives have political power, do they fail to do the things they said they were going to do?

    To return to the words of Mark Steyn (and John Derbyshire), why are we such pansies?

    The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing. -Edmund Burke

    • #55
  26. Lily Bart Inactive
    Lily Bart
    @LilyBart

    Spin:I wrote a post on Ricochet about the definition of the word socialism. It seems that most young people think socialism means “the government doing something.” The other day, I had a discussion with a woman who believed that the being a socialist meant, primarily, being charitable. Caring about the poor. When I asked her about the actual definition of the word, bringing up things like abolition of private property, and government ownership of business, she had no idea. That is not socialism to her.

    Government is simply the name for the things we do together…..

    We never discuss the shocking effects of government politics, it’s just taken that most of what government does is good.    We need to talk about the harm government does with their programs, how they ultimately serve themselves, and what the future of people will be when we’re out of money, as we surely will be.  Look at Detroit – our future.  (or Venezuela!)

    Also, I think modern socialists have given up the idea of government actually owning means of production as impractical.  So much better to let the private sector own the businesses, but government rules and regulations control the businesses and the tax code confiscates most of the profits.   Its less messy, and for bonus points, they can blame businesses when it all goes awry.

    • #56
  27. Ed G. Member
    Ed G.
    @EdG

    Umbra Fractus:

    Ed G.: Besides, do you really think this is the first election that David Duke and that type have supported the Republican candidate? Should we refrain from forthright talk about immigration simply because white supremacists incorrectly think someone is finally winking at them for the first time in a few decades?

    It’s the first one in my lifetime where the candidate made no effort to distance himself from those endorsements.

    Actually he has distanced himself. Both before that interview and after it. But let’s not make this another Trump post. Can’t we leave him out of it for a change?

    • #57
  28. Lucy Pevensie Inactive
    Lucy Pevensie
    @LucyPevensie

    Fake John/Jane Galt:

    Only whites can be racist. This is a given that can not be questioned in this country.

    Off topic. The question was why we can’t appeal to black people right now. Our state GOP has been very effective in appealing to black people, but this election is making a huge dent in their ability to do so, and it’s not just David Duke, although David Duke does not help. But it’s the whole alt-right movement, best described here and here.

    • #58
  29. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    The left will always believe that this country could make Communism or socialism work–we could do it better than anyone else, which is the usual elitist view of progressivism. So if terrible things resulted from all the places that now have Communism or socialism, they just didn’t quite get it right. Sigh.

    • #59
  30. Don Tillman Member
    Don Tillman
    @DonTillman

    barbara lydick: Moreover, she said that because the US is the richest country in the world we should try socialism for a few years and if it didn’t work here, we could always change back to our present system.

    Oh, that’s a beautiful setup!  It beckons the perfect response:

    “With all the socialism-oriented government programs that have failed, can you name any that were were actually able to ‘change back’?  Nope; they always make excuses and double down.”

    Followed by:

    “You see, fundamental to socialism is that there is no mechanism to correct things when they go wrong.  It’s like going out on a sailboat without the ability to correct for winds and currents along the way; sooner or later you wreck up on the rocks.”

    • #60
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.