Home » Communism, North America, Politics » Bernie Sanders Democratic Socialism Doesn't Work - Here's Why


Bernie Sanders Democratic Socialism Doesn't Work - Here's Why

 
 
 
 
 
submit to reddit

The consequences of “democratic socialism” have been disastrous: no food, no housing, no clothing, no fuel.

To my British and American friends who must deal with the socialist nonsense of Bernie Sanders and Jeremy Corbyn, I found this poem.

It was written by Rudyard Kipling, the writer most hated by English Socialists in the 40’s and an opponent to the interventionist policies implemented by the labor party after the second world war:

In the Carboniferous Epoch we were promised abundance for all,

By robbing selected Peter to pay for collective Paul;

But, though we had plenty of money, there was nothing our money could buy,

And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said: “if you don’t ‘work you die.

This poem is not an exaggeration. At the time, it was decreed by the Control of Engagement Order that “no man between the ages of 18 and 50, or woman between the ages of 18 and 40, can change occupations at will. The Minister of Labor has the power to direct such workers to the employment he considers best for the national interest.” This Order was abolished only in March 1950.

At the time, the consequences of “democratic socialism” were disastrous: no food, no housing, no clothing, no fuel. By 1948, rations had fallen well below the wartime average. At the same date, one could read in The New Statesman, which was by no means a virulent opponent of Planning: “You may have social security, but you cannot go into a store and buy two quarts of milk” To which an English commentator replied: “You not only cannot buy two quarts of milk. You cannot buy one. You can only get two quarts of milk on your doorstep a week. If you try to get more you are apt to land in jail.”

Planned chaos was the logical outcome of the foolish socialist policies implemented by the British government. J.T. Flynn, the great libertarian journalist, in his book The Road Ahead (1949) noticed the devastating effects of government intervention in housing. He wrote:

The bombs and guided missiles that destroyed 300,000 British dwellings in World War II were not the worst enemies of British home ownership. That honor is reserved for the persons who advocated laws for “low-cost public housing” and for “cooperation” between government and private enterprise in housing for low income groups.

Great Britain is spending as large a proportion of its income on housing as it did before the war, but it is getting barely half the number of homes. During 4 years after World War II, only 367,761 permanent houses were built, compared with a total of 2,500,000 in the 8 years before the war, of which 1,888,000 were built by private enterprise. Owing to the greater need for housing, and 300,000 dwellings having been made uninhabitable by the war, various types of housing and control acts were passed. But, inevitably, the more control, the less housing.

In January, 1947, a great plan for affordable/free housing was announced by the government. It was supposed to furnish 250,000 houses in the year. The government went on with the plans and mobilized all sorts of resources: plaster, cement, plumbing, nails, brick and other materials necessary were ordered and produced. But after some times, it was discovered that lumber could not be supplied for more than 60,000 houses. The great plan failed miserably, falling short by 190,000 houses. In the meantime, all the other materials were being furiously produced and it was also discovered that there was not enough labor to produce them. Bricks, plaster and other things produced were pilling up, wasted for lack of buyers. The plan was a pathetic fiasco. Whether it is Sanders or Coryn, the policies they support will fail for the same reason socialism failed in the post WWII United Kingdom. One does not have to think much to understand the parallel between the “affordable housing” policies of the English labor party and the request for “free” education or health care. It will fail because governments cannot operate rational allocation of resources, because markets are necessary to the good functioning of an economy.

In fact, “democratic socialism” was such a failure in post WWII England that a long-time member of the labor party, Alfred Edwards, had to admit:

I have spent years discoursing on the defects of the Capitalist system. I do not withdraw those criticisms. But we have seen the two systems side by side. And the man who would still argue for socialism as the means of ridding our society of the defects of capitalism is blind indeed. Socialism just does not work.

Bernie Sanders and Jeremy Corbyn may like post WWII England and its so-called “social policies”. The truth however is that no one really wants to go back to a time were government was running every aspect of your life, to a time were shortages, rather than prosperity, was the rule.

Source

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 3.0/5 (2 votes cast)
Bernie Sanders Democratic Socialism Doesn't Work - Here's Why, 3.0 out of 5 based on 2 ratings
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  



RELATED ARTICLES

Did you like this information? Then please consider making a donation or subscribing to our Newsletter.
  • Ken Lee

    Well that was the 1950s where technology was useless. Now were living in the 21st century where food and items can be produced abundantly. I guess ur stupid to have written this article. Think more before comparing the ages.

    • Bob Mac

      Ken Lee reads a lot, and this is good, but he is not an economist, nor does he understand history as a valid social science. Mass psychology makes history, and human nature never changes.

  • lindajoyadams

    The USA has a form of government under the US Constitution. and can choose to have some things more things held in common( socialistic as social security and others things not. Plus state have rights. It’s a constant ‘checks on powers to balance that the people’s rights are not usurped by a few who hold the greater positions. If we choose to do things one way and do not like it, we can change to some other way. ITS A BLEND THAT IS MORE EASILY CHANGED as times change. But we need all to vote so that big money interest and agendas of a powerful few do not usurp the rights of any. We only need laws sufficient so that no one among us is harmed. and that is up to us as a society how we care for one another. And all in the USA need to vote for all the other offices as those are the ones we elect to balance the powers of any president who gets ‘over powerful.’ to him or herself. Linda Joy Adams

  • Bob Mac

    Please read Glenn Beck’s fine novel The Overton Window, and its sequel The Eye of Moloch. The PR leader favored this very poem, and was about to torture his very own son to death, when the lad recited those very lines. Now I understand it better.

Copyright © 2009 The European Union Times – Breaking News, Latest News. All rights reserved.