The Evolution of Socialism

Collectivism believes in the concentration of power at the expense of individual freedoms and rights. The state is controlled by a ruling elite which determines the law. The source of rights under a collectivist paradigm is the feelings or whims of the controlling group. Under this ideological variant, rights are nothing more than the permissions granted to him by other men. Man must ask for permission to live. Communism, Fascism, Socialism, theocracies, and military Dictatorships are all forms of Collectivism.

Towards the middle of the twentieth collectivism was becoming an obvious perceptual failure. While it secured power for small groups of ruling elites it was manifested practically in different forms of evil to the public— war, poverty, oppression, famine, and social unrest. Its failing were obvious to most people. While it triumphed morally —selfless sacrifice is noble and self interest is evil, it failed practically—massive amounts of unnecessary death. It produced an evidently miserable, poor and oppressive culture in its Communist forms —Germany, China and Russia. It was failing in its theocratic forms, even while being home to the largest oil reserves in the world – the Islamic Democratic Socialism of Iran, Algeria, and Iraq. And to make matters worse it was also performing miserably in its less violent socialist forms— the welfare states of Great Britain, America, France and Canada were mired in stagnation and recession with all the typical consequences of high unemployment, high taxation, and high inflation.

Eastern and Middle Eastern Collectivists responded by typically Authoritarian means—contemporary Islamic Fascism, Chinese pragmatic Communism, and Eastern European Oligarchs are their current forms. All are still violent, prone to war and poverty, and culturally oppressive. And of course power is still confined to a small group who believe they are acting in society’s best interests.

Socialism responded differently. They didn’t panic. Once again they took a more subtle action. They publicly disavowed their own propaganda. They conceded the failure of bureaucratic control, central planning and scientific production. They admitted free markets were more effective in controlling production. This was ingenious compared to the crude methods employed by their inarticulate brethren.

Socialism never was about equality. That’s the propaganda they used to influence the public sentiments. Socialism like all other forms of collectivism is about power and who has it. Power is needed to control, protect and engineer society. Socialism believes in securing power through the confiscation and redistribution of wealth. Enforced Democratic measures by the western world ensured the need for a gradual secession of power combined with a subtler mechanism used to manipulate wealth compared to the overtly violent Communists means.

Socialism traditionally secured wealth and consequently power through the nationalization of industry. They preached the benefits of scientific planning and altruism. The Canadian Government, like most other western democracies, have owned or still do own monopolies, in the oil, timber, hydroelectric, television, communications, railroad, aviation, mail delivery, and medicine industries. The problem was that the public failure of these controls was too obvious to maintain power for a prolonged period of time in a truly democratic country. The common citizen dealt with the inefficient bureaucratic mechanism every day. He saw how his tax dollars were being spent and wasted every day far too clearly for government to be comfortable. All the moral propaganda in the world couldn’t combat the evident economic failures of social planning.

The seizure of wealth prevents a truly independent class form arising in society. If government controls the wealth then one must act accordingly to obtain it within society. Socialist Collectivists understood this. It was not necessary to own the industry’s production it was only necessary to control its profits. They admitted central planning was a failure. They relinquished their burdensome monopolies and began to sell public assets to private individuals (albeit individuals who were very friendly with the ruling collectivists—Maurice Strong) and immediately began to fervently regulate and outrageously tax every component of business.

This solved multiple problems. It allowed Collectivists to deflect criticism while still controlling power. They were allowed to unload the burden of complex industry production while still maintaining control of its profits. It hid their ineptness from the public and placed the blame on distant corporations. They could tax all production at 48% (second only to China— meaning that 48 cents of every created dollar of worth passes through government coffers before redistribution) which allowed them to maintain financial control of the country.

The entrepreneur is too small of a minority to resist government coercion. Morally, he is condemned by the public— through government controlled influence: education, artistic funding, and academic propaganda. And to further ensure citizen obedience, it is made obvious that his wealth is always closely tied to the arbitrary legislation of the ruling collectivist government. See NEP, Interest Rate fluctuation, and most recently Income Trust legislation.

While Socialism has evolved its collectivist premises remain unchanged—maintain power.