What Socialism is and Isn’t, and how this Relates to the National Debt
At first, the “threat of Socialism” and the “National Debt” would seem to be two different subjects, but they are related in a sinister way. Basically, the right wing, who is always accusing the left of wanting Socialism and running up the debt, is doing a pretty good job of Socialism and running up the debt on their own.
Socialism is Nationalized Industry and guaranteed jobs, while things like Social Security and Medicare are simply “money pools” (like insurance, where you pool your money with others to balance the risk of aging, job loss, and sickness). Republicans have stooped to the level of calling things like carpools “Socialism”, when “sharing resources” enjoys a long American tradition (especially in the farm culture). It is disturbing that the National Debt is in runaway growth mode, with Republicans’ “corporate Socialism” (chiefly defense, oil and farm subsidies, Wall Street bailouts) being the real driver of debt. Although both sides now have economists that say “deficits don’t matter”, there will come a time when interest payments on the debt crowd out services. At least Democrats can claim a kind of return on this debt (SS and Medicare allow people to cope, and they are basically getting their own money back). However, running up debt subsidizing the sacred cows of the right (aging energy and defense tech, investment Ponzi schemes, shaky grain-belt products) is not planting the seeds for future growth and prosperity…it’s more like splurging for a giant party. (Reich, 2019)
It is important for the purposes of this article to first point out that “sharing of resources” is not “socialism”. At the most rudimentary level, it is neighbors helping each other out, by sharing equipment and resources they might not be able to afford on their own. For instance, Larry has a pickup and Bill (a friend and neighbor) needs to move his mother into an apartment. Larry helps Bill move using his pickup, and Bill (who is an avid gardener) gives Larry a bushel of apples. Is this Socialism or Communism? No, this is old fashioned American cooperation. Next, Larry and Bill each make a payment of $20/mo into the church collection plate. This money is pooled, to help the needy or unfortunate, and to maintain the church. Is this Socialism or Communism? No, this is more like an insurance fund, because Larry and Bill know that someday, they might be the needy or unfortunate. Why does the right wing make these accusations? Because they want to provide cover for their own subsidies, which ironically don’t help neighbors or communities. They only help a few greedy people at the top. Fred owns an oil company, invests in defense stocks and corn futures, while going to a large Evangelical church. The government (and taxpayers) help pay for Fred’s oil company to explore new oil fields, for the “good of the country”, while Fred’s oil company pollutes (which the government has to clean up at taxpayer’s expense). Never mind the fact that emerging energy technology is cleaner, safer, and doesn’t require subsidies (think wind and solar). Additionally, Fred’s defense and ag investments are doing well because the government pours money into defense and corn, whether they need it or not, or whether it is efficient or not, “for the good of the country”. In addition, Fred’s large Evangelical church has tax-free status, while making similar investments in oil, defense, and corn futures, apparently “for the good of the country”. Additionally, Fred supports tariffs on Toyotas which might force people to buy inferior Ford Pintos, in the name of “Buying American”. All the while, Fred and his friends are worried that Democrats are peddling “Socialism”, while most are simply peddling a type of neighborly risk-balancing. Most Democrats are even ok with large corporate freedoms and profits, provided they actually do something good for the Country. Though he bristles at the suggestion, Fred is the real “Socialist” threat here, and this is a double whammy as his antics threaten to break the National bank and take us all down with him and his cronies.
This is because Fred and his friends have started believing that “the deficit doesn’t matter”. He even has support for this theory among some of his weird counterparts on the left, who actually are Socialists (they actually believe in government takeover of business). They all believe that as long as the government keeps printing money, there will always be enough for a) Corporate welfare and greed on the right b) Questionable nanny-state government on the left (that goes beyond neighborly-ness). Neither of them seem to understand the laws of economic gravity, that what goes up must come down. Thus, they don’t believe that a) Interest on the debt will eventually crowd out services b) The need to aggressively sell government bonds will eventually raise interest rates c) “Crowd Out” will slow growth, with investors buying government debt instead of private ventures or technologies d) Rising debt will give us fewer options with which to combat future recessions e) Rising debt will place an unfair burden on future generations f) rising debt will increase the chances of insolvency, meaning our Nation could become a slave to the Nation(s) that hold(s) our debt or g) rising debt will cause inflation, which would put a burden on already burdened “have nots”. (Capretta, 2018)
A good example of “good national debt” was World War II, when we ran large deficits for the purposes of saving the world, putting many people to work (with benefits), and creating new technologies that would be relevant for many years to come, all of which helped us pay down this deficit. At this point we have to ask ourselves questions like “corn (oil, battleships) get big subsidies and other vegetables (renewable technologies, missile defense systems) don’t…are the subsidized items really so great that we can afford to put our country in hawk over them?” If we subsidized better food, energy, and defense, at least our country might survive to pay off all of it’s debts.
Of course, national debt apologists from both parties are already shooting down all of the potential risks of a high national debt, and why shouldn’t they? They make a living being hired by irresponsible politicians who look good spending money and being dishonest about the repercussions, plus these politicians know they will be long-gone by the time the bad-effects have come to bear. The most imminent threat, that national debt will crowd out services, cause Americans (and foreign investors) to lose faith in American government, and bring us to the brink of default (with perhaps China being willing to “buy” our debt with political concessions or the sale of national lands) is a very, very serious threat. So perhaps right-wingers should look in their gold-plated mirrors before they start spouting off about “Socialism”, and realize that the biggest threat to this country is borrowing from taxpayers and investors to bail out ill-conceived industries, while stiffing folks that simply want to fund monetary risk pools for their health, unemployment, and retirement. They should really support this on one basic sinister level…to guarantee that they in turn will become the gullible tax-payers that fuel this endless cycle of debt and foolish investment.
And shared-risk insurance pools aside, the Country IS threatened by debt linked to government strong-arming of business and individual freedom, and this would not just be Socialism, but Trump Fascism.
Like this Story? See more in Vern Scott’s new book “Survival Vanity and the Neo-Nutocracy”, available at Amazon.com
