“What's wrong with a little Socialism?”

Yesterday, I met my liberal Democrat friend for our weekly breakfast, a tradition we have continued for many years. We talk family, friends, sports and, yes, even politics. Nothing has changed for decades, except he now has fruit and bran muffins; I have stuck with artery clogging fried eggs, up, toast (not whole wheat), high cholesterol breakfast meats and potatoes. He is lean and trim, and has had bypass surgery, I am overweight and disgustingly healthy. Life is not fair.

“So,” he said, chomping a dry muffin. “you must be impressed with the way that Obama has hit the ground running.” He flashed a wide grin, bits of muffin clinging on his lips, teeth and chin.

I nearly choked on a forkful of gooey egg, greasy bacon and starchy potato. “Impressed,” I said, swallowing a heart stopping load of food. “Impressed does not begin to describe my feelings.” I took a draught of my regular coffee, laden with cream and sugar.

My friend looked perplexed, and said, as he took a sip of his herb tea and honey, “What does that mean?”
I told him how appalled I am at the turn this country has taken since Obama's inauguration on January 20, just 4 weeks ago. As he looked on, shocked to discover that there was someone who was not riding a wave of euphoria. His reading of the New York Times and viewing of MSNBC and CNN lead him to believe that the entire country is on a post-inauguration high.

“It means,” I said, “that I am saddened and concerned to see our country make a 180 and head down the road of socialism.”

“So,” he said, “what's wrong with a little socialism? Capitalism has not done so well lately.”
My friend's sentiment is not unlike what many citizens and politicians are saying, or implying lately, sometimes even from the right. In normal times, just saying, “socialism” would be enough to end a political argument. But these are clearly not normal times, so let's take a stab at answering the question directly.

Simply put, socialism is a system where citizens are promised results, not just opportunity. Our Constitution promises the “pursuit of happiness,” but does not guarantee that any particular citizen will attain anything, but will not be restricted from pursuing any legal goal. Socialism preaches that every citizen has the right to certain entitlements, and the state endeavors to provide them to its citizens. Socialists believe that under capitalism, too much wealth becomes concentrated in the hands of too few, who then exploit the less privileged. Socialists advocate a more even distribution of wealth and power, “spreading it around,” to quote a recent Obama phrase.

Under the socialist ideal, effort is rewarded, regardless of results, and accumulation of wealth by a few is prevented, so that more may enjoy the benefits of what society has to offer. The sad fact is that often even a minimal effort is not required, and everyone gets entitlements, deserved or not.

So, what is wrong with wanting to make sure that all citizens are provided for, and that more can have a better lifestyle by taking from the overabundance of the privileged few?

The problem is that to implement socialism, basic freedoms have to be curtailed or abolished. For starters, socialism is built on government ownership or very tight control of industry and commerce. This means, obviously, that citizens' rights to freely pursue business opportunities are severely limited by the government. Property rights must also be greatly curtailed, and the personal accumulation of wealth abolished. The government becomes the arbitrator of who succeeds, and to what extent.

There are those, notably liberal Democrats, who argue that government can provide this oversight and regulation without impinging on freedom, and without autocratic governance. Unfortunately, there is not a single historical example where a democratic society and socialistic principles have co-existed.

So, to the point, what is wrong with “a little socialism?” Nothing, if you don't care about freedom and liberty.

George W. Bush - Last President of the United States of America

It was a good run – 216 years, 43 Presidents, 111 Congresses. The United States of America rose from a far-flung colony of Imperial Britain to the last superpower left. We won wars, hot and cold, with Spain, Barberry, Russia, Germany, Japan, Italy, Mexico, numerous Indian tribes and other, lesser powers over the years. No country ever bore more faithful allegiance to freedom and liberty as did the USA. Although its tenure did not match the run of other long running nations, like the Roman Empire, the Chinese dynasties or Ancient Egypt, no country ever freed more people, or brought more peace or greater prosperity than did the brain child of the Founding Fathers.

But, now, sadly, it may be gone.

Historians will argue for years, centuries, perhaps, about what caused the demise, but they will mark the event with the cover of Newsweek magazine for February 16, 2009. The cover showed a handshake symbol, one hand red, one hand blue, with the headline shouting, “WE ARE ALL SOCIALISTS NOW.” The article celebrates the event, and even declares that the USA is now “French.”

I wonder if this means we will now ban the use of words other than English in commerce as does France with French. Maybe we can also look forward to riots, universal unions, anti-business laws, government mandated 35 hour work weeks, month long vacations, curbs on freedom of speech, and unfettered immigration. Oh, I guess we have that last part already.

Unfortunately, the November elections heavily favored those who want to end the system of capitalism spawned by the Founders. It is doubtful that they will change the name of our country, but everything they founded, even the national symbols are at risk. There has been a desire for changes in the National Anthem (too militant), the National Bird (too violent) and even the name (States have no rights).

There are those of you who read this that will say I am being rhetorical and overly alarmist, let me explain. The Founding Fathers understood that to achieve the benefits of a free market economy, basic freedoms had to be guaranteed. (These freedoms were not granted, but recognized as coming directly from the Creator.) First to be elicited were life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. (Not a guarantee of happiness, just the right to pursue it as you wish.) Next, came the enumerated rights in the first ten Amendments to the Constitution, known as the Bill of Rights.

Without unfettered access to these basic freedoms, the promise of America can not be fulfilled. Now, to achieve socialism, some, or all of these freedoms have to be severely curtailed, or outright eliminated. The unwashed masses are persuaded to give up these God-given, Constitutionally guaranteed freedoms for a social safety net, "justice" and promises of a better life. Whether these promises are realized or not, is up for grabs, because once the freedoms are ceded, they cannot be peaceably restored. The history of socialism is a series of failures, with not a single success story.

We are at a tipping point. If the American public falls for the empty promise of socialism, the Great American Experiment will be over, and the country known as the United States of America will cease to exist.

Then, George W. Bush will have been the last President of the USA.