History Ignored – the Undying Appeal of Socialism

Why, why, why... does socialism still attract supporters?  How come there’s not a widely-supported presidential candidate pushing mercantilism or a barter system for the American economy?  Certainly the latter two were outdated centuries ago and the first one has been a consistent failure across millennia.

But it’s news to some that socialist Venezuela is in financial crisis with inflation sky high and widespread shortages of consumer necessities.  And yet, young Americans by the millions have been attracted to Sen. Bernie Sanders, a proclaimed socialist.

In its essence, socialism demands equality of results.  By contrast, the free enterprise system (capitalism) offers equal opportunity.  Karl Marx, in the Communist Manifesto, put the socialist position quite succinctly:  From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.

 

There is an understandable appeal to this prescription.  After all, that sounds so nice… but it’s not consistent with human nature.  Where is the incentive for those with “ability” to use it for the benefit of those in “need”?  Of course, in some perfect world (like Utopia) people would act as socialists would want – sort of like “one for all and all for one”.  This hope has guided cooperative communities and kibbutzim around the world.  But they uniformly fail.  Human nature is the reason. 

Some participants may be altruistic for a while, giving without getting, for the good of the community.  However, others will certainly do more taking than giving, generating resentment from others.  Thus the idealism which was the motivating factor in the initial organization of the group begins to weaken as the result of jealousy, anger, laziness and myriad negative aspects of human nature.

So what happens?  Seemingly, nobody works hard without appropriate rewards.  The economy falters.  There is an equality that comes to pass – poverty is shared by all.  This is the reality of socialism.  With this perspective, the late Bernie-mania doesn’t seem so amusing.

Note:  There is a common tendency on the right to treat Marx’s economic prescriptions set forth in his tome “Das Kapital” as inseparable from doctrines of the twentieth century’s Marxist/Leninist/totalitarian/communist states.  That is a distortion.  Marx envisioned that inevitably communism would supplant all other economic systems as a matter of historical certainty. Lenin realized that people must be compelled or killed to bring about a system contrary to their self-interest.  Marx was naïve.  Lenin and his ideological heirs were not.