Socialism, Capitalism, and the Missing Ingredient: Freedom
In November 1986 Reason’s Melvyn Krauss wrote “The United States probably has spent too much time and too many resources containing communism, and too little time and resources spreading capitalism.” He goes on to say “Once capitalism spreads, communism will contain itself.” If you replace Krauss’s references to capitalism with socialism then you have transported yourself from 1986 smack dab into the middle of one of the biggest and most concerning disputes facing America today. As an active member of the Libertarian Party I have seen first hand what happens when one unreasonable group or caucus infiltrates and methodically changes the overall messaging of a party. If Democrats don’t want to share in this experience then those who are truly social program safety net only proponents need to hold the line against their full on socialist counterparts.
Many adults first learned about socialism as defined in history class textbooks. It is defined as a system where the means are managed by the collective and it is typically listed right along with other failed systems such as communism and fascism. The lessons about how socialism did not work were so clear, so why on earth are we seeing such a resurgence of pro-socialism commentary? If we follow the timeline from Bernie Sanders to Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez to Zohran Mamdani, it’s fairly easy to see how the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) have slowly tipped the scale in socialism’s favor.
Daniel McCarthy recently wrote an article in The Spectator stating that “socialism is more fashionable today than at any time since the Soviet Union collapsed” and effectively blamed libertarians for disappearing at this crucial moment in history. Have libertarians disappeared because we have so much freedom in our daily lives that we have gotten lazy and are taking it all for granted? Have libertarians disappeared because we lack a central inspiring torchbearer figure like we’ve had in the past? Reason’s Robby Soave writes a rebuttal to McCarthy’s article here where he skillfully points out the major flaw in McCarthy’s argument, which is confusing the formal Libertarian Party with the informal libertarian movement.
To Robby’s point, the language being used by both sides is so incredibly important. For example, if Democratic Socialists want us all to believe that they are in fact a newer softer breed of socialism then perhaps not constantly quoting Karl Marx is a good place to start. Similarly, if Republican Capitalists want us all to believe that they are really in support of free-markets then admitting that we are currently living under cronyism and not true capitalism is a good first step for them. In both cases, the reform they are actually searching for is freedom. Freedom is the mechanism by which economies thrive and ordinary people have ultimate control of their own futures. With freedom anything is possible, we don’t have to choose just one version of success.
If you are tired of the most extreme personifications of each political party driving commentary then you must do your part. If there is a lack of torchbearers for liberty then you must carry the flame. Leaders like Friedman, Hayak, Rothbard, and Paul have left the embers burning for us. Now is the exact moment when we must each lead by example, be intentional with our language, and defend libertarian principles.
