No Such Thing as “Democratic Socialism”

© 2018 Steve Feinstein. All rights reserved.

The new darling of the Democratic Party and the liberal mainstream media is Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the bright-eyed, 20-something upstart who upended long-time House member Joe Crowley in a New York state Democratic primary a few weeks ago. In their breathless, frenzied rush to anoint Ocasio-Cortez as the next coming of the Savior of the Nation, liberals across the land have wholeheartedly embraced her call for “Democratic Socialism.”

Ignoring the fact that Bernie Sanders espoused essentially the exact same things in the last presidential campaign but was unceremoniously and dishonestly pushed aside by the Democratic Party in favor of Hillary Clinton, what exactly is this “Democratic Socialism” that seems to have everyone on that side of the fence so atwitter these days?

What Democrats think it is sounds good: Income equality, a fair living wage for everyone, plentiful employment opportunities, quality healthcare coverage for all, affordable college education for all who want it, easy access to affordable, quality housing, and a tax system where the so-called rich pay their “fair share.”

While they’re at it, the Ocasio-Cortez’s of the world would also abolish ICE while ending most immigration restrictions, end what they see as our destructive international interventionism and put a stop to Israel’s wholly unjustified occupation and oppression of Palestine. What these last three have to do with either “Democracy” or “Socialism” is unclear, but there it is anyway.

Implicit in the entire discussion of their prized new order is that everything about the American economy, way of life and culture that is to their liking would remain securely in place, unaffected by the transition to Democratic Socialism. That, of course, is preposterous. The aspects of daily American life that people like and take for granted—plentiful food availability at well-stocked supermarkets, instant access to news, sports and music, the ability to get product information, make purchases and have them delivered the next day, cheap and plentiful fuel availability, an uncountable variety of non-essential consumer goods, from toys to fashion clothing to jewelry to entertainment electronics and their associated services, and millions of other items—are all made possible by the capitalistic/profit-oriented structure of our economic system. If the private business profit incentive is removed, as is the case in a socialist economy, the underlying competitive impetus for providing those goods and services disappears. It’s a zero-sum game: the more “socialism” that is introduced into the economy, the less efficient that economy becomes, because lessened private competition results in fewer choices and a diminishing incentive to increase efficiency or reduce costs.

Proponents of so-called Democratic Socialism never actually explain where the money needed to pay for all the largess will come from. There is a limit to how much simply taxing the rich will produce. Taxes on services and sales transactions would need to be raised to a stifling degree, with a commensurate negative effect on economic activity.

Europe’s supposed nirvana of universal healthcare is, in reality, a boondoggle of smoke and mirrors, where the average person has limited access to what we would consider routine medical care, at a level far lower than the average American could ever imagine. In Italy, for example, patients usually bring their own metal eating utensils and towels with them, since those are often not provided. Toilet paper is often scarce in the hospital as well. For childbirth, expectant mothers usually bring her own topical medicines, sanitary products and newborn diapers. Visitors are not asked to leave by 8:00 PM as is customary in U.S. hospitals. On the contrary, patients are advised to have a visitor stay overnight with them, because nurse staffing levels are far lower, as a matter of normal course. Bedding is not provided for overnight visitors, however.

Patients do have access to doctors and medical care via the national health system, but non-critical conditions and injuries receive lower priority and delayed attention. If a patient desires American-style “on-demand” care, they must simply pay for it out-of-pocket, an option not possible for all but the wealthiest citizens.

I know this first-hand, from an American family member living there for fourteen years and having had three children in Italy. She is fortunate enough to live in a high-income household, well above the European norm. They get around the limitations of EU-styled universal healthcare by being able to pay for any extra care they need. But that access is simply not available to the average Italian, heavily-taxed $8.00/gallon gasoline notwithstanding.

Let’s look at one other fantastical promise of Democratic Socialism: affordable college for anyone who wants it. The government can’t make college “affordable.” When the government artificially corrupts the education marketplace by injecting billions of dollars into the mix in the form of aid, scholarships, stipends and the like, they don’t reduce the ultimate cost of college. They increase it. Secure in the knowledge that a very significant portion of their students get artificially low-rate loans and generous grants/financial aid, the colleges themselves simply raise their tuition, salaries and fees—at a rate far in excess of inflation—confident that the Government will be handing out money to the students so they can pay for a significant portion of their college expenses.

What’s needed in the education marketplace is less government involvement, not more. Government-provided funds distort and obscure the real cost of education. College pricing is higher, not lower, because of government money. Remove the artificial effect of the Government’s likely one-third or more share of the $70,000 cost at Boston University and virtually no one would be able to go there. If Government-subsidized financial assistance was removed from the equation, then colleges would be forced to compete with each other in the open market for their “customers” hard-earned money. College costs would go down and the services and value they offered would go up, as the free market imposed its ruthless, unapologetic competitive lessons on the various college “brands.”

Capitalism is the best answer for raising the standard of living and delivering greater opportunities to more people. The more government is involved—funded by higher and higher taxation—the more 6-month waits we have at VA hospitals, the more $70k tuitions we have at colleges and the more $50 hammers we have being purchased by the Pentagon. Capitalism is far from perfect and not everyone benefits to the same degree—but it’s fundamentally superior to everything else. It’s kind of like what Churchill said about democracy: “Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others.”

“Democratic Socialism,” as envisioned by its proponents, doesn’t exist. Not in the real world. It’s just another pipe-dream fantasy with which hucksters like Ocasio-Cortez hope to fool unsuspecting, uninformed, entitlement-minded voters. Or worse yet, themselves.



  • William Carr

    Democratic Socialism is an oxymoron

  • David Coffey

    Capitalism with morality is free enterprise with responsibility. This is what we need, or we will never get the blessing that we need to get in our businesses and personal finances. Zero tariffs and zero protectionism of goods and services in this nation would be best, no choosing to protect some goods and not others. This is neither fair nor is it moral.

    Our handling of money needs to be the with utmost Virtue to see that no one gets cheated. Now, we will see the economy boom greater than ever when everyone is being treated fairly. Equality of Opportunity and great giving to those needy who are around us. Teaching a man how to fish or hunt that he may have food for himself and his household.

    One of the tenets of free enterprise is negotiation. No price is fixed. Sellers of products may begin with a price for a product, but everything is negotiable. The President has taught this to us well, and we need to continue the practice among ourselves. This way, no one would be left out.

    I have learned another Principle from my Father also: it would be best to rotate our crops so our soil may be naturally enriched by letting a seventh of the farm lay fallow for a year, that the soil may rest and recuperate, and this practice could be continued year after year. I have learned a lot from Adam Smith, and even though he did use the examples of France and Britain a lot, his favor was for the work of the “unseen hand” to have the pre-eminence among the people, not the market, nor the government, but the God and Father of us all.

    I desire to see the Principles he laid out in his first work plus allowing the land to rest. We would find that there would be plenty of food for everyone in the nation and around the world, because God would begin to bless the nation and the land for our Obedience to Him as pertains to the health of the land. However, let us at least attempt to run our businesses with a high degree of morality.

    In Smith’s first work: The Theory of Moral Sentiments, he presents the revelation from God on how to Love one another and have compassion for self and others. The short definition of the Law of Cosmos that he continued to present in An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations is “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you” and “God is not mocked, for whatever you sow, that shall you absolutely reap also.” Would not this be tremendous. This Law of the Cosmos would be the bulwark and the basis of our great economic upturn.

    This will not continue if we do not go all the way with the revelation of Adam Smith. How many have read his first work and mastered it: The Theory of Moral Sentiments, which was the foundation for his second: An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. How can we ever understand the second without first understanding and mastering the first work.

    I would like to see us back under the bi-metal standard: gold and silver, as we were during the first 83 years or so of our representative republican form of government. We need to get back on a solid footing with our finances as a nation, and this would be the time to do this. Abraham Lincoln angered the Nephilim of Europe when he refused to take the money of the financiers who were selling their nations down the drain. The President went to a standard of scrip which was to discontinue after the Civil War, but, he was murdered before he got it done, and, therefore, the nation never did get back on the bi-metal standard.

    European financiers were crying that it was not fair to have both metals as the basis for valuing our money. The Congress decided to allow Europe to have the silver and we keep the gold. This was a very bad decision because, shortly after the agreement was made, the United States began to have some of the deepest depressions we had ever had which is why the moneyed interests in this nation began to run the markets like the Europeans ran theirs, and their markets were destroyed by carnality, greed, and hubris which destroyed the wealth of Africa also. The Rothschilds, Cecil Rhodes, the Morgans, J. P. Morgan, Jr. came to this nation and set up the markets the same way Europe did, and the Right thing was never done. Some of the wealthy of Prussia and the Austria-Hungary Empire began to use capitalism the way we do now. The Progressives in Europe, who caused destruction wherever they went, were a branch of the Iluminati, a group of elite business leaders, educators, economists, philosophers, politicians, scientists, psychologists, psychiatrists, theologians, and government controllers, formed by Adam Weishopt, who were Nephilim all, not that much different from the “swamp” in Washington, D.C. and throughout the nation and the world today, which I call the “sewer” because a swamp has some ecological benefit to Mankind whereas a sewer stinks only. An American, Robert Owen, took his ideas to Europe with him when they were not well accepted in this nation, informed the European elite that if they did not treat everyone in the British Empire and in all of the empires of Europe as equal Citizens, they would have trouble on their hands. Cecil Rhodes went and destroyed the wealth of the people of Africa and sold their mines to Europeans for their greedy purposes.

    We must not go down that road, but with humility and Thanksgiving for God’s gift of this republic, we need to treat our fellow Citizens as first class Citizens. We need to allow the FED to die a quick death, that it does not manipulate the money supply, or we could allow that group be a keeper of the nations wealth, for distribution as Congress directs that it is needed.

    There is no reason why each individual who is able can have the same Opportunity to create wealth and give a good portion of it to people who cannot take care of themselves. This would not be forced giving mandated by the government through heavy taxation, but a willingness to share our wealth among ourselves out of Love, not force of Law.

    Maybe Congress would not mind taking back its responsibility to value our currency, the gold and the silver, every year as they used to, along with the other weights and measures that need to be noted every year.

    As you can tell, I have not been idle in my Heart and mind, and I would like to see Adam Smith’s full revelation come to pass in this nation, as Above; so below. God has blessed this nation so richly that it would be a shame to turn the nation over to the Watchers and their God-less creation and the Nephilim and their mechanized hewn-man.

    Think about this anyway, and if there is a way that we can see this through, everyone will be blessed from the least to the greatest of us. God bless you! WISDOM!

    I AM Faith-fully David: beloved; Henry: head, leader; Coffey: of the victorious ones. Always Victory!