Written By Thomas Perez. March 25, 2018 at 7:45PM.
Since the beginning of this great Republic, canadates from various parties have echoed different slogans. Slogans that played upon specific issues that was facing the American society and culture of it’s day and era. Issues that cited a call for either; freedom, liberty, greater security, equality for all – including women, a less burdensome tax on products and labor, a greater distribution of production through the GDP, employee rights, union rights, higher wages, better healthcare coverage, affordable or free education, better housing, the continued general welfare net for the less fortunate; and a whole list of other domestic issues. These issues have often played a major role in history. They are repeated because they represent the dignity of all that is good about a benevolent society and government, albeit, through trial and error.
Some societies were created with all the good intentions listed above. To uphold the common core of dignity and the right of every individual to entitlement. However, entitlement, as in the case of the Proletariat against the Bourgeoisie are often achieved by means of revolution. Often causing unnecessary bloodshed. But the “pursuit of life, liberty and happiness” is something not gained by the means of overthrow, but by defense and pursuit. By defense, because we defend ourselves against foreign invaders that will seek to ursup our liberty and happiness. By pursuit, meaning, an individual in a capitalistic society is free to pursue any pot of gold located at the bottom of a rainbow; nobody is holding them back. Such is the entrepreneurial spirit in a capitalistic society. But even in America, the ideology of liberty, freedom and the pursuit of happiness has had its fair share of trial and error also. Not everyone enjoyed “inalienable rights” as history teaches us. But we did come a long way. A slow process.
Other cultures and societies took matters into their own hands, choosing to speed up the process of a “utopian” society equally distributed for all, without caste systems. Such an incident took place during the 19th Cent. So much so that it produced what became known as ‘The Communist Manifesto.’ In it, the authors Karl Marx and Frederick Engels argues the case of the oppressor against the oppressed. The two opposing forces, in the eyes of Marx and Engels, are the oppressers, which are the Bourgeoisie and the oppressed, which are the Proletariat. Moreover, it not only seeked to eradicate capitalism, but it also saw it as the old Freudian way of life in which, according to Marxist theory, capitalism sprang from. Marx and Engels actually makes this very clear in the fact that their treatise can be summarized into three synoptic overviews or commentaries.
The first commentary deals with the rich, the powerful, the owners of production pitted against the working middle-class, the caste that depended on the owners for survival through labor. The owners of land and businesses were the powerful employers, and the workers was its labor force. This is no different than the issues facing the working middle-class and teamsters of today as they struggle to make ends meet, while maintaining a status of employment, a family unit, a mortgage and various other needs.
Today, as it was in the past, the traditional socialistic argument has always been about the fair distribution of a nations wealth. In Marxist theory it is a democratic ownership of the nation’s wealth by “means of production.” However, it never deals directly with the actual question of ownership – who rightfully owns the tools, machines and assembly lines by which the means of production are produced. Instead it seeks to nationalize them, or allow the public to buy them through various IPO’s. Progressives today avoid this aspect of the socialist/communist model, offering no alternatives. Original owners and investers shiver at the possibility of loss. That is not fair to them. But sooner or a later, parties like the ‘Democratic Socialists of America’ (DSA) would have to deal with this dilemma once and for all.
The DSA are mostly made up of members who are within their 30’s and various millennials. They also seem to draw in members who are sympathetic to “general will” and the umbrella of communism. Socialism and communism are sometimes viewed interchangeably. The members are concerned with the very same issues cited above. While others consider socialism on a larger scale, the scale of public ownership. This is simlar to communism’s nation/state ownership of private businesses, fully nationalized, with a fair distribution of wealth for all. However, there is no fair method that will insure that a nations wealth is evenly distributed among the masses.
Moreover, many Americans today are introduced to socialism from protests movements like ‘Occupy,’ ‘Black Lives Matter’ and the case for women’s rights, as demonstrated in the ‘International Woman’s Day’ protest marches. However, many do not identify with any political affiliation with reference to socialism/communism, but they are sympathetic to the concept – leaning more toward the aspects of socialism. Disillusionment from capitalism, racial and gender inequality, especially among women, the LGTB community and income inequality; all attribute to the ever growing socialistic sympathetic attitudes of American people today. An attitude that voices for a change in the American social and economic structure.
The second deals with various working class relationships with the communist party itself. There were many different types of working-class socialistic parties sympathetic to the communist ideology. The party gave the working union classes the idea of a general will that will not infringe on other working-class parties, offering them progressive income tax, abolition of child labor, women’s rights, eradications of private property and free public education. This is strikingly similar to Bernie Sanders slogan of “Not Me, Us,” “A Future to Believe In,” “A Political Revolution is Coming, Not for Sale,” and Obama’s 2008 slogan; “Change is Coming.” Moreover, it also echos the cry of Sanders “free college education and universal healthcare for all.”
It begs to ask the question, “what is it that certain political parties want to change?” It would seem that their main objective is to completly overthrow America’s pure capitalistic society, in favor of a broader sociological change; namely ‘Democratic Socialism.’ Such are the members of the DSA.
The third deals with distinctions. Distinctions between various socialistic ideas and the communist umbrella over all of them. This concept is achieved through decent common core and the general belief of it’s social philosophy. The treatise ends boldly by declaring that social democrats should align themselves with the working classes of all the countries in an attempt to secure a truly free non-oppressive society of equality, thus eradicating the power elite. The ideology of social democracy advocates for a peaceful transition, rather than a Marxist approach of a literal revolution from capitalism.
But today, most Leftist, Democrat and Liberal supporters of socialism are actually coming out of the closet, and are now openly saying catch phrases like; “socialism will win,” etc. They are now advocating violence through non-peaceful protests and are declaring attacks and/or harassment be made on individuals who support Republican and Conservative ideas by encouraging owners of restaurants and other private venues not to do business with anyone who is of the right – individuals like Maxine Walters are encouraging this type of prejudice, bigotry, lawlessness and hate. This is to make strong their numbers. A method of intimidation, all in the name of socialism and communism.
However, there is not one agreed upon definitive definition of socialism, or communism. Moreover, even American political pundants from conservatives and right wingers today often intermingle the possible idea of rising communistic sympathies with change associated with socialism and liberalism. Conservatives, socialists, democratic socialists and liberals all rail insults at each other through internet memes, satirical animations and social blogs. And as we can see, the conservative (Republicans/right wingers) are out-numbered because there is unifying support for each other from the entire left, as they represent various leftist groups. This type of activity must stop. All it does is divide our country. America today seems to be divided into two arms; the right and the left. Even the media seems to be divided on issues; pro and con.
In recent decades (since the 60’s) the left is vastly growing into multiple outlets. How those outlets will be plugged into one umbrella term; be it pure socialism, democratic socialism or a form of communism, may be just a matter of time. A matter of time that may undermine American freedoms as we know it today, fostering it into an Orwellian distopia. Or it may bolster it’s fabric into a state of true bliss and utopian equality, from top to bottom. That will truly be a cinematic 1927 ‘Metropolis’ ending realized. However, socialist democrats are repeatedly stopped in their tracks, not only by conservative capitalists, but by liberal centralists as well. Central liberalists often oppose true American change and reform; like free higher education and universal healthcare. When will the changing of America take place? Is it changing? Are we ready for change? Is there need for a change? The evidence certainly points in that direction, but only time will tell. But I’ am sure Republican and Conservative voters will not take to change lying down, especially when the ideologcal systems of socialism and communism has always failed humanities deepest and most cherished ideas.
Moreover, the picture above wonderfully illustrates why a full socialistic society eventually always fails. Just think about it. It is inevitable that the working class will become so disenfranchised that they will begin to cease their incentive and thus their labor. And when that happens, they too will join the line on the right. The attitude of “Hell, why not? If John and Mary Doe can do it, why not me?” “I want entitlements too!” Who then is left on the left side to uphold businesses, jobs, corporations and the general flow of the economic system? The government? Yes, the government! Very dangerous. Very dangerous indeed, as we have seen in history. The government becomes the shareholder – in actuality the government becomes the owner – holding more shares, or all of it. A complete buy-out. Thus having the right of way, within a business structure, to completely control it’s employees. But they too, the government that is, eventually run out of resources – leading to despotism and fascism. Hence the dangers of communism and socialism today.
The quotation above “The pursuit of life, liberty and happiness” is something not gained by the means of overthrow, but by defense and pursuit,” is similar to the aspirations of the Kingdom of God. The Kingdom of God defends itself. It is defended by God; He defines it for His redeemed from this economic, desirous and wanting worldly system; and from our fallen carnal nature. It pursues life, liberty in Christ and something better than happiness: Joy.