In response:
This was written in response to an op-ed by one Alyssa Ahlgren. I will e-mail her the link to this blog post, hence the references to “you” and “your column.” She is a relatively new and self-styles as an “ambassador” for “Turning point USA” which is a conservative organization.
The column was titled “How to be a Socialist in America” and, as one might guess from the title, was Hard Right in tone. She also, in this piece, cites one Dr. Thomas Sowell as a “great economist and thinker.” While acknowledging Dr Sowell’s creds as an economist but disagreeing with many of his social science talking points, I would point out that he is one of a tiny handful of African American PhDs who have apparently forgotten where they came from and believes, or has said he believes, that racism is of no economic consequence in America today.
Ms. Alhgren: As to your marginally plagiarized (from Dr Sowell) claim that "the only people advocating for socialism are those who have never lived under it" there are four letters you ought to know - OECD. That is, The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development - an intergovernmental economic organization with 36 member countries, founded in 1961 by the US, France and others to stimulate economic progress and world trade.
Like most far right apologists, you would have readers believe that there is either Socialism or Capitalism and nothing in between. That is, as the vast majority of OECD nations prove, blatantly false. I'm sure that, by your definition, Finland, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, the UK and, in fact, most of Western/Central Europe (all OECD members) are Socialist. but wait...they all have "regulated" market economies. What you are apparently denying is that by almost every metric known, they all are, in the majority, far "happier" (a hazy term admittedly) than the US.
Any recent survey of OECD health care consumer satisfaction and other societal metrics bears that statement out. People advocating for the current Republican regime have become so adept at speaking from both sides of their mouths as to make fact indistinguishable from fiction. Your column simply furthers the truth of that statement.
Socialism also happens to be the system (if there truly still is one, absent the cult of Putin) in Russia, yet our President cozies up to the Russians because of the hope that someday he'll get to build a hotel there. Out of the other side of his mouth he echoes the charges that Cuba is Satan incarnate. Why don't you examine the history of Russia and then explain how we should make nice with them and continue shunning Cuba? I would agree that Fidel Castro did bad things to those who disagreed with him however, he's also been deceased for two years and was out of power for 6 years prior to his death. What we are doing now is punishing a people who, allowed to interact with a market system, might well transition to a similar system, blending their socialist system with market principles.
What is consistently overlooked by those of the Far Right is that Isaac Newton was correct, and his laws of motion valid, in far more areas than ever he theorized. His Third Law states that "For every action (force) in nature there is an equal and opposite reaction." The use of "force in nature”, while probably not even considered by Newton as having applicability outside planetary objects and gravity, is relevant to almost every social interaction as well.
This is especially true, while also denied by some, in economic practices. One quick example: Those on the Far Right in England, in 1773, would have undoubtedly supported and affirmed the absolute right of the Parliament to enact legislation which included a reduced tax on tea while boosting sales by allowing a monopoly on tea importation to the American colonies by the failing British East India company. Coincidentally (or, actually, not) many MPs were invested in said company. This was legislation aimed at saving one company at the expense of a much wider population segment. This is not as far removed from today’s anti-regulatory efforts as it might seem at first. We know, or should know, how that turned out in December of that year. Think “Boston tea party.”
At the core of this, resides the Free Market Capitalist “nugget of philosophy” which has been stated in various ways but boils down to, “Some of us are better than others and deserving of government support of our “betterness.”
John D. Rockefeller believed that, so did Jay Gould, Cornelius Vanderbilt, and J.P Morgan. So, today, do the Koch brothers and Donald Trump. The Obama Administration put in place regulations aimed at providing cleaner water for many Americans. The Trump administration, trumpeting “excessive government regulation” has removed most of these protections, not in the interest of the bulk of those affected, but in the interest of those for whom relaxed restrictions on dumping have the effect of improving profit margin.
Those who trumpet Socialism and really mean “Communism” would have us believe that any efforts to create a fair (not level, but “fair”) playing field are Socialism. They acknowledge no degree or limit, because fear and misinformation are their stock in trade. To take a real world and objective look at “what if?” Consider what America would look like if there were: No Social Security, Medicare/Medicaid, Food stamps. If there were only private turnpikes. If all mineral resources were the exclusive property of those who “owned” the land. Consider the effects of a truly “free market” system without any restrictions on price gouging, monopoly or trusts such as the Sherman Act. And finally, what if your electrical utility could simply charge whatever they wished? No worries, they can’t, because in “socialist’ (small "s") fashion, Public Utilities Commissions oversee them and regulate (there’s that word again) prices.
Another singularly important Obama era accomplishment was the Dodd-Frank Act which, simply put, places strict regulations on lenders and banks in an effort to protect consumers and prevent another all-out economic recession. Donald Trump has done all in his power to debase and reverse this legislation, not because doing so is good for most Americans, because it isn’t, but because it limits abuses of financial markets and predatory lending practices.
Finally, while many Republican lawmakers oppose most government regulations, and all will rail against “socialism” in the upcoming election cycle, fourteen Republicans currently in Congress received or have received farm subsidies…a total of $7.2 million over recent years. Apparently not all “socialist” ideas are bad, huh?
What is consistently overlooked by those of the Far Right is that Isaac Newton was correct, and his laws of motion valid, in far more areas than ever he theorized. His Third Law states that "For every action (force) in nature there is an equal and opposite reaction." The use of "force in nature”, while probably not even considered by Newton as having applicability outside planetary objects and gravity, is relevant to almost every social interaction as well.
This is especially true, while also denied by some, in economic practices. One quick example: Those on the Far Right in England, in 1773, would have undoubtedly supported and affirmed the absolute right of the Parliament to enact legislation which included a reduced tax on tea while boosting sales by allowing a monopoly on tea importation to the American colonies by the failing British East India company. Coincidentally (or, actually, not) many MPs were invested in said company. This was legislation aimed at saving one company at the expense of a much wider population segment. This is not as far removed from today’s anti-regulatory efforts as it might seem at first. We know, or should know, how that turned out in December of that year. Think “Boston tea party.”
At the core of this, resides the Free Market Capitalist “nugget of philosophy” which has been stated in various ways but boils down to, “Some of us are better than others and deserving of government support of our “betterness.”
John D. Rockefeller believed that, so did Jay Gould, Cornelius Vanderbilt, and J.P Morgan. So, today, do the Koch brothers and Donald Trump. The Obama Administration put in place regulations aimed at providing cleaner water for many Americans. The Trump administration, trumpeting “excessive government regulation” has removed most of these protections, not in the interest of the bulk of those affected, but in the interest of those for whom relaxed restrictions on dumping have the effect of improving profit margin.
Those who trumpet Socialism and really mean “Communism” would have us believe that any efforts to create a fair (not level, but “fair”) playing field are Socialism. They acknowledge no degree or limit, because fear and misinformation are their stock in trade. To take a real world and objective look at “what if?” Consider what America would look like if there were: No Social Security, Medicare/Medicaid, Food stamps. If there were only private turnpikes. If all mineral resources were the exclusive property of those who “owned” the land. Consider the effects of a truly “free market” system without any restrictions on price gouging, monopoly or trusts such as the Sherman Act. And finally, what if your electrical utility could simply charge whatever they wished? No worries, they can’t, because in “socialist’ (small "s") fashion, Public Utilities Commissions oversee them and regulate (there’s that word again) prices.
Another singularly important Obama era accomplishment was the Dodd-Frank Act which, simply put, places strict regulations on lenders and banks in an effort to protect consumers and prevent another all-out economic recession. Donald Trump has done all in his power to debase and reverse this legislation, not because doing so is good for most Americans, because it isn’t, but because it limits abuses of financial markets and predatory lending practices.
Finally, while many Republican lawmakers oppose most government regulations, and all will rail against “socialism” in the upcoming election cycle, fourteen Republicans currently in Congress received or have received farm subsidies…a total of $7.2 million over recent years. Apparently not all “socialist” ideas are bad, huh?
No comments:
Post a Comment