Conservatives have tried, quite successfully, to scare the populace with the word ‘socialism’ for at least a century. It still works with the illiterati. In both graduate and undergraduate classes there were teachers of economics who were unable to provide a concise definition of the word. I seriously doubt that any of the politicians invoking the word actually know what it means. This post provides a free class in the dismal science — economics.
Thankfully, their routine is beginning to wear thin. This election showed that 73 percent want universal healthcare, as every other developed country. Women’s rights, gender issues, raising the minimum wage, free education and many more progressives ideas are supported buy significant and growing majorities. While civilization is moving forward, conservatives are trying to steer the vehicle by referencing only the rear view mirror. They think they are headed back to the “good ole days,” that never existed.
Conservatives fought to keep us a colony of Great Britain, keep enslaving people, maintain women as property, deny unions, so that the financial power of corporations could not be balanced by individual workers banding together for a level playing field. And, as we have witnessed in this election, the extraordinary lengths to which they will go to deny people their right to vote. Criminal, anti-American and anti-Christian behavior are their weapons of choice. Sadly, over 70 million of our fellows bought into the fear-mongering.
Okay. Let’s proceed to counter their fear-mongering with some actual facts and reasoning. Weapons missing from their arsenal.
First, it will help to define capitalism. You’re going to get two for the price of one here today. Once upon a time capitalism meant the ownership of the major means of production in the hands of a few. That has changed. Stockholders, the owners, no longer realistically control corporations. The operative word is now control, which has been assumed by the corporate officers and boards.
The definition of socialism is somewhat similar. It is the ownership and control of the major means of production by the society. Now, you and I both know that is not how it actually works. The control in “socialist” countries seems to always devolve into the hands of the government – actually, into the hands of the leadership of the government. That always turns out to be a small group.
Now, where have we heard that recently? Oh, yeah. That’s the same as a few, only two paragraphs back. While economists are wont to refer to those “socialist” counties as having “state socialism,” they are way off base. A small group is no different than a few. Ipso facto, those countries that call themselves socialist but hold control the major means of production in the leadership of that country are, in reality, practicing state capitalism.
Now, let’s pretend that I own a company that makes Hula-Hoops. Further, let’s pretend my company has 50 percent of the market, or 60 percent, or even eighty percent. It’s likely that I would be a very wealthy old man. But, would I be a capitalist? Emphatically NO! Why not? I own and control a very successful business and have sufficient wealth to place me in the upper reaches of the one-percent.
Hula-Hoops fail to qualify as a part of the major means of production. I used to hear claims that owning your home made you a capitalist. Once again, wrong; and for the same reason.
Having cleared that up, let’s look at the operative words, ‘major means of production.’ It includes such areas of the economy as transportation, energy, communications, steel production, et alia.
Okay, I am aware that those ignorant of the actual meaning of the word socialism apply it to many other sectors. The way the word is commonly used can include schools, fire and police and healthcare. Why not throw in the military? Using the word so loosely opens a few cans of worms
To avoid any hint of socialism we would each need to responsible for paving, or not paving, the street in front of our home – or at least half of it. You may want to get by with little more than a cow path, while your neighbor next door, or the one across the street wants a 4-lane parkway. Let’s not even get into the sticky subject of sewer and water lines. Septic tanks are not universally practical and have you ever seen a well that could accommodate a high-rise apartment building?
Defined thusly, socialism is unavoidable. Unless we use these words precisely, or even if we don’t, we unnecessarily engender misunderstandings, conflicts and fear.
I wish it were possible to avoid the usage of those words altogether. But, it isn’t. I would prefer that we tackle each area individually. Allow the government to handle those matters that we cannot do for ourselves, individually and those matters that we don’t want to do ourselves or we would find too burdensome or that would be more cost-effective and/or efficient done by the government.
Having been a tenured student married to a retired teacher of 40 years experience, education is important to me. Too many unqualified people have become engaged in home-schooling. Even the handful that might be qualified shouldn’t. Whether you have considered it or not, you learned far more outside of the classroom than inside. Then why public schooling?
It’s called socialization. For a country to be a successful nation requires a large degree of shared experience and values. People can accomplish far more together than individually. Cooperation, people skills and such are more important than our society credits.
Though not always on the same note as I am, Bill Maher does have the ability to come up with many important points and express them in a memorable way. Enjoy, and perhaps learn a bit from, the video.
If you found this educational, edifying, interesting or otherwise worth your time, this geezer would appreciate a little supplement to those Social Security checks, They forgot to factor in the cost of publishing a blog.
Many thanks,
.
.
