There's Nothing 'Gorgeous' About Socialism

townhall.com

Socialism has failed every time it has been tried on a large scale. It works only in theory, and in small, homogenous enclaves like lily-white Scandinavian nations with Protestant work ethics. Socialism fails in part because it doesn't understand fundamental human nature, but it also fails because it doesn't understand basic economics.

Contemporary fans of socialism are often wealthy, affluent, and coddled Westerners whose toughest day-to-day decision is whether they're going to drive the Mercedes or the Audi to Starbucks that morning. They'll tell us "real socialism hasn't been tried yet" and swear up and down that this time we'll get it right.

This requires that they ignore places like Cuba, East Germany, and Venezuela. The last nation went from one of the wealthiest on earth to one where at least 70 percent of the population now lives in poverty. In Cuba, the government provides monthly food rations: just seven pounds of rice, one pound of beans, a half a bottle of cooking oil, one daily bread roll (recently cut), small amounts of chicken, eggs, milk (prioritized for children), sugar, coffee, and soap/toiletries. It's estimated that these foodstuffs only provide 30 to 60 percent of a person's daily caloric needs. Leftists will look at this and think it simply means they've finally achieved equality. And some will say those are communist nations, not socialist ones. Communism and socialism are two sides of the same coin; the latter is simply a more palatable word for the former.

So when actress Amanda Seyfried chimes in, she deserves to be mocked for her blatant ignorance on the issue.

She must've gone to the Tim Walz School on socialism, because he believes something similar, once saying socialism is merely "neighborliness" and "taking care of each other."

Recommended

The rest of us see it for what it is: an oppressive ideology that has to be bolstered up by capitalist nations and enforced on the people at gunpoint. In "The Forgotten Man," Amity Shlaes notes that the Soviet Union was dependent on U.S. cash in 1927, only ten years after the revolution. And socialism has killed hundreds of millions over the years in pursuit of that socialist "utopia."

People fled places like Cuba and East Germany, at great personal risk, because socialism turns nations into unlivable hellholes. Many died trying to escape, and many had to leave behind everything for a chance to be truly free. People don't risk life and limb to escape a "gorgeous idea."

It's worth noting that Seyfried has a net worth of around $16 million. If she'd like to "take care of each other," she can start by doling out some of that, and I'll send her my address. She won't, of course, because socialism is for other people, and not the wealthy.

That's assuming, of course, that Seyfried is sufficiently connected to maintain her current social status under a socialist regime. Many online socialists believe such a system of governance will allow them to be creatives—poets, artists, screenwriters—while someone else pays their bills. I know someone who believes he'll be a Twitch streamer in a socialist United States. That's not how it works. Making a socialist nation function means everyone goes to a farm or a factory for grueling, long days of hard labor. Your free time is eaten up standing in breadlines. The fun, cushy jobs and roles go to those who are well-connected with the socialist rulers.

That's the exact opposite of a "gorgeous idea."