Kamala’s economic policies are more socialist than Biden’s, and the left applauds her, believing they will be better off if she becomes president. However, more than 100 years of history have shown that socialism makes everyone poor and generally worse off.
Socialism is to the left of capitalism, and moving further left, with tighter government controls, leads to communism. This progression is almost always guaranteed because each societal or economic problem typically results in more government regulation and increased central control. For this article, I will use socialism and communism interchangeably, keeping in mind that socialism opens the door to a slide toward full communism.
Socialism/communism is a system where everyone relies on the state for clothing, food, housing, and education, with no personal choice in these matters. Your tax rate becomes so high that your salary turns into pocket money. Liberal socialists aim to push the US toward greater socialism, reducing self-reliance and autonomy in favor of government provisions. Private options, like school voucher programs that Democrats oppose, would be eliminated. They want to mandate the use of government schools only, leaving no option for better private education and no way to protect your children from messages you find harmful.
Liberals calling for socialism have likely never lived in a communist country. If they had, they would never vote for that system. Every communist country that has ever existed was a one-party state because no sane person who experienced communism would vote for it. The natural inclination of human beings is to better themselves and be motivated by profit. Therefore, communist countries must be totalitarian police states to prevent citizens from engaging in underground capitalist behavior.
Liberals mistakenly believe socialism/communism will improve their financial situation. However, communism has consistently failed, with every communist country being poor. All but five communist countries have transitioned to capitalism and never looked back. The remaining five are China, Laos, North Korea (DPRK), Cuba, and Vietnam, with Venezuela being socialist. Economically, North Korea, Cuba, Laos, and Venezuela are complete basket cases, dependent on foreign food aid from more capitalist countries, causing their citizens to suffer. These nations should serve as cautionary tales.
In Venezuela, which is socialist rather than fully communist, nearly one-third of the population suffers from hunger, 82% live in poverty, and 53% in extreme poverty. In communist Cuba and Laos, the average salary is around $2,000 per year. China and Vietnam fare slightly better due to adopting market socialism, a hybrid of communism and capitalism. Despite this, they remain relatively poor, with average annual incomes of about $4,600 in Vietnam and $13,140 in China. In contrast, the average salary in the US exceeds $85,000 per year.
Liberals often point to China as a model for what they want America to be. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) claims to have lifted 800 million people out of poverty, but in reality, communism kept people poor. In 1976, the average income in China was around $200 per year. It only increased because the CCP began liberalizing the economy. It was the private sector, not the government, that made people richer. However, government control still limited development. By 2009, the average income was around $3,500, equivalent to the US in 1900 when adjusted for price. Today, despite having the second highest GDP, China’s average income is about one-sixth of the United States’, with more than half the population poor and about 47% living on less than $10 per day.
To maintain its power, the CCP employs the world’s most sophisticated and widespread surveillance system, monitoring nearly every second of every citizen’s day. Almost all foreign media and social media are blocked to prevent new ideas from abroad and to control the dissemination of viewpoints that differ from the government narrative. If someone makes a prohibited social media post, their account is shut down, and the police likely arrive to question or arrest them.
China has a social credit score system functioning like a digital ID. Posting unauthorized content, possessing forbidden materials, or organizing unauthorized political or religious events can lower your social credit score. A low score can prevent you from traveling on high-speed rail, obtaining bank loans or jobs, and bar your children from the best universities.
The slide from socialism to communism begins with the government taking over businesses. The Chinese government owns entire industries, including factories, mining companies, oil companies, all major banks, hotels, haircutters, restaurants, and retailers. These state-owned enterprises (SOEs) generated over $12 trillion in total revenue in 2023, accounting for most of the country’s $17.5 trillion GDP. Through regulation or economic advantages given to SOEs, private companies cannot compete.
By suppressing the private sector, the central government increases citizen dependence on government largess. Without a viable private sector, citizens rely on the government for food, clothing, shelter, and other benefits. Liberals praise the way the communist government redistributes revenue from SOEs to the people, but they overlook that it is not shared based on merit or productivity. Instead, distribution often follows arbitrary government criteria like a high social credit score, allegiance to the party, or through corruption and nepotism.
In socialist countries that haven’t gone fully communist, the same reliance on government assistance occurs through high taxes. In Germany, the top tax rate is 47%; in Sweden, 52%; in Finland, 51%; and in France, 55%. Liberals point out that Europeans receive free education, kindergarten, healthcare, and subsidized transportation and housing. However, they miss that these benefits are necessary because high taxes leave citizens unable to afford private alternatives. Government assistance means you have to take what you get. Yes, transportation is cheaper in Europe, but it’s public transportation, while more Americans own cars. Europeans may get subsidized apartments, but more Americans live in freestanding homes with yards. As for medical care, if you dislike your HMO, imagine how much worse it would function if the government ran it and doctors earned $700/year like in Cuba or $42,000/year like in Sweden.
There is nothing redeeming about socialism/communism. It does not lift people out of poverty, it does not improve lives, and it is something the US should absolutely avoid.