Victor Davis Hanson: Socialism guarantees failure and suffering – So why do so many Americans support it?


John-F

macrumors regular
Original poster
Oct 7, 2011
223
847
Of course you will, because you have to use a soft voice to effectively peddle nonsense. Although, the assumption that I have not already been extensively exposed to glibertarian blather is a subtle snipe in and of itself: it is possible to read or hear that material without succumbing to its seductive allure.

Living in the real world, I have seen and continue to see the widespread effects of “wealth creation”, which makes it obvious to me that the tenets of the ideology are based firmly upon ignoring its direct and peripheral costs. It is like using the scientific method on the baseline system and stopping before getting to any additional cause/effect vectors.

So much for being “polite”.
Your view of the economy is flawed and naive. Your angry dismissal of things you don't agree with is noted as well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Solver

Sydde

macrumors 68020
Aug 17, 2009
2,107
2,280
IOKWARDI
Your view of the economy is flawed and naive. Your angry dismissal of things you don't agree with is noted as well.
I will not dispute that my view has flaws, but to call it naïve, when you whip around the flag of a theory that lacks substantial evidence to support it is laughable. As for being angry, when I hear authoritative nonsense flung about, yes, it can make me angry. You seem to have little to offer other than, “You're wrong. Google it” while I am actually trying to say stuff.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JayMysterio

linuxcooldude

macrumors 68020
Mar 1, 2010
2,470
4,483
We don't need no stinkin socialism... just keep waiting for wealth to trickle down.. Trust me, this will be the decade when it finally happens.
Wealth doesn't just trickle down, you actually have to work for it. With socialism, work isn't nessicarily needed, but somehow trickles down any way.
 

JagdTiger

macrumors 6502
Dec 20, 2017
333
365
An excellent article:

Victor Davis Hanson is a senior fellow in military history at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University and a professor emeritus of classics at California State University, Fresno. He is the author of more than two dozen books, ranging in topics from ancient Greece to modern America, most recently "The Case for Trump" (Basic Books, 2019) He lives in Selma, California.

Multiple forms of socialism, from hard Stalinism to European redistribution, continue to fail.

Russia and China are still struggling with the legacy of genocidal communism. Eastern Europe still suffers after decades of Soviet-imposed socialist chaos.

Cuba, Nicaragua, North Korea and Venezuela are unfree, poor and failed states. Baathism — a synonym for pan-Arabic socialism — ruined the postwar Middle East.

The soft-socialist European Union countries are stagnant and mostly dependent on the U.S. military for their protection.

In contrast, current American deregulation, tax cuts and incentives, and record energy production have given the United States the strongest economy in the world.

So why, then, are two of the top three Democratic presidential contenders — Sens. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., and Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., — either overtly or implicitly running on socialist agendas? Why are the heartthrobs of American progressives — Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) and Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) — calling for socialist redistributionist schemes?

---------

Add up a lost generation of woke and broke college graduates, waves of impoverished immigrants without much knowledge of American economic traditions, wealthy advocates of boutique socialism and asleep-at-the-wheel Republicans, and it becomes clear why historically destructive socialism is suddenly seen as cool.

Regrettably, sometimes the naive and disaffected must relearn that their pie-in-the sky socialist medicine is far worse than the perceived malady of inequality.

And unfortunately, when socialists gain power, they don’t destroy just themselves. They usually take everyone else down with them as well.

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/victor-davis-hanson-history-socialism
Because they wont be under the same system as everyone else.
- - Post merged: - -

Wealth doesn't just trickle down, you actually have to work for it. With socialism, work isn't nessicarily needed, but somehow trickles down any way.
Exactly, that’s why Reagan’s trickle down theory did not work, it was a complete scam.
 
Last edited:

linuxcooldude

macrumors 68020
Mar 1, 2010
2,470
4,483
Because they wont be under the same time system as everyone else.
- - Post merged: - -


Exactly, that’s why Reagan’s trickle down theory did not work, it was a complete scam.
Thats not exactly what I said. The basis of the trickle down theory are incentives for buisnesses to invest into themselves by hiring more people and offer more for their employees then their competitors once the job market is wide open.
Likewise, the employee must be willing to look more appealing to their prospective employer through skills and experience.
I was more comparing socialism to the trickle down theory is more than just giving buisnesess incentives to grow by investing in employees, but employees need to do their part rather than just expecting social programs to provide most of what they need.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Solver

hawkeye_a

macrumors 65816
Jun 27, 2016
1,308
3,380
Communism/socialism requires conformity through force or the threat of force.
Capitalism is tolerant and multifaceted which respects individual rights.

A communist/socialist can practice their beliefs in a capitalistic system without state persecution(or support). Capitalists would have their property confiscated and probably executed in a communist state.

It is unfortunate that the delusion of socialism/communism has retured, when just last century it was one of the, if not the most destructive force mankind has ever had to reckon with. The estimates range from 60-100+ million lives lost to that “religion” in a single century. How many more before it is finally relegated to the dustbin of history where it belongs?

Every time, every single time, that insane ideology takes grip of a society it has lead to unmitigated misery. And yet fools want to keep repeating that experiment expecting different outcomes. Thats just egomaniacal.
 
Last edited:

hawkeye_a

macrumors 65816
Jun 27, 2016
1,308
3,380
This two minute clip is what reminded me of history, what is going on around the world, and outcomes(instead of just “intentions” and “theories”)...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Solver and John-F

Eraserhead

macrumors G4
Nov 3, 2005
10,300
10,444
UK
Shop closing laws determine not only Sundays, but the specific opening and closing hours. Some states have liberalized the laws. Highly regulated society.
All states but Saarland and Bavaria have liberalised the laws.

And 6am to 8pm Monday to Saturday with Sunday closing isn’t that restrictive.
 

Bug-Creator

macrumors 6502a
May 30, 2011
566
2,164
Germany
"Ladenschlussgesetz" == Socialism???

It's just a regulation not that much difference than those about who when and where can buy alcohol (and than has to hide it in a paper bag when walking down the road.

Those would be never fly around here -> US is a highly regulated society.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Eraserhead

DearthnVader

macrumors 6502a
Dec 17, 2015
902
4,922
Red Springs, NC
An excellent article:

Victor Davis Hanson is a senior fellow in military history at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University and a professor emeritus of classics at California State University, Fresno. He is the author of more than two dozen books, ranging in topics from ancient Greece to modern America, most recently "The Case for Trump" (Basic Books, 2019) He lives in Selma, California.

Multiple forms of socialism, from hard Stalinism to European redistribution, continue to fail.

Russia and China are still struggling with the legacy of genocidal communism. Eastern Europe still suffers after decades of Soviet-imposed socialist chaos.

Cuba, Nicaragua, North Korea and Venezuela are unfree, poor and failed states. Baathism — a synonym for pan-Arabic socialism — ruined the postwar Middle East.

The soft-socialist European Union countries are stagnant and mostly dependent on the U.S. military for their protection.

In contrast, current American deregulation, tax cuts and incentives, and record energy production have given the United States the strongest economy in the world.

So why, then, are two of the top three Democratic presidential contenders — Sens. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., and Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., — either overtly or implicitly running on socialist agendas? Why are the heartthrobs of American progressives — Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) and Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) — calling for socialist redistributionist schemes?

---------

Add up a lost generation of woke and broke college graduates, waves of impoverished immigrants without much knowledge of American economic traditions, wealthy advocates of boutique socialism and asleep-at-the-wheel Republicans, and it becomes clear why historically destructive socialism is suddenly seen as cool.

Regrettably, sometimes the naive and disaffected must relearn that their pie-in-the sky socialist medicine is far worse than the perceived malady of inequality.

And unfortunately, when socialists gain power, they don’t destroy just themselves. They usually take everyone else down with them as well.

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/victor-davis-hanson-history-socialism
Socialism doesn't have one hard/fast definition nor does Capitalism or any other -ist or -ism.

What separates us from Cuba/North Korea/Venezuela is free enterprise, personal rights, and private property rights. Tho these rights have reasonable limits.

I know it's fun to use the word socialism to tar and feather liberals and liberal politicians, are Sanders or Warren advocating for the elimination of free enterprise, personal rights, or private property rights?

To me, I don't think so, so I'd hardly call them socialists. Just because you want a robust social safety net, you want a government that sets reasonable limits on rights, and for the government to put forth reasonable regulation when the free enterprise system threatens to consume the vastest share of wealth into the hands of the already wealthy, doesn't make you a socialist.

I, my self, advocated for the fifth plank of the Communist manifesto, but that hardly makes me a communist, it just makes me a realist.

We have the ability to learn from the mistakes of history, but it's important not to throw out the baby with the bathwater. Just because full blown Socialism/Communism don't work, doesn't mean that every part of those systems is bad, and can't work for the betterment of our societies.

If we dismantled every part of our societies that anyone could label socialist, it would be our ruination.
 

DearthnVader

macrumors 6502a
Dec 17, 2015
902
4,922
Red Springs, NC
Mayor Pete has jumped on the socialism train, now offering ‘free’ college for anyone who’s parents make less than 100K. Also universal pre-K and ‘free‘ childcare for poor kids. I wish they would stop calling this stuff free. It’s not. Somebody is paying for it.

Who do you suppose that it is that pays for uneducated or under educated people?

Hint, it's you.

Who do you suppose pays of uninsured people?

Hint, it's you.

Who do you suppose pays for people that can't work because they have no childcare?

Hint, it's you.

Who do you suppose pays for all the social programs that people making minimum wage need to survive?

Hint, it's you.
 

RichardMZhlubb

Contributor
Nov 26, 2010
209
15,760
Washington, DC
Mayor Pete has jumped on the socialism train, now offering ‘free’ college for anyone who’s parents make less than 100K. Also universal pre-K and ‘free‘ childcare for poor kids. I wish they would stop calling this stuff free. It’s not. Somebody is paying for it.
Pete doesn’t use the word “free” to describe his college tuition plan. That’s a reporter’s description. Also, I really don’t see how taxpayer-funded K-12 education is fine, but expanding it to pre-K-16 for some people is evil socialism.
 

Rogifan

macrumors Core
Nov 14, 2011
20,747
22,807
Pete doesn’t use the word “free” to describe his college tuition plan. That’s a reporter’s description. Also, I really don’t see how taxpayer-funded K-12 education is fine, but expanding it to pre-K-16 for some people is evil socialism.
Why stop at college? Let’s just give people free things from cradle to grave.
 

hawkeye_a

macrumors 65816
Jun 27, 2016
1,308
3,380
Why stop at college? Let’s just give people free things from cradle to grave.
I've always wanted a Ferrari and a yatch, in fact I think everyone should get one, especially when everyone else pays for it./sarcasm

When I see someone with a great car, house, etc...I don't feel envy, jealousy or hate to the point where i'd get government to penalize them for them for their accomplishments/inheritance/whatever. I wonder if that's the difference between a classical-liberal and a communist?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Solver and John-F

hawkeye_a

macrumors 65816
Jun 27, 2016
1,308
3,380
Do you consider taxpayer-funded K-12 education to be socialism?
What do you call it when a central authority mandates a service, imposes a cost and has no option for individuals to opt out?

IMHO the primary functions of a federal state are national security, and funding federal courts and such. I think education aught to be up to each state as the "one size fits all" federal model is too generic for a diverse large population.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Solver

TheFluffyDuck

macrumors 6502a
Jul 26, 2012
507
1,231
The problems with income vs cost of living and the income disparity is most extreme in Democratic controlled states. Agree that problems exist, but "the only other solution getting discussed" is not the cure but a further poison. Perhaps the discussion should be further expanded, but other solutions not consistent with the far left. If you look at the other thread on Sanders' proposal, do you really think that will improve your life?
Is communism the answer? No, but neither is laissez-faire capitalism. Is one worse than the other? Yes. But that isn't not saying much. Sure, the one can spawn people like Elon musk who makes a rocket. But if at the cost is a hundred million wage slaves worse off than their parents, that's not an improvement. That's not a bug, its a feature!

People are desperate! The social contract is broken on so many levels. It doenst matter if it is republican or democrats in charge they are both brought by several industries who lobby them.

If you want to see who truly owns your country, just look at your social ills. 1% of your population is behind bars, so much for land of the free, thats the privatisation of your prisons. You don't have socialised medicine, because your insurance company owns your government. You have rampant gun crime, as the NRA and military-industrial complex own your senators. You cant afford houses as parasitic banks and speculators have all your money. Capitalism is morphing into feudalism.

Most people rent a house, a car, your phone, even the media you watch and listen to. You are owning less and less, in a system that is focused around personal ownership. That should scare the hell out of everybody, as it doesn't leave much room for those who own nothing.
 

cajun67

macrumors regular
Aug 29, 2011
161
290
Why stop at college? Let’s just give people free things from cradle to grave.
Depends on what you mean by "free things"

Exotic automobiles? No

But what about...
  • Food stamps because they're too poor to feed their children?
  • Housing assistance to keep people who are struggling off the streets?
  • Education from kindergarten through college or trade school so that they can be productive members of society?
  • Healthcare so that families don't have to go into bankruptcy over medical bills? (BTW, bankruptcy doesn't pay the bill, it just forces the system to absorb the loss and raise prices on everyone else, anyway)