Episode 14 Show Notes- Destroying the Myth of Democratic Socialism

 

Episode Description

Professor Giordano destroys the myth of democratic socialism. As the political concept of democratic socialism grows more popular, its time people understand why democracy, liberty, and freedom are not compatible with socialism. The advocacy news media fails to force those who advocate for democratic socialism to define what it really is. It’s time to separate fantasy from reality and educate the masses on the concept of socialism. For show notes and sourcing, please visit The PAS Report website.

Intro

Welcome everyone to another episode of The PAS Report Weekly Roundup Podcast. This is your host Nick Giordano.

Last week I highlighted the attempt by some to completely remake America into a country we would not recognize. I explained how there are those who want to abolish the Electoral College for nothing more than power and control. This week, I will continue to highlight those trying to undo America and our institutions by focusing on the idea of democratic socialism.

The advocacy news media has failed us once again. With all these high-profile politicians calling for democratic socialism, the media has failed to press these people to clearly define what democratic socialism really means. Here, at The PAS Report, we will continue to explore issues that impact your life and explain things in-depth so that you can make an informed decision. This week is no different.

As always, if you want to see the show notes or the sourcing of my material, go to thepasreport.com.

Why are people viewing socialism more favorably?

Support for the idea of socialism has been growing in the United States for the last several years. Poll after poll has shown Americans are more accepting of socialism.

According to a Harris Poll, 61% of Americans aged between 18 to 24 have a positive view of socialism, and 55% of women between the ages of 18-54 would rather live in a socialist country. (Axios)

In a Pew Research poll, 65% of Democrats have a somewhat positive to very positive view on socialism. Regardless of political party, 50% of those 18-29 view socialism in a positive light and 47% of those between the ages 30-49 view socialism in a positive light. (Pew Research)

In a Gallup poll, 43% of Americans believe socialism is a good thing regardless of age. In 1942, only 25% of Americans viewed socialism as a bad thing for the country. (Gallup)

So, what’s going on here? Why are more and more Americans gravitating towards this concept of socialism?

Lying politicians and the advocacy news media

One of the reasons that more people are gravitating toward the concept of socialism is because the politicians are lying, and the advocacy news media fails to call them out and report about socialism. Another reason is that most don’t know what socialism is.

First, let’s explore the politicians and the advocacy media. People like Senator Bernie Sanders, Congresswomen Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, and others decided they are going to call it democratic socialism as opposed to just socialism.

When asked what they mean by democratic socialism, they will usually respond, pointing to the Scandinavian countries like Denmark, Norway, and Sweden. This is the first lie. Denmark, Norway, and Sweden’s economy are based on free-market capitalism. These are not socialist countries as they want you to believe.

A 2019 index of economic freedom conducted by the Heritage Foundation ranked all three countries in the top 30 of the freest markets in the world. Denmark ranks 14^th, Sweden ranks 19^th, and Norway ranks 26^th. (Heritage Foundation) This is a conservative thinktank that looks to highlight countries moving towards socialism and uses strict criteria when developing the index.

To say that these are socialist countries is a flat out lie. These are high tax social welfare countries. They offer major social welfare programs to their people. In return, people pay heavy tax-burdens. These countries invest little in their militaries which allows them to afford these generous programs. The advocacy news media should be challenging any politician or person who says that these countries are democratic socialist countries.

The lie of the compatibility of democratic principles and socialism

Another flat out lie is that there is such a thing of democratic socialism. The idea that democratic principles and socialism can coexist is a myth. Democracy signifies that power is vested in the people. That people can exercise power directly or indirectly through the system.

Socialism advocates collective and governmental control and administration of the means of production and the distribution of goods. In fact, according to Karl Marx, socialism is the first phase of communism, and he believes that socialism is not yet to “provide justice and equality.” (Marxists) To Marx, it is nothing more than a means to an end.

Calling it democratic socialism is an oxymoron. Democratic principles foster liberty/freedom. Liberty is the natural condition of human beings wherein, we exercise our freewill responsibly in accord with the dictates of right reason and natural law. Freewill is the freedom to make choices as long as we are not infringing on the God-given rights of others.

Socialism is about control. According to Congresswomen AOC, she states that democratic socialism means “putting democracy and society first, instead of capital first.” (Quartz) According to Democratic Socialists of America, they “believe that the workers and consumers who are effected by economic institutions should own and control them.” (Democratic Socialists of America)

Ask yourself, how would you bring corporations under greater “democratic control?” Are the workers and consumers going to be able to have control and ownership? Is every employee or member of the community going to be a decision-maker? What happens when they all have different views? Are custodial staff supposed to make executive decisions on corporate operations? There would have to be a medium that works on behalf of the people, and that medium is government. According to their own words, “…but we can bring them under greater democratic control. The government could use regulations and tax incentives to encourage companies to act in the public interest and outlaw destructive activities.” (Democratic Socialists of America)

You don’t just get to make up your terms and definitions.

Bernie Sanders says “What democratic socialism means to me is having in a civilized society, the understanding that we can make sure that all of our people live in security and dignity,” Sanders said. “To me, when I talk about democratic socialism, what I talk about are human rights and economic rights.” (Business Insider) When talking about all people living in security and dignity, as well as economic rights, is that any different than when Marx talks about justice and equality?

The morality argument

Now I am not very concerned about Bernie Sanders. He has been largely consistent throughout his career. I do not believe Bernie cares about power and control. He believes he is making the moral argument. What concerns me is the AOC’s of the world that believe they are morally superior and look to seek power and control. In her famous 60 minutes interview, she said that it is better to be morally right than factually accurate. (60 Minutes/Real Clear Politics)

Two problems with that. First, when we make decisions in our personal lives, moral and ethics should come into play. However, when it comes to government, morality and emotion cannot be used to make policy. For example, look at the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. I would hate to be president and have to make that decision. As a human being, it was the hardest decision President Truman had to make. He understood that one day, he would have to meet his maker and answer for his decision. In his diary, he wrote, “We have discovered the most terrible bomb in the history of the world…It seems to me the most terrible thing ever discovered, but it can be useful.” (Stripes) As President, it was the easiest decision he had to make. His concern was the American troops and winning a war. His advisors estimated that between 250,000 and 1 million Americans would have lost their life in an invasion of Japan, and up to 5.5 million Japanese. (Scientific American)

The second problem is these democrat socialists try to argue that government has a moral obligation to ensure social and economic equality, but what does that mean? You notice they never explain it. They will just point to a CEO making $20 million and say it is unfair, but how much should a custodian or a store clerk or a police officer or a teacher be paid? If you want to pay me more, go for it, but let’s not pretend it closes the wealth gap. Let’s not pretend a $15 minimum wage is going to balance pay between CEOs or lead people out of poverty.

Democratic socialists say their ideas promote democracy

As I just stated, putting democratic with socialism is an oxymoron. Democratic principles equal freedom, socialism equals power and control. These fools say that their version of democratic socialism will actually foster more democracy and greater liberty. They say under their system, people would have greater control. Let’s just take a look at some of the proposals and see how much freedom and liberty they allow.

Medicare

Take Medicare-for-all since this is being pushed hard by the democratic socialists. What if you like your current insurance? I’m happy with my insurance. I get great benefits at my college. Under Medicare-for-all, you and I have no choice. You are forced to participate in a Medicare-for-all system.

If you’re part of the wealthy elite, you can afford to purchase private insurance rather than stay within a Medicare-for-all system, but it would impact average folks like us. The overwhelming majority of us would not be able to afford private insurance outside of Medicare for all system so we will have no choice but to participate in it. How is that freedom?

According to a January 2019 Gallup survey, 86.3% of adults have health insurance, 13.7% do not. (Gallup) 69% of Americans view their health insurance as excellent or good, and 80% view the quality of healthcare they receive as excellent or good. (Gallup) Democratic socialists say they don’t care if you’re happy with your current insurance. You must obey and comply. So not only do the overwhelming majority of Americans lose the insurance they are satisfied with, we will see a decrease in the quality of care. And don’t forget, there are a lot of out-of-pocket costs with Medicare, and many seniors still pay over $3,000 a year for healthcare.

Wages

One of the things we constantly hear is increasing the minimum wage to $15 an hour so people can make a livable wage. No one should be relying on a minimum wage job to live and raise a family. Jobs like the fast-food sector were meant for young Americans to make a little side money while learning a work ethic. These jobs were never meant to sustain families. Also, while a $15 minimum wage may make sense in New York City and the downstate region, it may not be feasible in places like Wyoming and Nebraska. Also, others are going to want to see pay increases. What happens to the shift supervisor making $15 an hour or those with specialized skills such as security or health aides making $15-$20? They are going to want a pay increase as well. If everyone gets a pay increase, no one gets a pay increase.

Democratic socialist constantly lament the idea of excessive CEO pay. While I may agree that some CEO pay is excessive, these democratic socialists don’t tell you two things. They never say what a just and equitable salary for a CEO would be or who would determine it. A salary will be considered high if the elites of the democratic socialist deem it too high. Remember, these democratic socialists say that they want to increase economic equality so how will they do that through government of course.

Take Portland. In 2016, they adopted a surtax on CEO pay that exceeds 100 times the wage of median employees. (Variety) Ironically, the government raised 2.8 million dollars off that surtax. Do you think they distributed it to the employees of the companies that paid the surtax, or did they keep it in the government coffers?

Guns

As for freedom and liberty, what do you think the democratic socialist’s position is on guns? Well, all we need to do is go to their website, and we find that they advocate, “there is no choice but to be bold. Which is why we think that the only way to guarantee that we will dramatically reduce acts of violence involving guns is to remove guns from society.” Now that’s freedom but wait there’s more. They state you can have a gun “provided it is manually loaded. That means one bullet loaded in the gun, by hand, at a time.” (Democratic Socialists of America) This is their words, not Professor Giordano putting words in their mouth. Several presidential candidates have called for the banning of at least some firearms (if not most), and many want a mandatory gun buyback program. Many have stated that they would take Executive Action if Congress, the law-making body, failed to act. (Axios) Doesn’t that sound like freedom to you?

Green New Deal

Congresswomen AOC’s Green New Deal Resolution has become a rallying cry for the democratic socialists. Under the Green New Deal, you would think it’s all about the environment, but actually, it’s about what they deem as social and economic equality. The rest is about social and economic equality. Since many of the candidates have said they support some version of the Green New Deal, let’s see the increase in freedom and liberty we have. (U.S. Congress)

• To achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emissions through a fair and just transition for all communities and workers.
  • The only way to get to net-zero greenhouse gas emissions is to eliminate entire industries like coal, oil, and gas.
  • Do the employees of these industries have any say? What about all the secondary jobs created to service these industries? What about all the restaurants, delis, dry cleaners, and other small businesses that opened near these industries?
  • They determined that these fuels are bad, and the only way to go 100% green is to shut these economic sectors down.

 

• To secure for all people of the United States for generations to come- clean air and water, climate and community resiliency, healthy food, etc.
  • The healthy food really jumped out at me. If we do go under a Medicare-for-all system, it will make sense that the government determines what you eat. Government is supposed to be good stewards of tax-payer dollars, and so as a society, the government will now be in charge of people’s diets.

 

• Zero-emission vehicles
  • So, if you have a car that runs on gas, you must obey the new rules. When your car breaks down, you will have to purchase a new vehicle that meets their standards regardless of whether you can afford it.

 

• Ensure the public receives appropriate ownership stakes and returns on investment.
  • How will the public be able to leverage their ownership? Who will be cutting the checks for the return on investment?
  • Of course, only the government can do this.

 

• Directing investments to spur economic development
  • Of course, it is government that will direct investment.

 

• Guaranteeing a job with a family-sustaining wage, adequate family and medical leave, paid vacations, and retirement security to all people of the United States.
  • Yea, a guarantee we all retire broke.
  • How can government force a guarantee of a job without control over the economy?

 

• Providing all people of the United States with
  • High-quality healthcare
  • Affordable, safe, and adequate housing
  • Economic security; and
  • Clean water, clean air, healthy affordable food, and access to nature.

That last part is the scariest clause in the whole damn thing. If you are dependent on government for healthcare, for food, for housing, for education, then who are you beholden to? Will you bite the hand that controls your “economic security and human rights?”

Education

Free college tuition may sound great to younger people, but nothing is free. A universal college education program would have severe repercussions. Most private colleges would go out of business. The Ivy League schools will remain because they have the money. The Ivy League schools will become even more for the elite than they already are because only the elites would be able to afford it. And if the wealthy elites send their children to public university systems, why should we as taxpayers have to pay for someone whose family can easily afford the cost of a college education?

What most of those that support the idea of free college tuition doesn’t realize is that it limits our choices. Most will only be able to go to public colleges and universities. Overcrowding would become a big problem, and the quality of education would certainly decline. Also, if everyone gets a bachelor’s degree, the degree becomes useless because there is little to differentiate from others.

Interestingly enough, the only two countries to offer tuition-free college are France and Germany, both having lower graduation rates than countries that require a significant out-of-pocket investment. (OECD) Why? Simple, when you have to invest your own money, you tend to take it more seriously.

Also, if the government runs the college education program, don’t they have a say in your major? What most don’t realize, even though they would find out as soon as they did a little research, is many countries offering significant tuition discounts require you to take a career aptitude test in high school and the results determine what your major will be. If you want to major in something different, you will have to attend a private school.

Think about it logically. If we have 1 million unemployed lawyers, why would the government allow you to be a law major? (Not that they would pay for advanced degrees) So, we have 1,000,001? In most countries where the government pays a high cost of the tuition, they are going to give you a few options for majors and if you don’t like those majors too bad. College majors will be based on the needs of society, and there would be no benefit for the government to pay for someone’s degree in Caribbean Studies, or White Privilege, or some other BS major.

Democratic Socialism is a threat to freedom and democracy

The reality is democratic socialism is downright dangerous and a threat to liberty. I just discussed five issues. In each of those issues, I demonstrated how you would not have as much liberty. In fact, your freewill will be limited to what government deems acceptable.

I cannot repeat enough that democracy and socialism cannot coexist together. Democratic socialists believe they are morally superior, and they look to achieve their objectives through any means necessary. You are not allowed to question their moral authority. If you question them, they will label you as a racist, bigot, sexist, fascist, etc. They will try to censor and silence all those who disagree with them. Afterall, they are the ones fighting for good. Fighting for economic and social equality, so if you disagree, you must be inherently bad.

All you have to do is go to the Democratic Socialists of America to see what their goals and objectives are. And rather than win in the marketplace of ideas, they look to infiltrate our institutions from within to radically alter this country.

Reading through a June 2016 article, titled “A Summary of Democratic Socialists of America Document” written by the Democratic Socialists of America, it states, “Finally, individual civil and political rights (freedom of speech, assembly, the right to vote, etc.), which are currently routinely violated, would be strengthened, and public resources would be devoted to the development of a genuinely free press and a democratically administered mass media.” (Medium)

This should send shivers down every Americans spine. Public resources, meaning government, would be the ones to determine what a free press is. Government would administer a “democratic” mass media, which means that government is the one controlling the messaging and what it deems acceptable and unacceptable.

Another article on their website explains “Why Socialists Should Become Teachers,” and they view teaching as a strategic means to transform the minds of the youth and to “help shape the militancy and political ideology of the unions.” (Democratic Socialists of America)

Just do your research because the information is out there.

Let’s play a game of who said that

We want to be brothers and sisters. We want respect and equality. – Hugo Chavez

I can’t name a single issue with roots in race that doesn’t have economic implications, and I cannot think of a single economic issue that doesn’t have racial implications. The idea that we have to separate them and choose one is a con. – AOC

To me, what socialism means is to guarantee a basic level of dignity. – AOC

The equal right of all citizens to health, education, work, food, security, culture, science, and wellbeing – that is, the same rights we proclaimed when we began our struggle, in addition to those which emerge from our dreams of justice and equality for all inhabitants of our world – is what I wish for all. – Fidel Castro

I believe that every person (American) should have stable, dignified housing; health care; education – that the most very basic needs to sustain modern life should be guaranteed in a moral society. – AOC

We must reduce all the emissions that are destroying the planet. However, that requires a change in lifestyle, a change in the economic model. – Hugo Chavez

The squandering of oil and gas is associated with one of the greatest tragedies, not in the least resolved, which is suffered by humankind: climate change. – Fidel Castro

The existing world economic order constitutes a system of plundering and exploitation like no other in history. Thus, peoples believe less and less in statements and promises. – Fidel Castro

Nothing in the world is irreversible, not even capitalism. – Fidel Castro

Capitalism has not always existed in the world and will not always exist in the world. – AOC

Closing

This is not to say that capitalism doesn’t have its problems. When you see corporate executives get millions of dollars in bonuses, and at the same time they are laying workers off or go out of business a few months later, people start to question the idea of capitalism. When a pharmaceutical company raises the price of the Epi-Pen by 450%, people begin to question capitalism. Corporations are contributing to the rise of socialism, and they should take notice.

Capitalism is still the best economic model and has created the largest middle class the world has seen. But we have to recognize it’s not perfect. While it’s easy to say socialism is wrong and bad, we must admit the flaws in the current system as well. We don’t shy away from the issues here at The PAS Report, and in future episodes, we will explore how to remedy some of the defects in capitalism. If we don’t discuss and address some of these problems, the country will continue to shift towards the idea of socialism, and we will not be able to recognize this country.

Here at The PAS Report, we continue to focus on the important issues, and we focus on bringing facts and truth. It is time to call out the true motives of those trying to undo America and our institutions, and we will continue to address this.

I would really appreciate it if you take one minute and write a good review for The PAS Report in iTunes, Google Play, Stitcher, or however you listen to this podcast.

Please share this episode and sign-up for The Pas Report Newsletter at thepasreport.com.

As always if there is a topic or issue you would like me to focus on, send an email to podcast@pasreport.com.

Thank you for joining us, stay safe, and I’ll be back next week.

 

Follow Nicholas Giordano

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
•