While Crispin Sartwell drives the point home, there is only one small
problem. It is not a socialist government, but a corporate capitalist
government that produced Donald Trump.
Carl Jarvis
On 8/24/18, Richard Driscoll <llocsirdsr@xxxxxxx> wrote:
Carl/Miriam
NB: The following article appeared in the Opinion Columns of the WSJ
dated August 23, 2018. I found it to be interesting and informative.
Mr. Sartwell teaches Philosophy at Dickinson College in Carlisle, Pa.
The link to this article is included at the end of the article.
How to Argue With a Young Socialist
So you can’t stand Trump. Do you want him to control the
universities and run the hospitals?
Trump supporters argue with Trump critics in Hollywood, Aug. 18. Photo:
mark ralston/Agence France-Presse/Getty Images
770 Comments
<https://www.wsj.com/articles/how-to-argue-with-a-young-socialist-1534973784#comments_sector>
By
Crispin Sartwell
Aug. 22, 2018 5:36 p.m. ET
If you’re reading this newspaper, you’re probably not flirting with
democratic socialism. But many young Trump-resisters are, so you may
find yourself in debate with an energetic new democratic socialist,
perhaps even around the family dinner table. The
socialist-vs.-capitalist debate has a certain 1960s or 1840s flavor, and
you may want to bone up on the arguments and find some contemporary
clinchers. Here’s one: The rise of Donald Trump displays exactly why
socialism is a bad idea, in a way that a young leftist can readily
understand.
Defining “socialism” is a classic problem and one of dubious usefulness,
but start here: If the U.S. were to follow the advocates of democratic
socialism, it would involve increasing state control of the economy in
many dimensions. The welfare state would become even more pervasive and
activist. Perhaps the government would guarantee things like universal
employment at a living wage, as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has proposed.
In other words, socialism would dramatically increase the government’s
power and resources while making Americans more dependent on it for
goods and necessities: food, clothing, shelter, education, health care.
The socialist argument runs from the basic truth that all people ought
to have these things to the apparently almost trivial corollary that the
state should provide them.
Under democratic socialism, these vast powers and resources would be
overseen by elected officials. But to say the absolutely obvious, Mr.
Trump was elected president in 2016. What would it mean, you can ask
your young interlocutor, if the U.S. were a democratic socialist country
and all that power fell into his hands? What if the Trump administration
controlled the universities and ran the hospitals?
A government that feeds its citizens tells them what and whether to eat.
And it is possible that the U.S. might end up someday with a leader that
the socialists find even more abhorrent than Mr. Trump. So why, you can
ask your young friend, is he so eager to give people he may hate so much
more power over his own life?
This is one reason—one of several—that wanting the state to provide
everything for everyone is simply a terrible idea. It should be obvious
to the sort of people who are putting socialist ideas forward. Those on
the left may well believe that the U.S. is a persistently racist
country. They may believe that “mass incarceration” is an extension of
Jim Crow. By this account, a socialist transition would put an even
greater share of the nation’s output—every new welfare program or
power—under the control, at least intermittently, of evil racists. Why
would people with this view be so eager to create the powers they
believe likely to oppress them?
Back in the day, socialism was accompanied by the notion that the whole
human species was on a progressive arc, and that government was merely
the citizenry acting together. Neither of these claims was ever
plausible. Without them, the logic of socialism unravels. If the people
who wield state power are no better or more trustworthy than anyone
else, then the arc of history is liable to bend toward reaction or
fascism or oppression. The more powers placed in the hands of
government, the deeper this bend is likely to be.
Americans need to start talking about more realistic ways to provide for
each other, and other solutions or at least reforms are possible. But
right at this moment, with every Trumpian irruption, it should be clear,
above all to the young leftist, that more government power is at least
as likely to exacerbate as to ameliorate injustice.
/Mr. Sartwell teaches philosophy at Dickinson College in Carlisle, Pa./
/https://www.wsj.com/articles/how-to-argue-with-a-young-socialist-1534973784
/
/
/
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
