A month or so ago, there were a number of letters to the editor in some of our regional newspapers arguing the merits of “left wing socialist” and “right wing capitalist” economic theories.
I remember this quote from years ago: “When I was in college, I was a communist but became a capitalist when I began a business.” Maybe his story could be continued as “But, when I hit the big money I became a progressive”.
I had a hard time differentiating between communism, socialism and progressivism until I discovered early 20th century observations concerning differences between rich and poor within political ideologies which are uncannily valid today.
Progressives tend to be wealthy, private jet liberals who outwardly embrace socialism but are hard core capitalists concerning their own business and investment affairs. Redistribution of wealth and means, high taxes, mandatory use of public transportation and relocation from the suburbs to urban centers is for everyone else. They would reject collective bargaining and union representation on their own projects. Being well to do, they have no reservations about killing the economy and therefore jobs with high priced energy for the sake of ideology– they can absorb the inflated costs of goods and services that devastate the middle class and pound down the genuinely poor without changing their own life styles. Progressives strive to live an upper crust good life.
True socialists tend not to have wealth and desire to redistribute wealth and income from everyone over a determined level of means to a defined underclass, which both wealthy “liberals” and moneyed “conservatives” resist with lobbyists and attorneys. The individual tax burden engendered by socialist policies and programs falls most heavily on middle class business and blue collar workers, who don't have the resources to legally avoid redistribution. The socialist “good life” is a theoretically egalitarian ant farm in which the ideological “good of society” outweighs the good of the individual, with an exploitative wealthy class brought to heel by being forced to finance the ant farm's existence. Personal productivity geared to increasing personal means is institutionally discouraged, which depresses collective production. There is much more concern with providing social services than creating a business climate conducive to job growth, and socialists will kill the economy for ideological principle. Socialism promotes equality by making everyone but a parasitic, progressive oligarchy equally poor and equally dependent on government. Socialism in practice depends on the capitalism it punishes to fund society and therefore will eventually self destruct and end with societal anarchy.
Socialists and progressives ignore that the tech and “green” industries are capitalist enterprises while older manufacturing and traditional energy industries are scorned and marked for regulatory punishment. The ideological hypocrisy is such that capitalist oil tycoon Tom Styres can rebrand himself as a progressive environmentalist – with not a shred of liberal self loathing over the source of his wealth nor any socialist guilt over retaining his wealth and privilege.
Promotion of communism seems to originate not from an oppressed and disaffected class of working poor, but from educated upper middle class and privileged youth with little practical life experience. While progressives and socialists work for the long term, communists seek immediate change, often through violent revolution. Whenever a communist revolution occurs, the former order is purged. Then the revolution often turns on itself, eating its own children while an oppressive, all powerful oligarchy emerges out of the chaos.
We need a balanced approach to society and the economy, and neither leftist big government nor laissez-faire capitalism will do. Otherwise we will join the roster of former nations.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
No comments:
Post a Comment