By Harold Pease, Ph. D
We have previously demonstrated that presidential candidate Bernie Sanders, if elected, will not be the first to introduce socialism into mainstream America. Previous presidents have done so already and it has been in our diet for most of a hundred years. Both he and opponent Hillary Clinton would make militant socialist Eugene V. Debbs, founder of the Socialist Party of America (1901) and five-time presidential candidate, look like todays conservative republican. With a vote for either Sanders or Clinton many Americans are almost running to socialism. Why?
The Athenian democracy idea profoundly changed the world that was ruled by monarchies; a king stayed in power and passed it on to posterity until removed. The “great idea” gave ever-larger portions of vote power to the masses but it had no brakes. When is society democratized enough? Should every man have an equal vote? Are they equally informed, equally intelligent, equally gifted? No, but as it expands the next level wants everything as well. Once tasted it enlarges until all have an equal participation despite their differences or ignorance.
Nearly 300 years after democracy was first introduced in Athens Aristotle (384 BC – 322 BC), wrote of democracy’s inherent weakness, that being, when everyman is allowed to rise to the level his talent and industry permit him, some will become rich and others poor. The rich will always despise the poor, and the poor will always envy the rich. When the poor obtain the same vote power as the rich under a democracy, as they always will, given their greater numbers, they will use that power to take from the rich. It may take some time for this to happen because democracy does initially encourage the profit motive, which stimulates everyone’s desire to get rich. This is good for a society because to do so they invest in society, which creates additional business, that employ more people, that develop an ever-larger middle class. The middle class, Aristotle believed, should be the ruling class as it is closer to the poor and better understands their legitimate needs and, at the same time, it has enough of the world’s goods not to covet, thus destroy, the rich class. Still, in time the less productive will grow, especially when they can attach their vote to politicians who, to get elected, promise them ever more.
Again, history has demonstrated that democracy has no brakes and, once entered into, gradually transitions into socialism, which also has no brakes. At what moment is society democratized enough, or socialized enough? As things become freer for the non-productive part of society, and they believe themselves entitled thereto, more money must be confiscated from the productive middle and upper classes and it is the rich class and entrepreneurial middle class that risk their money to create the jobs. When has a poor man ever created a job for anyone? In time these classes cannot provide the money that is demanded of them to feed and otherwise subsidize the less productive class. They are disincentivized, and then destroyed, by ever-higher taxes. All too soon the definition of rich is ever lowered until it destroys the rich class and feeds on the middle class through excessive taxation—even until all are poor. Despite the promises, the only thing that socialism gives is slavery and shared poverty.
My point again, democracies have no brakes. They do not know how to stop, and failing to stop, always degenerate into socialism. They do not have a limit. Aristotle recognized this when he wrote, ““Republics decline into democracies and democracies degenerate into despotisms.” When that understanding is lost, the force to democratize more increases as voting becomes more universal which is what democracies encourage. Shouldn’t everyone have an equal vote? Those in Athens came to believe so. Said Aristotle, “Democracy arises out of the notion that those who are equal in any respect are equal in all respects; because men are equally free, they claim to be absolutely equal” (Ibid.).
As voting becomes more universal, vote power favors the poor as they, in time, become the majority. This process is accelerated, and corrupted, when politicians link government gift giving with their election. As the poor, as a class, always tend to favor government intervention and thus financial favors from government to their benefit, and since all government money comes from the middle and upper classes through ever increasing taxes, (presently 47% of the adult population pay no federal income tax and a good share of these make up the non-productive class) they eventually destroy the productive base of society as government takes over more of the economy by confiscation or regulation. The overriding principle is, the more socialism the higher the taxes and burden on the producing class.
As government controls ever more portions of the economy, democracy transcends to socialism. Again, at what point does democracy become socialism no one can say. Obamacare alone transferred one seventh of the economy to the federal government. Sometime in this transition democracy ceases to be democracy although the term continues to be used, socialism more accurately describes the real system, hence Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez’s warning in 2009 to Fidel Castro, one a socialist the other a communist, “We have to be careful lest we become right of Obama.” It needs noting that both Clinton and Sanders are left of Barack Obama.
So why is half of America running to socialism? They first desire what is from the sweat of others. Then once given come to believe it owed them. Getting something for nothing has always been a powerful motive.