Socialism

Summary

The article discusses the misconceptions of socialism among young Americans, contrasting it with the realities of historical socialist and communist regimes, and advocates for a social market economy as a balanced alternative.

Abstract

The author reflects on a conversation with a young American who idealizes socialism, highlighting the harsh realities of socialist and communist states such as China under Mao, the Soviet Union, and East Germany, where human rights abuses and economic failures were rampant. The article argues that capitalism, despite its flaws, has been more successful in reducing poverty and fostering innovation, citing the example of China's recent economic growth following market reforms. It emphasizes that true socialist systems have always led to totalitarianism, stifling individual freedoms and talent. The author suggests that the social market economy model of Germany and Scandinavian countries, which combines capitalism with robust social programs, is a more viable and preferable system. The article concludes that while capitalism needs reforms to address issues like environmental degradation, socialism is not a suitable alternative for large nations like the United States.

Opinions

Socialist and communist countries have a history of human rights abuses and economic mismanagement.
Capitalism has effectively lifted people out of poverty and spurred innovation, though it is not without its issues.
The idea of a benign socialism is unrealistic as it has always been accompanied by totalitarianism.
People inherently prioritize personal interests over the collective good and thrive on competition.
The social market economy model is superior, providing a balance between capitalism and social welfare.
Small-scale communal living, as seen in kibbutzim and communes, can be successful due to their size and voluntary nature.
Americans' reluctance to pay higher taxes hinders the implementation of more extensive social programs.
Reforming capitalism is necessary, but socialism is not the answer for large countries like the United States.

Why are so many young Americans enamored with it?

I recently had a discussion on Facebook with a young colleague of mine. She is very leftist and would like nothing better for the U.S. to become a socialist country with more humanist values, she says.

However, socialist and communist countries have displayed very little of these humanist values. In Mao’s China, millions starved to death; the Soviet Union had the Gulag for their dissidents who were subjected to brutal hard labor there. In East Germany, spies reported on everyone.

On the other hand, capitalism has lifted more people out of poverty than any other form of government. I have spent time in socialist countries, and Americans wouldn’t like it there. Capitalism is not perfect by any means, but everything else is worse.

Many Americans don’t really understand what a socialist system is. They seem to think that Scandinavian countries (and some others) are socialist when all they do is balance capitalism with social programs, just as Germany, my home country, has a “social market economy.” All real socialist/communist systems are totalitarian.

My father, who grew up in former East Germany, was lucky that he could go to college, an oversight really. Since his father was college educated, he would not have been allowed. Think about that: You want to be a teacher, but you will work in a factory. Besides, a terrible loss for a country to ignore talented people.

My grandmother snuck out to “church” every Sunday, meeting at a different place every week, and not even my grandfather could know where she went. My cousin went to prison for drawing a mustache of Honecker’s (the chief dictator’s) picture. Every classroom had his picture on the wall. Any student who would contradict a teacher and the official party line would be sent to “reform school” to be brainwashed there. You never voiced a political opinion or anything that could have been understood as criticism since you didn’t know who was listening. There where spies everywhere.

Yes, everyone had a place to live, and the basic foods were heavily subsidized, as long as you were satisfied with getting oranges only once a year or so, and having perhaps two kinds of detergent or toothpaste to choose from. In the summer, when I visited family there, there was always a shortage of toilet paper and lots of other things. None of my relatives want that country back!

Again, capitalism is not perfect. It requires constant “growth” and may ultimately destroy the planet if it’s not reformed, but socialism is not the answer to that. When the cows in the field behind my uncle’s house keeled over and died and he got cancer, no one dared to ask why. Germany is still cleaning up chemicals that were left out in the open and poisoned streams and groundwater in former East Germany.

My colleague still thinks a benign socialism is possible. However, there has never been socialism without totalitarianism and there never will be. History clearly demonstrates that. It’s premise that you can create a human being who cares more about the group than himself has also been proven wrong. People will always care about themselves more than about a group of strangers and thrive on competition.

Case in point: After the second industrial revolution, when many Europeans moved into cities, a green belt was preserved (and still is) where people can lease small allotment gardens. In former East Germany, people grew more fruits and vegetables than the whole collective agriculture there produced. When China relaxed the rules on individual ownership, entrepreneurship exploded, and now China is more advanced in AI and other innovations than we are. Yes, China is still a (communist) dictatorship, but life is very different than during Mao’s reign.

Come to think, there was one place I lived that really came close to what my colleague seems to envision: the kibbutz in Israel I worked at in 1980, a few hundred people living and working together, sharing farm equipment. They shared the work, the food, and the proceeds from the milk and vegetables they sold and the bread they baked in the bakery. It worked for them since they lived there voluntarily and all benefited from this system; it worked there just as it worked in the communes I saw in Oregon in the early 80’s — because they were small. This cannot be expanded to a country of 360 million people.

I do think that the social market economy in Germany and the Scandinavian countries is preferable to the system here in the U.S., but people there agree to higher taxes for the common good. Many Americans will not vote for politicians who would raise taxes even if the roads and bridges are crumbling and many social program are underfunded. Unless this changes, this country will not move into the direction she would like.