Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
How Can We Teach That the Fire Is Hot?
George Orwell said, “So much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don’t even know that the fire is hot.” The realist in me would add that this is why the left-wing control of our educational systems, media, and entertainment industry is so catastrophic. The conspiracy theorist in me would add that this is why the left wing places so much emphasis on controlling our educational systems, media, and entertainment industry.
Regardless, socialism seems to be rapidly gaining popularity here in the US, largely among people who seem to have absolutely no idea that the fire is hot. They appear unaware that the 20th century even happened, much less why. I would argue that this represents clear evidence that our educational systems, media, and entertainment industry are in fine shape – from a left-wing perspective, it’s working. Anyway, this brings up a few questions in my mind:
- How is possible for anyone to have a favorable view of socialism after our experiences over the past 150 years?
- How does one attempt to educate someone capable of such remarkable, apparently willful, blindness?
- Why is this happening now? What happened to make socialism so attractive all of a sudden?
- Can Democrats win American elections while being openly socialist?
- Is our Democrat party engaging in smart politics or self-immolation?
I’ll start by giving you my opinions, although I wrote this post because I want yours. My guesses:
- People can view socialism favorably only if they have no idea what it has done in the past. So the left wing is smart to control our educational systems, etc.
- People who chose to believe in socialism must feel some pain from their choices – they must feel the results of socialism themselves – poverty, tyranny, or something. They need to feel the heat of the fire. You cannot explain it to them; they won’t listen. Even first-hand experience doesn’t seem to work much of the time – the truly poor want more promises of security from their leaders and will tend to vote socialist. This is a serious problem.
- I have no idea why socialism is becoming so popular now. Please help.
- Yes – I believe that socialism is popular enough that Democrats can win as Socialists. Really, they have been doing so for decades, and socialism is only becoming more popular.
- I think this is smart politics by Democrats. I hope I’m wrong. About all this.
So what say you? Why is socialism rapidly becoming more popular, what can be done to change people’s minds, and are the Democrats smart to pursue this path?
Thanks for your input.
Published in General
Having recently mixed it up with some “democratic socialists” on Twitter, they definitely mean Sweden. As for Venezuela, I was told:
Other comments seemed to blame us for Venezuela’s dire situation because we imposed an oil embargo, including one who wrote:
I agree, I think this is a key distinction to acknowledge if we want to actually engage with and persuade the other side.
The term “democratic socialism” seems to be a clever bit of branding intended to differentiate “good socialism” from the likes of the USSR, China, North Korea, and so forth. It is in fact true that the Communist model as implemented by the likes of Lenin, Stalin, Mao, and other such monsters always involved the “dictatorship of the proletariat,” in which the Communist Party seized absolute power, rounded up the opposition, and either had them shot or sent off to re-education camps.
In contrast, the countries that the democratic socialists wish to emulate (Sweden, Denmark, etc.) have implemented a form of socialism while retaining multiparty democracy, free and fair elections, free speech, fair trials, and so forth.
As well as the part today’s “Democratic Socialists” all miss, which is free markets!
Can’t remember if it was Andrew Klavan, Ben Shapiro or Dave Sussman podcast, who said,
“Happiness is a symptom, not a goal.”
Good for you! To me, any woman under forty is a girl . . .
It’s the joy of being alive another day that gets me out of the bed in the morning. That, and the cats meowing to be fed . . .
Same guy, different disguise . . .
Another thing to point out is the people in socialist countries that appear to work are a homogenized bunch. Look at how the influx of non-assimilating Muslims in those countries is shaking up their socialist beliefs.
The Nordic countries became rich off of capitalism, tried socialism, lost a great deal of that wealth, and are currently rolling back their welfare states because they noticed the damage socialism was doing before it was too late. The Scandinavians didn’t succeed at socialism; they survived it.
Klavan says, “Remember, we’re living in good times in this country in which the Left is unhappy.”
But, the Left is always unhappy and must be by “virtue” of their worldview. Their goal is “equality,” which is only achieved when everyone is equally dead.
In addition to the democracy angle, another key difference is that modern American “democratic socialists” aren’t calling for the state to nationalize the means of production. That was really the key pillar of early 20th-century Marxism.
Sure, Bernie Sanders and his ilk would love to heavily regulate commerce and deem numerous industries common carriers (and thus subject to the same restrictions as an electric utility), but nobody on the left these days is calling for the government to simply seize Ford, Boeing, or Archers Daniel Midland.
So they’re economic fascists, not communists.
Uh… Maxine Waters wanted to seize the banks. And Obama bypassed the GM shareholders in favor of the unions. So, not “nobody.”
Excellent way to put it!
Did you see the article Drew linked in the PIT yesterday? An (apparently) serious argument that the government should nationalize moviepass to provide free movie tickets across the country.
That’s just it. All this “free” stuff means somebody gets enslaved. The Left would like you to believe it’s the “evil” corporations and the rich, but it’s really all of us.
Humans have preferred safe slavery over risky freedom since the Hebrews wanted to get back to the fleshpots of Egypt, if not before.
This is the question conservatives have the hardest time answering. How do we deal with this aspect of human nature?
I keep wanting to ask one of these fans of Nordic “socialism” what they intend to do with all the dark skinned people who aren’t descended from Northern European genetic and cultural stock?
I have heard from some people who have allegedly studied the issue that several southern European countries have systems that, on paper, are very similar to those in the Nordic countries, but have produced very different results.
I recall a guest on a Jim Pethokoukis podcast a few years ago who studied one of the Nordic systems, and identified data that showed the national character (attitudes toward work and free-loading) changed during the time of socialism. Either he or one of his sources concluded that the incentives of a “free stuff” system were so strong that 400+ years of cultural development was well on its way to being undone after only 35 years of socialism.
Can’t remember who it was, maybe PJ O’rourke, who said that East Germany was absolute proof that communism could never work, because in just a few years it managed to take a country full of Germans and make them poor.
I stay out of the PIT. I have a feeling if I ever went there, I’d be in it 24/7 . . .
With apologies to Drew, here’s his comment in full:
http://ricochet.com/505924/pit-14-b-chapter3-inglourious-pitsters/comment-page-1003/#comment-4231256
MoviePass never did seem like it would be a sustainable business.
And it wasn’t.
But someone’s got a solution! Nationalize it!
This was linked at Instapundit today, but you really have to read the thing to see the crazy Marxist basis therein.
Some choice quotes:
No mainstream politicians, perhaps, but I wouldn’t say nobody:
My personal favorite part of that article is this phrase: “The need [emphasis added] to nationalize MoviePass”.
Because movie pass is a vital national priority or something.
Yeah, I think it was PJ. Don’t remember the book.
Hm. I haven’t been to a movie in a theater since 2003.
There was an interesting episode of Planet Money recently called The New Socialists where they went and interviewed members of the Democratic Socialists of America to find out who they were and what they stand for. Turns out they don’t actually have a platform; it seems they are something of a big-tent group, and I suspect if they actually did try to write a platform their already tiny group would quickly splinter into many smaller ones. They did recently agree on these 3 top priorities:
However, these are just the first steps. They spoke to one member who said “we don’t just want to improve capitalism, we ultimately want to, you know, get rid of it.” And the National Director of the DSA gave the following analogy:
I’m guessing none of these people are actually on Medicare…
Frighteningly foolish.
What is the PIT?
Something I stay away from.
Well, the aforementioned National Director has been a member of the DSA “since college in the 2000’s,” so I’m guessing not.
Also, “Medicare for All” is just an incremental step towards their end goal of replicating the British National Health System.