Wherever you look, socialism is sexy again. In the UK this week, Jeremy Corbyn is seeking election as the nation’s Prime Minister on a proudly socialist platform.
In the USA, socialist Bernie Sanders is making a second run for President, and he has the endorsement of “the Squad”—a group of socialist Congresswomen which includes the famous firebrand freshman AOC.
You may not have noticed yet, but the climate strikes taking place the world over also have strong socialist undercurrents.
If the word socialism is new to you, it’s basically the idea that society’s wealth should be redistributed and shared by everyone. (Be sure to do your own research to fill out this definition).
“Socialism is now wildly popular in the mainstream.”
Socialism arose in the 19th century as a reaction to capitalism—our western economic system that is built on the idea of free trade, private ownership and entrepreneurship.
Both capitalism and socialism have their pros and cons. No system can generate wealth like capitalism can. But unrestrained, capitalism can lead to inequality and injustice.
Socialism, on the other hand, seeks to address these problems of inequality and injustice. But in order to achieve this effectively, socialist states require more and more power.
“Socialism is the idea that society’s wealth should be redistributed and shared by everyone.”
History has shown that socialism always moves towards totalitarianism, corruption, and poverty. The Soviet Union is the most notorious example of this—and Venezuela the most recent.
For all of these reasons, modern western nations have wisely decided to remain capitalist, albeit with a range of moderate socialist tweaks.
My country of Australia, for example, has a capitalist economy. But we have a universal healthcare system called Medicare, for which I’m very grateful. I have also benefitted from an interest-free student loan provided by our government, and a modest student income during the years I was at university.
“Socialism is seductive.”
In simple terms, the last hundred years of western politics has been a game of tug-of-war between those who want less of these “socialist tweaks” (conservatives, on the right) and those who want more (progressives, on the left). This is, and always will be, an important debate to have.
But something has started to shift in the last few years. Until recently, political parties that were openly socialist—and cheering for the overthrow of capitalism—remained on the fringe.
But socialism is now wildly popular in the mainstream. In a recent poll for example, 53% of millennials said they view socialism favourably. Given socialism’s diabolical track record, this should concern all of us.
Socialism is seductive. It has gained in popularity, but for all the wrong reasons. Here are six of them.
1. Socialism strokes our ego
As humans, we’re drawn to ideas that tell us what we want to hear about ourselves. There is a certain compliment that socialism pays us, which helps explain why it is so attractive—especially to young people.
The compliment is this: we humans are inherently good. The idea that we are basically good and ultimately perfectible is a fixed assumption underlying the socialist worldview.
Socialism assumes that the reason people don’t work is because they can’t—because of some impossible setback or systemic injustice.
While these are genuine reasons that some people don’t work, there is also the reality of human laziness and entitlement. Socialism fails to account for these vices. It is blind to the inherent selfishness of humanity. And this is a dangerous mistake to make.
“We’re drawn to ideas that tell us what we want to hear about ourselves.”
The reality is that if our collective wealth is redistributed—if the fruit of my labour is given to people who haven’t worked for it—then a big motivation for me to hold down a job or climb the career ladder is taken away.
Capitalism has worked for hundreds of years precisely because it accounts for this. Under the capitalist system, I am motivated to work because I will receive the reward that I deserve for my labour.
This system isn’t perfect, and as we’ve discovered, it needs checks and balances, like collective bargaining. But the capitalist systems we live under function so well because they are realistic: they account for both human vice and human virtue.
Socialism assumes only that humans are good. This is a nice compliment, and there is an attraction to this optimism. But it’s a deeply unstable belief on which to to build a society.
2. Socialism asks little and promises much
Socialism is often promoted by the well-educated and powerful. But it seeks its broad supporter base among those who feel disenfranchised.
I am a millennial. My generation came of age during the Great Recession, the global financial crisis that made us fear for our futures. We are the generation that, through no real fault of our own, are largely locked out of the real estate market. For better or worse, much later into life than previous generations, we have remained financially dependent on our parents.
Of course these are generalisations, but all of these factors make millennials far more attracted to socialism.
“Socialism is the politics of envy.”
Like our parents’ pocketbook, socialism seems to guarantee us ongoing prosperity while hiding the cost from us. It appeals to our fears and our financial dependence—our sense that we may never make it on our own. Socialism is a system that asks little of us and promises much.
In blunter terms, socialism is the politics of envy. It secretly appeals to our laziness and our sense of entitlement.
But history shows that while socialism is good at redistributing wealth, it has never been good at producing wealth. As Margaret Thatcher famously said, “The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money.”
3. Socialism spreads when history is forgotten
Today, we have the world’s knowledge quite literally at our fingertips. Through our smartphones alone, we can access all the breaking news from around the planet, and the wisdom of every civilisation.
We are the most educated people in history. It’s ironic then that we are so ignorant of history.
I went to school for thirteen years, but during all that time I learnt nothing of the 20 million people killed under Russia’s socialist republic. Or the 60 million lives that socialism claimed in China. Or the millions more who fell victim to socialist projects in lands as diverse as Vietnam, Romania, and Cuba.
In fact, estimates of the 20th century’s Socialist/Communist body count range from 100–150 million.
“There is a pressing need for us to overcome our historical amnesia.”
It is chilling to consider that socialism thrived in these places precisely because history was erased by their governments, or forgotten by their people.
If we are serious about preserving our liberty for generations to come, we would do well to heed the words of Edmund Burke, who said, “Those who don’t know history are doomed to repeat it.”
There is a pressing need for us to overcome our historical amnesia. This is a personal responsibility for each of us. But it also highlights the need for reformation in our institutions.
“Those who don’t know history are doomed to repeat it.”—Edmund Burke
Identity politics has overrun too many of our schools, universities and media outlets. It stokes the rage of rival disenfranchised groups, while ignoring the historic dangers in doing so.
Today’s downtrodden need a voice, to be sure. But their voice must be balanced with the cries of those from history who were crushed under the iron first of socialist empires.
Until then, socialism will retain its seductive allure.
4. Socialism appeals to the soft-hearted
Research shows that those who lean right tend to place more value on personal responsibility, while those who lean left are more prone to empathy.
Indeed, because of socialism’s emphasis on justice and practical aid for the poor and marginalised, a growing number of young Christians are drawn to socialism. I have often heard Christians make the case for socialism based on Acts 2:44-45.
“All the believers met together in one place and shared everything they had. They sold their property and possessions and shared the money with those in need.”
“A growing number of young Christians are drawn to socialism.”
I don’t doubt for a second the sincerity of believers who see parallels between socialism and Christian concern for “the least of these”.
But in this parallel is a glaring omission. The early church wasn’t forming a government—at most, they were arranging a “commune”. In other words, it was a contract that the faithful entered into voluntarily.
Socialism, by contrast, is a political system that people are born into and cannot escape unless they emigrate. (And it is noteworthy that while people often try to flee socialist governments, the most desirable destinations for refugees seem to be capitalist countries).
“Socialism is a pale substitute for compassion.”
No matter who you are—giver or recipient, religious or otherwise—compassion and generosity are always good for societies.
But compassion and generosity are, by their very definition, voluntary. The moment that large-scale “kindness” is enforced by government redistribution programs, it is at best high taxes. At worst, it’s extortion.
Socialism seems compassionate, but in truth it is a pale substitute for compassion. Far better is a robust democracy where the typically progressive value of empathy is driven (and balanced) by the typically conservative value of personal responsibility.
5. Socialism is seen as above critique
To summarise so far, socialism tells us what we want to hear about ourselves; it requires little from us while promising the world; and it is uniquely depicted as the politics of compassion.
For all of these reasons, in the popular progressive imagination, there is almost no such thing as too much socialism. The more of it we have, the better.
Obviously, not all progressives believe this. But it’s certainly the dominant narrative in the mainstream media. Whether it’s expanded healthcare programs or open borders or a bigger welfare net or free university education, it’s almost as though the sky’s the limit.
“In the popular progressive imagination, there is almost no such thing as too much socialism.”
Let’s have a conversation about each of these. But let’s balance it with the reality that the money has to come from somewhere. Inevitably, it won’t just be the rich who foot the ever-growing bill, but the middle class too.
Let’s also keep in view the fact that government services can breed generational dependence that ends up hurting the very communities they are seeking to help. Self-reliance—whatever that looks like—is important not just for material needs, but for people’s sense of dignity and purpose.
6. Socialism provides meaning in a post-Christian world
We all need something to live for. Though not all westerners through history were Christians, Christianity provided us with a collective sense of ultimate meaning and purpose.
In the West, as we become increasingly post-Christian, we are experiencing a vacuum of meaning. Many ideologies have rushed into the void, and undoubtedly one of those is socialism: the dogma that the government can solve all of our problems.
In the name of a thousand different causes, people now give their energies to this dogma with religious fanaticism.
“We all need something to live for.”
And as misdirected as this is, it makes sense. In our subconscious, we know that something should rule over us. The closest substitute that we humans have so far found for God is the state.
It is no coincidence that socialism and atheism have historically had a strong connection. The bigger a government gets, the more it tends to act like God.
Socialist states end up replacing God by seeking to provide everything, protect us from everything, and police everything. But as Thomas Jefferson warned, “A government big enough to give you everything you want is strong enough to take everything you have.”
“The closest substitute that we humans have so far found for God is the state.”
The founding fathers of western nations like America understood this in ways we have forgotten. Jefferson also warned that, “The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield, and government to gain ground.”
Today, people are quick to put Christians in their place and tell them to keep their religion out of politics. But this would have been news to our forebears. Religion is what helped them keep a healthy perspective on politics.
William Penn wrote that, “Those people who will not be governed by God will be ruled by tyrants.” Patrick Henry’s warning was even more chilling: “It is when people forget God that tyrants forge their chains.”
“Religion is what helped our forebears keep a healthy perspective on politics.”
I don’t know about you, but I’ll take God over totalitarianism any day of the week.
Let’s keep talking about the role government should play in our lives; about the tweaks needed under capitalism to root out injustice. But please, can we steer clear of socialism?
Social media is now actively suppressing conservative content. Make sure you see my posts by scrolling to the bottom of this page and subscribing to my blog.
9 thoughts on “Six Reasons Socialism is Sexy Again—But Shouldn’t Be”
I find your blog incredibly helpful Kurt. You seem to be extremely well-read and a deep thinker, and I appreciate the logical clarity with which you present your arguments. Thank you for drawing our attention to matters that are gravely important. I tend to be a passive, ‘go-with-the-flow’ type of person, but your blogs wake me up to the urgency of staying abreast with current (and historical) global politics and social trends; and the need to take responsibility and action – not just ‘go with the flow’. Your blog articles fire me up inside and remind me that I need to fight for values that are important to me … otherwise we risk losing the life that many of us (in Australia) take for granted.
Thank you so much! Your words were super encouraging – you’ve summarised in a paragraph the very reason I write this blog!
I have accidentally unsubscribed from Cross + Culture and would like to be reinstated please.I have tried completung the Recovery Form but I do not have a record of the identification codes required.Would you advise if you can help me please?Kind Regards, ShirleySent from Samsung tablet.
Hi Shirley, sorry to hear about that! I’m not an expert on this, but if you go to my latest post (https://kurtmahlburg.blog/2019/12/11/six-reasons-socialism-is-sexy-again-but-shouldnt-be/), scroll to the bottom and enter your email address, it should work 🙂
Hi Kurt. Our current capitalist system needs far more than “tweaks” to root out injustice. I feel you’ve greatly downplayed the tremendous extent capitalism has failed our society, the corruption that exists and how our current government has weakened democracy.
A few points that are a glaring indictment of our current system:
• One third of large Australian companies pay no tax.
• Rising inequality, the mega rich, with no material use for more wealth are using their money to make more money while the poor are left behind. This is getting worse and worse.
• Big business allowed to pursue profit with no thought to environmental impact – later generations will need to pay the cost of rectifying the damage caused
• Political donors and Murdoch media have far too much influence.
If you think socialism threatens democracy, have a look at our own system which has just been downgraded from open to narrowed thanks to our current government intimidating the ABC through raids and cracking down on peaceful protests and whistleblowers. Much more than tweaks are needed. Jesus was for the poor, not the elite.
There might be injustice perpetrated in the capitalist system, but those were committed by individuals, NOT the system itself, isn’t it?
On the other hand, socialism certainly has succeeded in bringing equality to people — equality of poverty and miseries. With Socialism, the problems were caused by the system itself, NOT by individuals. Socialism won’t solve our problems of injustice, because it would create more injustice.
With capitalism, there is hope for the poor; on the other hand, with socialism there is not much hope for the poor, everyone would be poor, equally poor. If you have doubt about this, please look at history — Soviet Union, communist China, North Korea, Vietnam, Cuba, and recently Venezuela, etc.
By the way, who caused so much poverty in capitalist societies?? As a matter of fact, divorce and pornography are big factors. Who brought divorce and pornography to our society?
My post was more condemning capitalism, rather than advocating for socialism. I have no concrete views on what our system should look like but would suggest some kind of move in the democratic socialist direction would be a huge improvement. I’m pretty sure the countries you’ve listed through history that have been “socialist” fall more in the communism/dictatorship field. A more modern example would be the democratic socialist leanings of the scandinavian countries which rate the highest in the world in wellness. As a Christian, happiness and wellness is something to aspire to. The meaning of life is kind of pointless if your only goal is to achieve as much material wealth for yourself as possible.
I feel saying capitalism injustice is caused by individuals whereas socialism injustice is caused by the system is a bit of a stretch. I work for a large international company that made the decision to outsource basic admin work overseas. Upper management obviously aren’t bad people individually, but the decision to move Australian jobs overseas to improve the company’s bottom line is a consequence of a large corporation being influenced by a system which prioritizes profits to shareholders (capitalism).
Any examples of how divorce and pornography have lead to poverty? I would suggest the dot points I’ve listed in my first point are much bigger factors.
It is a good article, and the focus on the broader definition of socialism is justified; people do need to know the great misery which eventuated under totalitarian systems cloaked as socialism.
The strict ‘book’ definition of socialism is that ALL means of production are owned and administered by the community. And we know how badly that can turn out.
Capitalism has provided us with huge advances and great innovations, but, as this is taken to its extreme, and the checks and restraints are scaled back, then huge inequalities arise as big business has every advantage; unlimited credit, unlimited access the law, exclusive access to politicians, very advantageassu ac regimes due to the abiltiy to offshore manufactureing and financial flows, and culminate in provied the ability
It is a good article, and the focus on the broader definition of socialism is justified; people do need to know the great misery which eventuated under totalitarian systems cloaked as socialism.
The strict ‘book’ definition of socialism is that ALL means of production are owned and administered by the community. And we know how badly that can turn out. But, unfettered capitalism can be worse.
Capitalism has provided us with huge advances and great innovations, but, as this is taken to its extreme, and the checks and restraints are scaled back, then huge inequalities arise as big business has every advantage; unlimited credit, unlimited access the law, exclusive access to politicians, very advantageous tax regimes due to the ability to offshore manufacturing and financial flows, and culminate in allowing them to absorb or eliminate all competition. The cry for less regulation is a red herring, as big business copes with it far better than small business, and in any event, realizes that the whole capitalist system only functions due to a myriad of laws and regulations covering everything from property ownership to financial transactions, and everything in between.
There needs to be a much greater focus on the middle ground, with a capitalist system supporting social programs such as the medicare and educational systems which you discuss favourably above. You do mention that checks and balances are required, but without touching on what those may be. The great inequalities arising now, especially in the USA, show the need for stringent anti-trust laws to prevent the great corporations from dominating and crushing all competition as they now do, and the need for stringent taxation laws to capture a fair share of profit squeezed out of the population and currently shunted off to overseas tax havens. Collective bargaining is a necessity, but that comes with the proviso that mafia/extortion style unions must be contained by very targeted laws.
There needs to be educational systems and research and extension systems run by the state; these don’t have to be the most efficient structures in the world, as part of that system is to redistribute wealth and population to all the far flung reaches of the land. Similarly local councils and their maintenance and construction teams should be increased in number and funded to achieve the same ends. The point is, people filling those roles and paid from tax revenue spend ALL their money in their communities, where small and medium businesses will then rise and where money is circulated and taxed again and again. There is no cost to the nation at all, only benefits.
These things are being eliminated by both sides of politics in Australia; the Liberals in a misguided belief that increased efficiency is good and is automatic when taken over by big business, and by Labor with the cynical knowledge that there are few left wing voters in rural areas.
Capitalism has and will continue to bring great advances in technology, but it can’t be allowed to do so at the expense of a great cohort of the population being left behind, when the solutions are simple when viewed without blinkered extreme ideology.
[…] Pawlowski grew up in Poland under communism. His grandparents lived under the Nazis. “My family escaped the communists in Poland and first […]