The Rise of Democratic Socialism - Communism by another name
I have been watching, with interest, the development and rising popularity of the Democratic Socialist movement. The most noticeable example is, in my opinion, the successful campaign and election of Zohran Mamdani as the mayor of New York City. At first I thought this was a political anomaly, but in the wake of his win several other Democratic Socialists have announced their candidacy for office. For example, we saw Melat Kiros win in Colorado, Claire Valdez in New York's 7th District, and Darializa Avila Chevalier in New York's 13th District. Further, we saw Janeese Lewis George win the Democratic mayoral primary in Washington, D.C.. Oliver Larkin is running for a House seat in Florida and Francesca Hong is running for governor in Wisconsin. You already know about Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Rashida Talib in Congress, but you may not have noticed that Nithya Raman advanced to a mayoral runoff against incumbent Karen Bass in Los Angeles.
I watch the rise of Democratic Socialism and wonder about its popularity in a nation that postured itself for over half a century to defeat communism, which is simply Democratic Socialism by another name. I believe that distinction has an impact. In mainstream America “Communism” is bad – a thing to be hated and destroyed, but “Democratic Socialism” can’t be that bad. However, words mean things and we sometimes lose that meaning in the never ending swirl and flow of information and propaganda. Let’s take a look at the philosophy of Communism versus Democratic Socialism.
Communism seeks to shift ownership of property, the means of production, natural resources, and the economy away from profit making private enterprise to public (governmental) ownership.
Democratic Socialism seeks to use taxation to redistribute wealth, to use government to take ownership of the means of production, and to have government regulate the economy.
The words are slightly different but the meaning is the same. Democratic Socialism is Communism.
How did we get to this point? How can our people possibly embrace something that is the antithesis of our way of life? What happened to our individualism, our drive to succeed, our willingness to work hard and make our way in the world?
The two-fold answer may surprise you. At first, I thought the answer was completely tied to the participation trophy philosophy. We all know about participation trophies. The concept is because sports are considered so important to children’s development as many as possible should actively engage in team activities. Many believe team sports teach things we all want (or should want) our children to experience; victory, defeat, adversity, teamwork, commitment – the list goes on. I believe, and I hope you do as well, that these are valuable lessons for children. The issue here is that not everyone can win or come in first, second, or third. Because parents, coaches, and administrators did not want discouraged children to quit team or individual competitive sports, they began giving awards to all participants. This created an expectation of receiving recognition for just showing up, whether or not the child contributed materially to the teams’ efforts. This allowed everyone to win – all the time – whether or not they actually won the competition. This philosophy led to the second part of my answer.
I thought about the ramifications and the long term effects of participation trophies and I am convinced the second part of the answer is the trend of helicopter parenting. Those children who were taught that everyone wins eventually became parents themselves and wanted to spare their children the humiliation and pain of losing and being singled out. Helicopter parents obsess over every detail of their children’s lives to the point that the children are “protected” from all disappointment, adversity, wrong, or negative outcome or interactions. This “protection” denies children the ability to develop real problem solving skills and the ability to experience and overcome adversity.
Alright – at this point you are likely asking me what this has to do with the rise of Democratic Socialism. Here is the answer. These participation trophy and helicopter parented children eventually grow up and either go to a University or enter the workforce. When they get to the real world, they are unable to deal with the adversity and unpleasantness they experience. They are in places that cause anxiety and uncertainty and can no longer count on their parents to swoop in and save the day. As a result they look for surrogates to soothe their anxiety, include them, and mitigate their bad experiences. They see all the “evils” of Capitalism as the cause of their problems. Their inability to find jobs after graduation is not because of poor work ethic or unrealistic salary requirements – it is because of the heartless and cruel oligarchs and business owners. The fact that they cannot immediately have the life they want rather than the life they have earned is not their fault – it is a result of our corrupt system.
The Democratic Socialists offer a solution to all of this. They offer the perception of equity (not necessarily equality) and security. They offer “free” busses, groceries, health care, and education. All of which sound wonderful, but all of which also costs money. Where will the money come from? Their solution is to tax the rich – this also sounds wonderful, but what happens when all the wealth is redistributed and there are no more rich to tax?
Our youth have been systematically robbed of their individuality and desire to succeed. They have been taught that everyone is a winner and there are no losers by being rewarded for just showing up. Many of their parents have shielded them from adversity and difficulty, thus creating anxiety and an inability to overcome adversity. Being forced into the real world without their parents to intervene at every turn has left them confused and vulnerable. The Democratic Socialist party offers these confused people the safety blanket they are used to. They have fewer decisions to make and fewer responsibilities to fulfill. Merit and the ability to achieve is less important and mediocrity is overlooked – in fact outside the new ruling class of the Democratic Socialist elite and their protégés, it is encouraged. This shift from meritocracy to mediocracy has opened the door for Communism to take hold in the greatest country on earth. The Democratic Socialist movement will destroy the fabric of our nation if we allow it – don’t allow it.
Source: The Rise of Democratic Socialism - Communism by another name
stormborns
theartofmadeline
snowghoul
pixelskylines
germansingergirl
kianamaiart
andulkaphoto
