“Socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant that only an intellectual could ignore or evade it.”
Thomas Sowell
Being that this was said by Tough Love Thomas, I must assume it is a warning against the slippery slope of the welfare state. Thomas Sowell is an American economist and social theorist. His no-nonsense approach to these topics is often controversial and he makes no apology for this. He is often regarded as a liberal bashing conservative. It’s easy to label anyone who finds fault with nanny-state governing as a heartless money grubber. To me he often sounds like a father trying to prepare you for the harsh reality of the world we must live in.
Of course, we often disagree with our fathers on certain things. Although with this statement, it seems to be more about narrowing the scope, rather than flat out rejection. It is clear that any attempt to take socialism to its extreme has ended in disaster. The economy stagnated and living conditions (for the lower classes at least) plummeting to deplorable levels.
My issue lies with the sweeping use of the word socialism. Socialism and communism are not one and the same. I do not intend to split hairs, so I will simply provide the way I intend to use the terms:
Socialism: The state uses taxes it collects from citizens for programs and initiatives designed to improve the livelihoods of citizens and society at large alongside its spending on infrastructure and defence. Given that citizens are taxed according to their income, the rich will inevitably pay more tax. A portion of that money will go into services for the lower classes. Services the rich do not require and may feel disgruntled at having to pay for.
Communism: The state seizes control of all property and sources of income. They run the industries, infrastructure, agriculture, military etc. There is no private ownership; not of property or business. The government operates as a central planning hub overseeing all production and distribution via specific departments. Now the all-wise government can ensure that everyone gets a fair share of all goods and services provided by the workers.
Thus, we have eliminated the captains of industry and replaced them with politicians. Apparently, this will result in the eradication of greed, hubris and the lust for power in the human species.
I am yet to find a good explanation why, but communism has thus far always been totalitarian as well. This does not seem compulsory for communism, in theory at least. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I am certain there has never been a totalitarian regime that ended up producing a successful economy, and although the IN group may have thrived, the OUT group got properly fucked. Not a very fruitful or egalitarian system.
Without a genuine example of communism minus totalitarianism, we can never be 100% sure it would fail. A democratic form of communism has yet to be attempted, which intrigues me. Although to be honest I would not feel confident being part of the nation introducing it.
Be that as it may, at present, all endeavours to bring Marx and Engels’ theories into practice have been dismal failures resulting in misery for the masses. Interestingly, China appears to have grown quite powerful using a different hybrid. They appear to have softened their rigid communist stance, adopting a combination of capitalism and socialism; while still holding fast to their totalitarian regime. Only time will tell how that turns out.
Back to the opening statement. Socialism runs along a large spectrum and communism, especially the totalitarian type, sits at one extreme. I am sure that Mr Sowell knows this and I am by no means a scholar on his extensive writings, so I can only relate to what I have seen or read myself. Please correct me if I have misinterpreted something or taken it out of context.
Looking at this statement on face value I reckon our main point of contention derives from our nationalities. I am an Australian and have been provided with Medicare since I was a kid. I have no memory of life without it. For an American like Thomas Sowell, such a system seems to be a frivolous waste of taxpayer’s hard-earned money. Though both stemming from the same homeland, our governments have quite different policies regarding government assistance/interference. I used those terms deliberately.
Leaving a critique of the variations between our economic ideologies aside, I will just say that to bundle all forms of socialism, or social welfare, into the doomed doctrine of communism is a very USAish thing to do.
I accept that capitalism has provided one of the best economic systems so far, yet it is far from ideal and seen in numerous versions around the world. This coupled with the various forms of government/democracy provides such a mish mash of combinations that a one-to-one comparison between countries is impossible.
“Many forms of Government have been tried and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.…”
Winston S Churchill, 11 November 1947
A riff on this is often used to describe capitalism:
“To paraphrase Winston Churchill, capitalism is the worst economic system except for all the other forms”
Original Unknown
Socialism is not a total rejection of capitalism; it is an attempt to reel in the avarice of the upper class. It seems to be failing miserably at present as we see the rise of corporate power and influence, so this argument might be redundant. The goal of socialism as I see it is to utilize legislation to ensure that the trickle-down economy idea receives more than just lip service from the elite. A noble initiative indeed, even if it is naïve.
“Since this is an era when many people are concerned about ‘fairness’ and ‘social justice,’ what is your ‘fair share’ of what someone else has worked for?”
Tough Love Thomas
Another wake-up slap from the pragmatic one. Who gets to decide how much gets redistributed from the rich and who gets what? Not to mention the amount of funds that will be exhausted paying eggheads for their theories and all the administrative staff required to run and keep track of all this. That’s all before you factor in theories that fail in reality, ala communism, and the host of charlatans lining up to offer their bogus services to get their hands on that sweet government funding. Probably need to hire more people to police the potential scammers too.
“The fact that the market is not doing what we wish it would do is no reason to automatically assume that the government would do better.”
Another solid jab from Pull Your Socks up Sowell!
This one reminded me of an Aussie tycoon’s famous rebuttal to a parliamentary committee:
“I am not evading tax in any way, shape or form. Now of course I am minimising my tax and if anybody in this country doesn’t minimise their tax they want their heads read because as a government I can tell you you’re not spending it that well that we should be donating extra.”
Kerry Packer
His premise is simple: politicians and bureaucrats do not have a great record when it comes to using our tax dollars wisely. To assume they would do any better with more money is a foolish idea. The government as Robin Hood is a wonderful fantasy. Trouble is that it is full of human beings, just as susceptible to deception and greed as anyone else. Gullibility and/or corruption is a constant threat. Not to mention outright stupid decisions, regardless of the intentions behind them.
All this is true. However, does that mean we simply keep the status quo Mr Sowell? It is abundantly clear that the corporations and super-rich have no intention of sharing the wealth. To rely on nothing but philanthropic assistance is just as foolish. Expecting people who covet wealth to willingly share it with the faceless masses is pie in the sky stupidity.
Therein lies one of the most contested conundrums facing populations the world over. One cannot amass such a ludicrous amount of wealth without exploitation of workers and/or skirting rules, regulations and tax obligations.
This looks like becoming an ongoing thread for a while. I would like to look at this issue using some of Thomas Sowell’s brilliant quotes and then dissecting them from an Aussie fair go point of view. Maybe there’s some gold in there somewhere.
Leave a Reply