Subversion And Constructive Synthesis Of Capitalism And Socialism
Politics / Social Issues May 18, 2017 - 04:48 PM GMTBy: Raymond_Matison
In America today there is evidence of long-term subversion undermining our democratic Republic. Often tactics and propaganda are attributed to liberals, conservatives, Democrats or Republicans. Unless we can be more precise in identifying and labeling persons or political parties responsible for this subversion, we will not be able to protect or maintain our Republic. At a minimum, there is a need to review political party current platforms, and to find the source of subversion which dramatically is veering our republic away from its Constitutional origins towards a socialist state.
Liberals and Conservatives
One of the largest possible divisions among people is to classify whether they live in a capitalistic or socialistic country. Then we should consider the largest division of people along the lines of some political persuasion. The largest and most readily recognizable man-made division among people in the U.S. is likely labeling them either as liberals or conservatives. If we consult a dictionary, we find that the definition of liberals includes terms such as not strict, tolerant of views differing from one’s own, not orthodox, favoring reform or progress, as in religion or education, and favoring political reforms tending toward democracy. By contrast, a conservative is defined by terms such as tending to preserve established traditions or institutions and to resist or oppose any changes in these, moderate or cautious.
When seen from a political perspective, liberals and conservatives seem to harbor specific beliefs which are far broader than their dictionary definition. It appears that liberals generally seek solutions from, and feel comfortable in being dependent on government. They support affirmative action in education and employment, yet are against competition in education provided by vouchers. They believe that the world’s major energy source of coal is too polluting, and that while oil has a declining global supply it produces too much carbon dioxide manifested in rapid man-made global warming. Accordingly, alternative and renewable energy sources such as solar or wind energy are emphasized. Liberals generally are against citizens keeping firearms, and they support abolishing the death penalty. They believe in “free” universal health care, and support the right to abortion and euthanasia. They have embraced amnesty for illegal aliens, which they call undocumented immigrants, and are against any profiling for security purposes. Also they have been proactive in removing any reference to God or religion from public places, and support same sex unions. There are surely other characteristics frequently attributable to liberals, but this suffices to provide at least a general modern classification.
By contrast, conservatives generally embrace self-sufficiency and personal responsibility while seeking to keep government activity limited in scope. Because they believe that educational and employment opportunities should be ability-based, they do not support affirmative action, and do support the need for competition in education as provided by school vouchers. Because long-term changes in temperature have not been undeniably proven to be man-made, restrictions for carbon production are not required. They believe that all sources of energy, including nuclear power should be used and developed. Conservatives take pride in the 2nd amendment providing the right to keep arms, and support the death penalty. They also believe in a market-driven health care system, recognizing that there is no such thing as free health care. They believe that a privatized insurance system provides the best health care; therefore, government should not be involved nor control it. Conservatives generally are against abortions, and are also against euthanasia. They do not support illegal immigrants and demand our government enforce its own immigration laws. They interpret the Constitution in a way which allows God to be cited on government buildings and schools, without implying that government is establishing a national religion. Conservatives are against same sex unions.
Individuals are too complex to adopt the specific beliefs of just either liberals or conservatives, but given free choice people will adopt principles from the broad list provided by both. It should be noted that neither liberals nor conservatives openly support or advocate subversion or violence to accomplish their specific political goals.
Democrats and Republicans
The next largest grouping domestically is that between Democrats and Republicans. Not all liberals become Democrats no more that conservatives necessarily become Republicans. First, to join a political party one must take specific action and register for their choice.
The Democratic Party has a well defined platform encompassing its prime principles. The many good-sounding and well intended policies include 1) raising incomes and restore economic security for the middle class, 2) create good paying jobs, 3) fight for economic fairness against inequality, 4) combat climate change, 5) build a clean energy economy, 6) provide quality and affordable education, 7) ensure the health and safety of all Americans, 8) confront global threats, 9) protect their values, among others.
The Republican Party also has a detailed and defined platform for its principles and policies. Their many good-sounding and well intended policies include 1) rebuilding the economy and creating jobs, 2) fair and simple taxes, 3) freeing financial markets, 4) creating a business climate that rewards risk and promotes innovation, 5) reducing the federal debt, 6) maintaining our constitutional system with limited government, separation of powers, the rights of the people preserved uncompromised for future generations, 7) making government work for the people, 8) balancing the budget, 9) saving Social Security, among others.
Presenting the above-cited principles of both Democratic and Republican parties to someone who has not previously been exposed to politics or the actual results of these policies – most people would choose their personal menu of items from the platform of both parties. After all, it appears difficult to argue with the majority of policies put forward by either party. Indeed, if one were to take a poll of a thousand people, it is likely that not one person would exclusively choose the policies of just one party rather than embrace some of the seemingly reasonable policies of both parties. So if the implementation of these policies in our economy has starkly different results - the devil is in the details of political elite rule.
These two political party official platforms have changed dramatically over the last 50 years. It is likely that few Democrats or Republicans today would fully understand or embrace the platform of their party of the 1960‘s. Also, terms such as “left” or “right” currently are generally synonymous with liberal and Democrat or conservative and Republican respectively. However, these terms are far more inclusive, as in the past the term “leftist” would have referred to a Marxist or Communist. While neither party’s stated political platform openly condones subversion or violence to achieve its political goals, news reports confirm periodic illegal activities from both parties.
Independents
Members ascribed to this group have elected not to be official members of either major political party. They may be well informed on issues affecting the nation, and even the particular politicians running for office, and consequently choose to vote for individuals rather than for a political party. Alternatively, they may be poorly informed or believe that their votes in the past have not resulted in improved governance, and have elected subsequently simply not to vote. Independents can be flexible, varying their preferences and therefore this descriptive term cannot convey a predictable set of beliefs or moral judgments of individuals belonging to this political group. Since independents as a group do not have a defined or unified political platform, they are an unlikely source of direct political action, and certainly not of subversion.
Libertarians and their political platform
According to Wikipedia, “Libertarianism is a collection of political philosophies and movements that uphold liberty as a core principle. Libertarians seek to maximize political freedom and autonomy, emphasizing freedom of choice, voluntary association, individual judgment, and self-ownership. Libertarians share skepticism of authority and state power.” Therefore, libertarians oppose Communism and National Socialism, fascism, and are against a welfare state, and against American military intervention.
Author David Boaz, in his book entitled “The Libertarian Mind” observes that “our government has become far too powerful, and it increasingly threatens our freedom. Government taxes too much, regulates too much, interferes too much. Politicians on both left and right seek to impose their own moral agenda on 300 million Americans. Laws and policies such as the Patriot Act, surveillance of American citizens, further government control of health care, the growing number of armed police raids on homes and businesses, and the government’s attempts to take private property without judicial process, make us fear an out-of-control government and remind us of the need to reestablish strict limits on power.” He accurately notes that “Taxes and regulations reduce people’s incentive to produce wealth, and government transfer programs reduce the incentive to work.”
The stated policies of Libertarians may be accepted by many, yet their official party membership is still so small that no one of their political party has a membership role in Congress. Due to their general policy of non-intervention, and rejection of force to achieve geopolitical goals, libertarians cannot be seen as undermining or subverting America.
Communism, Marxism, and Socialism
These political terms are mainly derived from the works of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, who in 1848 co-authored the book “Communist Manifesto”. Their thesis, Marxism, states that capitalists who have the means to employ workers necessarily take advantage of them, which eventually leads to opposition and conflict between these two classes of people. An uprising and revolution by workers acquires control of this means of production by forcefully taking owner property. Thus socializing the ownership of all means of production, and indirectly distributing its benefits to workers as common owners, creates a state where everyone fully shares in the ownership of communal property – which Marx called Communism.
Socialism, the conversion of capitalist means of production to common worker communal ownership would reach an end state in Communism, where this socioeconomic system in theory creates a classless humane society. But the devil is in the details. Over the last century, by some estimates more than 100 million people worldwide have perished on account of the spread, resistance, fighting, or fleeing Communism. The number of injured and maimed is many times those killed. Lost opportunities for a full or better life over decades for many more people due to this Communist pestilence is counted in billions.
The famous Austrian economist, F.A. Hayek, in his book entitled “The Road to Serfdom” states “from the point of view of fundamental human liberties there is little to choose between communism, socialism, and national socialism. They all are examples of the collectivist or totalitarian state … in its essentials not only is completed socialism the same as communism but it hardly differs from fascism.” “The crucial point of which our people are still so little aware is, however, not merely the magnitude of the changes which have taken place during the last generation but the fact that they mean a complete change in the direction of the evolution of our ideas and social order. For at least twenty-five years before the specter of totalitarianism became a real threat, we had progressively been moving away from the basic ideas on which Western civilization has been built. We have progressively abandoned that freedom in economic affairs without which personal and political freedom has never existed in the past. Although we had been warned by some of the greatest political thinkers of the nineteenth century, by Tocqueville and Lord Acton, that socialism means slavery, we have steadily moved in the direction of socialism.” (His original book, and these quotes were first published in 1944.)
Marxism is one of the few political philosophies which used violent revolution, war, conquest, tyranny, and totalitarianism to achieve its goals. The end justifies the means, they claim. Marxism also poses as a quasi religion for those embracing it, which uses propaganda, lies and subversion without guilt to propagate its influence in the twenty first century.
Socialist Party USA
Many Americans may be surprised to learn that a Socialist Party and a Communist Party even exist in this country today – but they both have existed here for over a century. A hundred years ago the Communist Party consisted of approximately 60,000 members – today they number about 5,000. This reduction in their party membership count is in no way intended to convey that it has lost determination, goals, or members. When the term “Communist” became unfavorable during WWII, communists simply either went underground or joined or formed other, more favorably named political organizations.
Over decades, these like-minded people embraced the work ethic that their socialist goals justify the means and have formed a multitude of cover organizations which use unscrupulous methods that neither traditional Democrats nor Republicans would consider. Organizations such as Democratic Socialists of America, Institute of Policy Studies, Washington School, Progressive Democrats of America, 21st Century Democrats, World Peace Council, and a score of labor unions and ethnic affinity groups have found a home for these agitators who would overthrow our existing political and economic order.
The Socialist Party in the USA has a current, well defined political platform which can be accessed in full through the internet. For those who suffer from hypotension, the medical term for low blood pressure, this is recommended reading for it will surely raise the blood pressure of any thinking person.
The first sentence of the Socialist Party USA: 2015-2017 national platform states “The Socialist Party stands for the abolition of every form of domination and exploitation …” It follows with “Socialism will establish a new social and economic order in which workers and community members will take responsibility for and control of … the production and distribution of all goods and services.”
Their specific policies are too many to list, but we highlight the following:
“We call for worker and community ownership and control of corporations …
We call for all financial and insurance institutions to be socially owned …
We call for a National Pension Authority to hold the assets of private pension funds…
We stand for the unconditional disarmament by the United States …
Ultimately a socialist revolution must be an international revolution …
We support militant united labor action ...
We oppose all effort to declare English an official language …
We call for the right of retirement at age 55 a minimum annual retirement income …
We call for the lowering of the voting age to 15
We support the formation of collectives …
We call for rent control for rental units …
We support the formation of non-profit land trusts …
We call for the abolition of the Federal bureau of Investigation …
The Socialist Party works to build a world in which everyone will be able to freely move across borders …
We believe that capitalism is fundamentally incompatible with democracy and that true democracy can only be achieved with society’s transformation to socialism.
We call for public ownership and democratic control of all our natural resources …
We oppose any new nuclear power projects and call for the rapid phasing out of all nuclear power plants …
We call for public ownership and worker control of existing corporate farms …”
It is truly ironic and illuminating that the Socialist Party’s USA own major premise of being opposed to “the abolition of every form of domination and exploitation” requires and demands control, totalitarian domination and exploitation of the people by a central tyrannical government to implement its goals. This partial list of its platform also corroborates that their Socialism is the half-way station to Communism. The reality of this platform demonstrates that Socialists harbor former Communists, and both continue to subvert our free society.
If this fact is not of great concern to you, just reflect on the fact that several months ago an avowed Socialist within the Democratic Party ran to become president in the United States. If elected, and Socialists proceeded to implement the afore-cited Socialist Platform, how long would it be before there is a civil war in the country?
Socialism’s uneven results
Many of us may believe that we have a fair understanding of what exactly is Socialism. After all, this term has been used for over several centuries, and we all are familiar with it. It is very likely, that even after reviewing the policy platform of the Socialist Party USA, we still do not have an accurate understanding of its meaning.
How is it that Venezuela is criticized for its failed socialist policies, and Sweden is lauded as a successful socialist country? If both are socialist, how can it be that there is such diversity in their economic success and other measures of governance? Well, again, the devil is in the details. The simple, but not all inclusive, explanation is that in the case of Venezuela the leaders have worked substantially in their own self-interest with a demonstrated capacity for great corruption. Venezuela is a far more populous and richer country than Sweden in terms of natural resources, but it has demonstrated that their system of socialism has brought the country to chaos and poverty. Contrariwise, in Sweden there is a higher sense of integrity, morality among its political leaders where government employees and citizens work together for the benefit of the whole populace. Again, the devil is proven to be in the details.
However, a more precise view of Sweden needs to be forwarded. Sweden does not have a tyrannical central government, and it has its own stock exchange – something not likely in fully developed socialist country. Its citizens are not herded in by an “iron wall”, and there is no visible exodus of people fleeing the country. In short, it is not truly a socialist country - and according to Wikipedia it is a “constitutional monarchy and a parliamentary democracy”. It develops businesses and seeks growth and profit acting similar to a capitalist country, one in which the level of concern for the wellbeing of all its citizens has a higher priority than simply the maximization of capitalist profits.
Socialism in America
Trevor Loudon in his book “The Enemies Within” states, “After Eastern Europe and China were communized by force after WWII, communist expansionism was resisted by stiff Western resolve. Western Europe, Canada and the United States would have to be socialized from the inside out. The existing order would have to be overturned by a process of subversion. Education, the churches and the media were all targeted. But the key focus, something hardy touched on by scholars, was the systematic infiltration and manipulation of the legislative bodies of each major Western nation.” He observes that “The Communist Party sets policy then enlists the help of unions and other sympathizers to promote it. Then they get leftist and communist sympathizing Democrats to promote it inside their party. It then becomes Democrat Party policy, then state or national legislation. Meanwhile, the general public is totally in the dark.”
Because this subversion started to become visible in the 1960’s we can surmise that fully two generations of Americans have been educated by a subverted educational system to become socialists, or worse. These two generations are now large in number, and have enough influence to take over the agenda of the two major political parties. Subversion over these last decades has high-jacked the real Democratic and Republican party, and is showing audacious intolerance for either moderate liberals or conservatives. It is now manifested by an attack on free speech, and physical violence to those who insist on practicing their Constitutional rights. Many of today’s Republicans are drifting towards Socialism, while most Democrats have already become ardent Socialists.
In America, it is commonly stated today that 90% of college and university staff are liberal Democrats, and that 90% of news reporters are liberal Democrats, and that 97% of the people in the Justice Department voted Democratic. If that is true, contrary to Mr. Ben Franklin’s centuries old admonition for “keeping” our Republic, we have lost it!
In the last century Europe experienced two great World Wars which, in part, were fought to contain Communism, Marxism, and National Socialism. But even decades later, most European countries have Socialist, Marxist, and evolved Communist parties which exert a great influence in their economies and polities. Over decades, even as we won the last world war, America also has permitted and acquired a pervasive socialist mentality.
As Mr. Loudon stated, “the general public is totally in the dark” about socialist subversion in America.
Propaganda and Fake News
Today we all experience an abundance propaganda and “fake news” that is news which intentionally is untrue and is created to mislead its intended audience. These episodes are frequently attributed to far left, liberals, or democrats. It is likely true that the Democratic Party has been more deeply infiltrated by individuals who had their goal to take over its agenda, and redirect its efforts towards socializing America. Mr. Loudon states “The latest phase of the Communist Party plans to infiltrate and manipulate the Democratic Party began in earnest in the 1970s, and has today, reached a peak of influence not seen since the 1940s.”
Unfortunately, there is ample proof of fake news also from the far right, conservative, or Republican side. For example, the CIA’s claim and evidence that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction, which propelled America into that war, were patently false – in a stellar example of “fake news” and subversion from the right.
For several decades an observation can be confirmed that actual economic results do not differ substantially regardless of which party is in power. The implication is that there exists a group of powerful elites in our society who steer geopolitics and economics regardless whether a Democrat or Republican is in office. This certainly seems plausible as the country also is involved in military conflicts regardless which political party controls the Presidency, House of Representatives and the Senate. In addition, interest rates have fallen for over thirty years spanning both party administrations. Growth of the money supply and credit has exceeded the rate of economic growth for a century regardless which political party prevails. Propaganda and fake news is used on the public to provide an illusion of liberty and choice.
Capitalism versus Socialism
On paper, simply reading the platform of both political and economic systems of Capitalism and Socialism, one can find many desirable points of philosophical agreement. However, the practical aspect of both these systems is visibly faulty. To repeat again: the devil is in the details. Socialism has failed in most countries in which it has been tried. Socialism’s end point, Communism, has shown itself to be a brutal, and insensitive to human needs. Its broader international goals have been the cause of destructive wars killing million of people. However, it may be possible to govern a country, regardless of its official form of government, such that it does not lead to abolition of individual rights, or totalitarian central government control, which has components of socialism similar to that practiced in Sweden or Norway.
Thus far, the concept of social ownership of the means of production, and all property has demonstrated its inability to serve or provide for its people. Common ownership of the means of production has stifled innovation and productivity, fostering corruption to obtain a limited supply of goods. Common ownership of land and buildings has demonstrated that no one takes responsibility for them, and infrastructure and living quarters deteriorate to the point of becoming dilapidated.
Anyone challenging this system, or its leadership, is usually intimidated to be silent or will be sent to a gulag archipelago, prison, or otherwise removed or liquidated. This is the recent history of Communism. Today’s Socialism, Communism’s little brother, appears milder in its methods to obtain control. It seeks power through political subversion and the ballot box rather from the barrel end of a rifle. However, make no mistake about its final destination to become a totalitarian system depriving people of individual liberty and economic freedom.
Historically, capitalism has produced great wealth to America and a higher standard of living for its most of its citizens. The individual ownership of the means of production and property has instilled a sense of responsibility in its owners. These owners of manufacturing know that to further increase their own wellbeing they must innovate and increase productivity. As owners of property they must repair and rehabilitate or improve it so as to increase its value to the owner. This built-in incentive in capitalism is an important advantage over socialism.
However, capitalism’s unbridled laissez-faire opportunities for ever increasing one’s wealth plays to the most basic of human frailties - ravenous greed. In order to own more wealth, capitalists have bombed countries back to the stone-age - those which have been unfortunate enough to have coveted natural resources for capitalists to own or control. In today’s milder version of control by practicing neocolonialism, capitalists have used its global financial system enforcers such as the IMF and World Bank to devastate both currencies and economies of countries that capitalists seek to plunder. The increasing disparity of wealth between capitalist elite and main stream citizens, which has drastically recently reduced our middle class, under-scores the ravenous and still unsatisfied appetites of those controlling capitalism.
Both socialism and capitalism suffer from the same problem – the imperfect human being. Potentially, any well intended and thoughtfully defined political and economic system can work reasonably well, if the people in control are caring and ethically near perfect. But unfortunately, there are no such humans. We have a long way to evolve to become those people which can make capitalism or socialism work effectively for all.
Today, elite Socialists’ leadership is desirous of taking control of the political and economic system and has used subversion to achieve its ends. Capitalists and their international ilk, globalists, are similarly seeking with the help of central banks to control the world. Both systems have historically demonstrated to be solely interested in power and control – not the increased quality of life for the common human being. If Socialist leaders cared for their workers, they would not have oppressed them for decades through central government tyranny; if the Capitalists cared for their workers, wages would not have stagnated for the last four decades as corporate profits multiplied and have risen to record levels.
A new way forward?
To create a world wherein people suffer less will require corporations, crony capitalists and government, to no longer require the maximization of profits above all else, but target maximum profits within the context of maximum employment, fully funded generous pensions, and liberal worker benefits. It will require elite capitalists, investors, and bankers to accept less concentration of wealth in their hands, and the rebuilding of a vast middle class. At the same time Socialists must give up their quest for International Socialism and Communism, which requires central totalitarian government control, and deprives humans of dignity and individual liberty.
Capitalism must not use military and financial conflict to destroy countries for the fear that some version of socialism may work well enough to be acceptable by it subjects and thereby threaten capitalism by its successful example. Socialists need not undermine capitalism for the fear that capitalists subjugate and oppress the workers of the world and control its natural resources, but acknowledge that capitalism actually creates overall wealth and wellbeing in a society. Winston Churchill was right when he said “The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings. The inherent virtue of Socialism is the equal sharing of miseries.” We can work on a more equal sharing of capitalist blessings, but there not much to be done with an abundance of miseries.
The human species has not yet evolved enough to perfect a social or economic system that eliminates conflict between classes of workers and elevates human wellbeing and happiness. What is unneeded in the present human character is the desire to control others, and excessive greed; but what is lacking in our human character is compassion. This perhaps was perceived best by the Dalai Lama as he stated in his book entitled “The Art of Happiness” that “if you want others to be happy, practice compassion; if you want to be happy, practice compassion.” Such wisdom could possibly avert the next conflict and violent revolution which is fermenting over control of our present social and economic political system, as driven by the increasing gap between the very rich and everyone else.
That compassion would allow our elite to practice a new form of capitalism, to coin a new phrase, capital humanism. Under capital humanism emphasis would be to maximize the incomes and job opportunities for the 99%, but support the 1% still to be rich. Government policy decisions would be crafted to benefit the broadest citizen inclusion and national interest specifically, rather corporations or the rich. Capital humanism would encourage wealth, as long as the mainstream Americans could share in productivity growth proportionately. That kind of policy would eliminate socialist need or attempt to take over the means of production, and its conflict. Decades of socialist and communist subversion has moved our country to become substantially socialist, a trend that, unfortunately, is likely to grow. Accordingly, a policy of capital humanism could avoid the ultimate bloody showdown between socialism and capitalism. It appears to be a viable non-violent solution, but the devil, of course, will be in the details.
Raymond Matison
Mr. Matison is a U.S. patriot who immigrated to this country in 1949. With a B.S. in engineering physics, an M.S. in Actuarial Science, work in the actuarial field, and as a financial analyst at Legg, Mason Inc., Lehman Brothers, and investment banking at Kidder Peabody, and Merrill Lynch provides a diverse background for experience. First-hand exposure to fascism, socialism, and communism as well as the completion of a U.S. Army military intelligence course in the 1960’s have inspired a continuing interest in selected topics in science, military, and economics. He can be e-mailed at rmatison@msn.com
Copyright © 2006 Raymond Matison - All Rights Reserved
Disclaimer: The above is a matter of opinion provided for general information purposes only and is not intended as investment advice. Information and analysis above are derived from sources and utilizing methods believed to be reliable, but we cannot accept responsibility for any losses you may incur as a result of this analysis. Individuals should consult with their personal financial advisors.
© 2005-2022 http://www.MarketOracle.co.uk - The Market Oracle is a FREE Daily Financial Markets Analysis & Forecasting online publication.
