The Mainstream Media Attempts to Soft-pedal Socialism

I have noticed a series of columns being published in mainstream media outlets, such as the Washington Post, New York Times, and the USA Today, over the last few weeks trying to soft-pedal socialism. These columns push the falsehood that socialism is different from communism, and they promote the idea that American socialism is economically nonmalignant, and unrelated to the socialism which failed in Europe in the 20th century, and in Venezuela in the 21st century. In other words, it’s ok America. I have also noticed in these columns that the question, “where has socialism ever worked” is never explored.

Well, this morning I encountered another one of these ‘socialism is not so bad’ columns in, no surprise, the USA Today, “GOP Calls Them ‘Communists.’ Here is what democratic socialists believe.” by Eduardo Cuevas. Despite the title, nowhere in the column did he explain how socialism is different from communism, but he did attack Trump for calling them communists and even compared him to Joseph McCarthy and the red scare of the 1950’s.

Eduardo Cuevas can’t explain the difference between socialism and communism for the simple fact that there is no difference. Both are rooted in the philosophy of Karl Marx, who like Graham Platner and Alexandria Ocasio Cortes, had rich capitalist parents. Specifically, the socialist philosophy comes from Marx’s maxim, “from each according to his means, to each according to their needs.” From this silly line, which rewards neediness and discourages acquisition of wealth, the socialists get their entire philosophy and policies. And like the communists, they believe in government planning and control over the economy, and they both believe that if you make more money, you owe the government more, and if you make less money, you owe the government less. In fact, if you are able to make a really small amount of money, they will send you money!

Also, some anecdotal evidence that there is no difference between communism and socialism, would be found in the numerous interviews conducted with young socialist college kids, where they are given quotes from Marx, although they don’t know that they are his quotes, and they express total agreement. Honestly, I know of no example of an American socialist disagreeing with Marx on anything. How can you agree with Karl Marx and not be a communist. You can’t. It would be like being in total agreement with the Pope on theology and still not being a Catholic.

Now I will grant the socialists that there might be some difference in degrees, for example the socialist may only want 70 percent of your income, and the communist wants to take 100 percent. A difference of 30 percent, which is a huge difference no doubt, but over time the socialist will realize that 70 percent is not enough to achieve true justice and equality, so they will decide that you are not paying your fair share and the 70 percent tax will have to be raised.

I would also point out that the Soviet Union, whose formal name was, The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, was a socialist country. True they did offer citizens free bus service, universal healthcare, free childcare, rent control, free college and government run grocery stores, but they were not purely communist, because they did have some private industry and private property. A good example, the private farming plots, which were permitted, and were far more efficient than the government run farms, which ironically proved that their socialist system didn’t work.

I was in college when the cold war ended, and I remember hearing the spin from my left-wing professors, which was, the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe were not communist countries, rather they were socialist countries, therefore socialism failed, not communism, which had not yet been tried. Today it is reversed. The left says that communism failed in the 20th century but not socialism.

In his column Cuevas quotes a socialist who tries to offer two differences with the communists, which are, today’s socialists believe in non-violent change and democracy. It seems that the American socialist will non-violently raise your taxes to 70 percent. How nice. As far as democracy, well, the capitalist system is very democratic. People vote every day. They vote for what products they want, what stores they want to shop in, what services they want, what charities they want to give to. The socialist want to take most of that power away (through taxes) and give it to the government.

I can understand why socialists don’t want to be linked to the communists, but in truth they are of the same flock. And we should link them, at least until they explain how they are different. And I also understand why the socialists like to say that they are “Democratic Socialists.” They may believe the word Democratic might make their philosophy less ugly.

Well, I suppose socialism can be implanted by force, or the voters could decide by some sort of referendum, but either way it is economically ruinous. And come to think of it you could also vote yourself into slavery as well.