(Have we created a generation without an understanding of these two evils?)
Cam Blevins resides in the Tri-State area and has been a member of local broadcast media for nearly a decade. His libertarian views on social and political issues lends a refreshing perspective to many complicated issues. Free State Patriot welcomes Cam as a new contributor!
December 8, 2018
Before I dive into my recent ponderings, I want to be perfectly clear- both are horrible ideas. Communism has led to the deaths of millions of people throughout history. That is an unforgivable offense and it is a shame that the evils of Communism are no longer taught with real importance in our schools. But that is another topic entirely.
So, obviously, Communism has a very dark past. But which is worse moving forward in the 21st century? Communism or Socialism? I say Socialism, and here’s why:
First off, Socialism today is romanticized by the youth and left. It’s looked at as all the good qualities of Communism, such as sharing of wealth for the greater good. But it is viewed as dispelling all the evil qualities of Communism, such as mass murder and starvation. That “Romanization” is akin to a sweet aroma that leads to a poisonous flower. The poisonous flower being more poverty.
Now, something that’s very important to point out before we go any further is this – There have been very few, if any, actual, truly Communist nations. Many have called themselves Communist, but few have actually achieved what is described in Marx’s writings – A society without currency, that moves forward for the greater good of all citizens.
“With collective production, money capital is completely dispensed with. The society distributes labor-power and means of production between the various branches of industry. There is no reason why the producers should not receive paper tokens permitting them to withdraw an amount corresponding to their labor time from the social consumption stocks. But these tokens are not money; they do not circulate.” – ‘Capital, Volume II’ by Karl Marx.
So, from that, we can gather, that in a truly Communist society, currency has been abolished completely. In exchange for production, you receive the goods and services you need to survive. But in a Socialist society, money is still a part of the system. It is just regulated and taxed at much higher rates.
In a Socialist society, the system is still dependent upon Capitalism to sustain itself. However, Capitalism does not flourish in a Socialist society. The cost of all the goods and services for every man, woman, and child would bankrupt the Capitalist system; thereby leaving the job creators near penniless.
One cannot create jobs in Capitalism without capital to compensate your worker. And because those with higher income are being taxed at an exponentially higher rate, that leads to two outcomes:
- The rich will find a way to keep their money outside the systems in America.
- There will be no incentive to continue working for that higher wage; considering the majority of it will not be kept by the person earning it.
In short, Socialism is not an economic system. It is a parasitic system that lives off Capitalism until it is bled dry.
The one thing that Socialism does truly accomplish in the long term is eliminate the middle class. Prime example: Venezuela.
And you’ll often hear the argument that “well, they’re not doing it right. We’ll do it right!” How naive a mindset? That in all of history, no one has done it correctly, but ‘’we’’ will be the ones to accomplish its success.
Which of the two is the greater evil moving into the future?
In my opinion, Socialism. For all its gory past, Communism, in theory, would function as an economic system. Now that doesn’t preclude it from civil unrest. But as an economic system where currency no longer exists, it can work.
But Socialism, dependent upon currency and the “fair distribution” of such, will always fail.
Free State Patriot 