The Birth of the Radical Left in America and the Harm it Does
A lesson for Australia
Dr G. Bergman
(Investigator Magazine 197, 2021 March)
The
radical left in America, as typified by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC)
and the so-called squad, now appears to have a major influence on the
Democrat party. The modern radical left was largely birthed by the
German intellectual Karl Marx (1818-1883). For this reason today many
of his followers are called Marxists. They now dominate many social
science departments at many of our leading universities.
Marx himself has an instructive history.
His
parents descended from a long line of rabbis, although Marx's father
converted to Christianity. His son, Karl, professed Christianity as a
youth. He was baptized a Lutheran in 1824, attended a Lutheran
elementary school, received praise for his Christian essays "on moral
and religious topics." His first written work, titled The Union of the Faithful with Christ,
was a treatise on the "love of Christ." Marx, at this time, believed
that it was Christianity that made men brothers. Marx wrote in a school
essay that the "brotherhood of man was rooted in the union of the
faithful with Christ." He concluded that it is only through the love of
Christ that "we turn our hearts at the same time to our brothers, whom
He [Christ] has bound more closely with us, for whom He also sacrificed
Himself." Union with Christ, he wrote, gives us "an inner
elevation, comfort in sorrow, calm trust, and a heart susceptible to
human love, to everything noble and great, not for the sake of ambition
and glory, but only for the sake of Christ."
He
remained a committed Christian until he encountered the materialist
atheistic writings and ideas as a University of Berlin student from
1836 to 1841. Marx became increasingly critical of Christianity
especially regarding the "the miracles of the New Testament as
messianic myths," and at the end of his university studies, Marx's
criticism of Christianity became more explicit. His slide from
Christianity eventually led him to militant atheism and his favorite
quote, “religion is the opiate of the people.” He explained in detail
in his Ph.D. dissertation why he rejected God, namely because, he
concluded from his University studies, that the proofs for the
existence of God are nothing but empty tautologies.
He eventually wrote the book that changed the world, Das Kapital,
in which he condemned capitalism that in turn inspired the communist
revolution whose goal was human equality, which was to be forced on the
people if necessary. A chief way he created equality was to
redistribute wealth. Obviously, the wealthy class resisted the
government's attempt to redistribute their wealth, which they felt they
earned honestly from their hard work. The result was the worst mass
murder in all of history. An estimated over a half-billion persons died
in the communist takeovers. This includes in the Korean war, the Viet
Nam war and 30 other wars. The fruits of Communism and aggressive
persecution of Christians still plague North Korea, Cuba, Venezuela and
the mixed economies of China and Russia. Communism, today called the
radical left, although very appealing to many, has an abysmal record of
failure. It has not worked no matter where it has been tried.
The latest example is Venezuela.
I
have a friend from Venezuela who, with his family, fled the country,
explaining it was once one of the wealthiest countries in the world.
Now it is one of the poorest due to, he claims, the controlling party
called the United Socialist Party of Venezuela (Partido Socialista
Unido de Venezuela). The President of Venezuela is the head of state
and the head of the government and their unicameral federal
legislature.
If
the Democrats end up controlling the presidency and both houses and
pack the supreme court, it appears we in America may be heading in the
same direction as Venezuela.
Is Socialism the Answer? A Tragic Lesson From the Past.
The
socialists, including soft socialists Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Bernie
Sanders, Joe Biden and Kamala Harris, have been much in the news
lately. Their promises clearly earned votes, but if implemented they
will produce unintended consequences as recently occurred in Venezuela;
once the wealthiest nation in South America it has been driven into
poverty.
The
best example is the catastrophe caused by The National Socialist German
Workers' Party (Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei),
abbreviated Nazi. The early twentieth-century German Nazis were far
ahead of their neighbors in providing a plethora of social programs,
including old-age insurance, rent supplements, unemployment and
disability benefits, old-age homes, interest-free loans for married
couples, state-paid healthcare, day-nurseries, holiday homes for
mothers, and food for needy families.
Nazis
spent lavishly on virtually every aspect of German life, including
medicine, super highways, entertainment, cruise ships, resorts, art,
music and much more. These social welfare programs represented a
Hitlerian endeavor to promote the well-being of all German citizens. As
Hitler stated in 1934, he was determined to give all Aryan Germans "the
highest possible standard of living" in the world. And he did for a
while, achieving enormous popularity as a result. The expenses for the
Nazi’s welfare state increased significantly each year. Soon they went
to war to conquer land to give to the disserving Germans these rich
social benefits.
The
Nazis ruled for only a dozen years, partly because that was how long it
took unbridled socialist economic policies to consume the accrued
capital of almost all of Western Europe. In the first six years
of Socialism, German government spending was paid for by canceling
foreign debt, issuing junk bonds, currency manipulation, and seizing
the assets of the wealthy Jews. As Margaret Thatcher observed, “The
problem with Socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's
money.“
When
Hitler ran out of Germany's money, in 1938 he proceeded to seize the
wealth of the Czechoslovakian Treasury, then in 1939 the Polish
Treasury, and in 1940 the French Treasury. The German decision to
invade these countries had strong economic motives. Hitler even managed
to get the British to hand over to Germany the more than 23 tons of
Czech gold in their possession. In addition, Germany's economy also
benefited enormously from the reintroduction of slavery into
Europe.
Socialist
regimes eventually run through the accrued assets of the economies they
conquer to deliver their utopian promises. The level of social spending
Nazism instituted cannot be maintained indefinitely. After they
exploit all other possible assets, they began using assets that can be
liquidated, including petroleum and minerals. In the final throes of
impoverishment they began converting humans into liquid assets,
including slave labor. Then regime change was forced by whatever method
the now impoverished people were able to achieve. In the case of
Germany, the regime change was in the end forced by the
Allies.
The Socialist Free College for Everybody Trap
Government
paying for student college-loan debt is a campaign issue that motivates
those with large debts to vote for persons supporting these programs.
When I was college age, coming from a broken family, I had no
choice but to commute to a local college. My only expense was tuition,
books and gas. Working one day a week to meet my expenses, I completed
my BS, MS and PhD at Wayne State University in 9 years, graduating with
honors without debts. Persons who go away to college today have the
added expense of room and board that can add 30,000 dollars or more a
year to their expenses. This luxury is like a person buying a luxury
Cadillac instead of a used Dodge as I did, then discovering he cannot
make the payments and expecting the government to bail him out. Later,
when I attended Miami University on scholarships for my Chemistry
graduate work, I realized the luxury I missed.
Free
college for everyone sounds like a great idea until one considers the
implications. My son was a professor in Norway and taught at other
colleges in Europe. He explained the reality of free tuition. The
government is not going to pay billions for students to earn degrees
with little demand like literature and art, so they survey employers to
determine how many people they need in each college major. Then they
convey to each college the number of majors in demand, as robotics and
medicine, they can admit. The goal is to fill real positions, not
educate in every area students have an interest. The college where my
son taught was allocated 30 slots in the area my son taught. As several
hundred persons applied for slots, most were not admitted regardless of
their qualifications.
In
America most colleges have open enrollment. All high school or GED
graduates who can pay or borrow tuition money can attend college. In
Europe, most people are unable to enter their ideal chosen field. In
America, students are more apt to earn degrees in areas of interest
and, after graduation, work in the family business. Consequently, many
earn degrees in their area of interest and not with the goal of working
in that area. Actually, over half of all college students never
graduate and, of these, only 27 percent work in the area of their
major. The reality is free college often means only the academically
privileged can attend.