Thanks to our poor K-grad school educations and ill-informed chattering classes (minions in the media and many in the punditry), “socialism”, the word, flutters about with scarcely a thought or understanding. When the word is thrown out, particularly by those who are about to be pasted with it – Are you listening Kamala Harris, Elizabeth Warren, AOC, Gillibrand, Sanders? – they either deny or don’t respond. What are they denying or ignoring? Do they even know what they’re denying or ignoring? I kinda doubt it.
Our decrepit textbooks frequently malign our understanding with a definition like “government ownership of the means of production”, or some such. No, it ain’t that pat. Break it down. “Ownership” is control and the “means of production” is property. Thus, socialism is government (or “public”) control of property. The control can be in the form of outright ownership or allowing people to have title but they, essentially, don’t have much say-so in the disposition of it.
Since the commercial and industrial revolutions, our notions of property – also called assets – have expanded way beyond those common in primitive barter societies. So the control, if it is pursued, has a lot further reach.
Here’s a ringer for you: a capitalist can be a socialist. It’s simple. A guy or gal with many assets in their possession can use them to bring about “public” control of property. Not all capitalists support capitalism. Friedrich Engels, Karl Marx’s partner, was a rather interesting case in point – one of many.
Well, how were the words “capitalism” and “capitalist” coined? The words entered wide usage in the 19th century within the constellation of people and groups aligned with the Socialist International. They were then popularized by Marx and Engels in their screeds. The socialists needed a word to encapsulate the people who they hated, what Adam Smith referred to as the men of commerce.
Think of socialism, then, on a spectrum with “free markets” at the other end. In our modern lexicon, you are entering the “socialism” orbit when you blather about “single payer”, “free college”, a Green New Deal, confiscatory taxation, etc., etc. All of them involve government control of other people’s property beyond the normal concerns about health and safety. That’s where we find the Dem Party of today.
To be real, socialism comes in many shades. We could go to the militant side where “communism” sits. We could go to the nicer place with “democracy”, as in democratic socialism. In fact, they would all call themselves “democratic socialists”, even Lenin. It’s just that a communist is impatient. He or she wants it NOW!
Warren and Harris say, “Not me!” Elizabeth Warren: “I am a capitalist.” Kamala Harris: “I am not a democratic socialist.” Mmmmm.
So, are the denials of Warren and Harris, et al, legit? Not quite. If anything, they fall within the capitalists-who-support-socialism league. Do they really understand what they claim they aren’t? All evidence points to … “No”.
RogerG