Fear of Socialism

Fear of Socialism

By Jim Miles

US fear of socialists

What is the US fear of socialism? What is it based on? It is based on the corporate desire to control the economy and politics of the masses without having those unruly masses having any say, other than a somewhat meaningless vote every four years, in how the wealth of the country is to be distributed. This can be seen with the Federalist Papers that argued against “factions” that might oppose the ideas of the propertied leaders of the country at the time. It can be seen in the many violent actions taken by political leaders and corporate leaders (generally one and the same, as today) when they called in the armed Pinkerton squads, local militias, up to the military, to squash any workers' demonstrations for better working conditions, for better wages, essentially for a better life. It was seen in the hysteria of the McCarthy era, and its fear of communist infiltrators hiding everywhere, a projection of fear that supported the excesses of the corporate, political and military leaders of the day. It can be seen in the many governments that opposed US interests in one way or another, thus incurring the wrathful label of socialists or communists, the enabling rhetoric of fear that then excused the violent invasion, infiltration, and overthrow of many truly democratic governments that had the legitimate support of the people of that country <2>.

These artificially concocted fears of socialism (without addressing the unrealistic fears of communism during the Cold War, nor how the definitions of communism or capitalism ever accurately reflect what they both really are) are inculcated into the US mindset throughout all facets of life from the educational system, through the media, and through the political system (the latter not much different from the media system). The underlying fear is from the corporate owners and their political supporters fearing that the unruly masses of people might not like what they are doing and try to put halters on their corporate activities.

The images and rhetoric of US/Canadian freedom and democracy are all very nice until they come up against the reality of invaded and occupied countries, an environment heading towards global changes that could affect our very survival, and finally, the current economic collapse that endangers many livelihoods, all based on the consumption of materials and the massive debt loads of an artificial finance capitalism that serves the underlying purpose of enriching the wealth and power of those already in control. With these three (occupations/war, environmental decline, financial collapse) all looming at the same time, the government’s response (US and their Canadian imitators) has been to support the corporations without any apparent concerns about transparency and openness that is required for other nations negotiating within the Washington consensus guidelines. It is obviously not free market capitalism as the markets are being avoided and/or controlled; nor is it socialism, as socialism, under its purest definition is that “the community as a whole should own and control the means of production, distribution, and exchange,” a concept the current bail-outs are loath to approach even though it is the taxpayers money that is being used. Your choice becomes some other “-ism” but not capitalism or socialism.

Back to being progressive.

Hmm, who would have thought, “the community as a whole….” Sounds quite progressive to me, with a lot of common sense, that the community should want universal health care, worker protections of various sorts, retirement benefits universally guaranteed and applied, an egalitarian distribution of educational and medical services, equal rights for all (in deed as well as in law), international laws that are upheld et al.

The problem of course is not the ideas, as they are – or should be – a matter of common sense for anyone with a touch of true humanitarian interests, but with the label.

http://www.politicalaffairs.net/article/articleview/7899/

:scared:
rocknation

powers want us too. TIME TO CHANGE !
peace be with you all.

but it's hard to prove it by many of his followers actions. :evilfrown:

I went to school in the 50's and 60's. Specifically, we were taught to fear the Soviet Union. Almost as an aside, it was taught that the Soviet Union was communist. But, the actual teaching was that it was not democratic. There was no economics involved, at least until high school, by which time the fear was already ingrained.

To be honest there was something to fear - lots of nuclear weapons pointed in our direction. I'm not saying, of course, that they also didn't have something to fear. There was also the matter of the "iron curtain". I had relatives there, and things were definitely not as nice for them as they were later in the USA. If you think the USA is a police state, you really need to talk to people who lived behind the iron curtain in the 50's. But, this had little to do with the economic system.

I don't know about the 30's. My father's father was a communist, at least for a time. My dad was a died in the wool Roosevelt Democrat, as was most of my family. So, I didn't quite get the level of fear instilled in me that others did.

You're absolutely correct. I, too, went to school in the 50s and 60s, and we were only taught that "communism" was bad, evil, anda threat to our way of life. But we weren't taught what communism really was, or what socialism really was.

If we even were offered an elective course in economics or politics -- anything beyond an obligatory "government" class where we learned enough about the constitution to pass a required test -- we only learned about capitalism. And if any other economic system was even discussed, it was disparaged.

Since it's much easier to get people to fear that which they don't know, keeping us all in economic ignorance has always been a goal of the corporate powers. By equating communism with socialism and then linking them both to a nuclear threat, "they" effectively brainwashed us into being good little consumers AND conveniently got us to forget who the real nuclear threat was (and is).


Tansy Gold

The "free marketeers" have been able to portray themselves as "populists". THEY are the "change agents". The "will of the people". Markets are a "natural order" and they set people free - you can hear the happy cries of the workers every time a union is busted.

Governments - ALL governments - seek to restrain. They make stupid "rules" and "regulations" that stifle the freedom and creativity of "the people".

THAT is why and how "socialism" is being demonized. To the free-marketeers - its the same as communism, the same as fascism, etc. The upper "elite" has been able to pull off the trick of being the "outcasts" and the "cool rebels". All the while raping us blind.


Read "One Market Under God" by Thomas Frank. About the dot-bomb erea - but the insight applies today.