Stump the Socialist: Bernie would rather not talk about Venezuela

[Free Vulcan]

“The trouble with socialism,” Margaret Thatcher once famously intoned, “is that eventually you run out of other people’s money.” The problem with being a socialist, however, is explaining away the inevitable impoverishment and collapse — and worse — of countries that adopt it. I worked with an avowed socialist at the end of the 1980s who lectured us repeatedly on the coming Utopia, citing all of the successes of the Soviet Union … right up until it collapsed. “They had the wrong people running it,” was the only comment we could get through Lowell’s gritted teeth when we asked him to explain it. Suddenly, Lowell seemed much less interested in discussing socialist utopias.

Come to think of it, Lowell did look a bit like Bernie Sanders, and Sanders sounds a bit like Lowell here. This delicious moment captured by Newsbusters took place in a Univision interview with Sanders a couple of days ago, but it’s worth watching no matter when it took place:

   

LEÓN KRAUZE, UNIVISION: I am sure that you know about this topic: various leftist governments, especially the populists, are in serious trouble in Latin America. The socialist model in Venezuela has the country near collapse. Argentina, also Brazil, how do you explain that failure?

    BERNIE SANDERS, DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATE: You are asking me questions…

    LEÓN KRAUZE, UNIVISION: I am sure you’re interested in that.

    BERNIE SANDERS, DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATE: I am very interested, but right now I’m running for President of the United States.

    LEÓN KRAUZE, UNIVISION: So you don’t have an opinion about the crisis in Venezuela?

    BERNIE SANDERS, DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATE: Of course I have an opinion, but as I said, I’m focused on my campaign.

Er … what? Sanders has proudly proclaimed his socialism for his entire adult life. When challenged on why he’s running for the Democratic nomination, he’s insisted that he’s actually a “Democratic Socialist” whose socialism fits within the party. Presumably, that means that he plans to govern under a socialist model. That is his campaign. Shouldn’t Sanders have to explain how a political and economic system that has impoverished countries everywhere it’s been tried will somehow magically work in the US?

I suspect the answer will be similar to Lowell’s — the wrong people were running it. Bernie somehow thinks he’s the right person to run it, but … that’s what Hugo Chavez, Fidel Castro, Nicolae Ceausescu, and Mikhail Gorbachev thought too. How well did that work out?

http://hotair.com/archives/2016/05/27/stump-the-socialist-bernie-would-rather-not-talk-about-venezuela/

[truth_seeker]

Don't want to talk about Venezuela Bernie, then how about North Korea, Cuba, East Germany.

The most stark comparison, was to East vs. West Germany during the 1970s/1980s. Germany had to have a wall to keep people in.

Germans in the west were prospering. In the East they were under the jackboot of secret police, Stasi etc.

West Germany had a thriving auto industry (VW, Mercedes, BMW, etc.), the East made the Trabant, a joke only equaled by the Yugo (communist/socialist Yugoslavian product, btw).

West Germans were free to travel the world, but not East Germans.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

I think it's a valid point, but the problem is that if pressed on this, Sanders has a rebuttal that will hold up for the 2-3 minute attention spans of a lot of people.  He'll just say that he agrees with socialism as it has been implemented in a bunch of European countries, not as it has been implemented in Venezuela, N.K, etc..  The argument against socialism in those countries is still there to be made, but it takes a lot more effort and knowledge on the part of the person making the argument.  And even then, some won't be convinced.

[Oceander]

I think it's a valid point, but the problem is that if pressed on this, Sanders has a rebuttal that will hold up for the 2-3 minute attention spans of a lot of people.  He'll just say that he agrees with socialism as it has been implemented in a bunch of European countries, not as it has been implemented in Venezuela, N.K, etc..  The argument against socialism in those countries is still there to be made, but it takes a lot more effort and knowledge on the part of the person making the argument.  And even then, some won't be convinced.

Very good point. 

[truth_seeker]

I think it's a valid point, but the problem is that if pressed on this, Sanders has a rebuttal that will hold up for the 2-3 minute attention spans of a lot of people.  He'll just say that he agrees with socialism as it has been implemented in a bunch of European countries, not as it has been implemented in Venezuela, N.K, etc..  The argument against socialism in those countries is still there to be made, but it takes a lot more effort and knowledge on the part of the person making the argument.  And even then, some won't be convinced.

So you bring up Greece, Italy, Portugal and their debt. Trump wins if he gets 10-20% of Bernie's supporters.

BTW some other great examples are the thriving former satellites, Poland, Hungary, Czech Republic etc.

And then you bring up again the repression that held people as captives. Today, not yesterday, people are held captive in socialism: N. Korea, Cuba, etc.  !!

Sweden, oil rich Norway and a few benefit from the advanced qualities of their societies. They would prosper with any system. Might do better with LESS socialism.

But the other places, like Africa that are held down and back with socialism need to see the bright light of exposure.

And finally maybe a lesson from Milton Friedman and his belief that personal freedom goes hand in hand with economic freedom.

You lose your personal freedom when your money is taxed away by a government, that knows better what you need.

[Suppressed]

I think it's a valid point, but the problem is that if pressed on this, Sanders has a rebuttal that will hold up for the 2-3 minute attention spans of a lot of people.  He'll just say that he agrees with socialism as it has been implemented in a bunch of European countries, not as it has been implemented in Venezuela, N.K, etc..  The argument against socialism in those countries is still there to be made, but it takes a lot more effort and knowledge on the part of the person making the argument.  And even then, some won't be convinced.

That's exactly the response his supporters give.  And many conservatives just keep reverting to the same old "but what about Venezuela" lines.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

So you bring up Greece, Italy, Portugal and their debt. Trump wins if he gets 10-20% of Bernie's supporters.

And Bernie counters with Germany, France, Sweden, and Denmark.

Sweden, oil rich Norway and a few benefit from the advanced qualities of their societies. They would prosper with any system. Might do better with LESS socialism.

And right there, the magic bullet of binding Bernie to Venezuela is lost.

And finally maybe a lesson from Milton Friedman and his belief that personal freedom goes hand in hand with economic freedom.  You lose your personal freedom when your money is taxed away by a government, that knows better what you need.

I agree completely with you -- I'm just arguing the politics of the point in the context of this election.  It's easy to see from a conservative perspective that socialism is trash.  The problem is that Bernie's supporters aren't coming from that perspective, and they'll hope on the lifeline of the Western/Northern Europe version of socialism without batting an eye.  They'll just dismiss Venezuela as socialism poorly implemented.

[truth_seeker]

And Bernie counters with Germany, France, Sweden, and Denmark.

And right there, the magic bullet of binding Bernie to Venezuela is lost.

I agree completely with you -- I'm just arguing the politics of the point in the context of this election.  It's easy to see from a conservative perspective that socialism is trash.  The problem is that Bernie's supporters aren't coming from that perspective, and they'll hope on the lifeline of the Western/Northern Europe version of socialism without batting an eye.  They'll just dismiss Venezuela as socialism poorly implemented.

In actual practice the economic aspects of socialism are open for discussion. Neither Europe nor the US have pure capitalism or pure socialism. We BOTH have Mixed Economies.

The same is true for India and China, who have ONLY RECENTLY prospered by introducing elements of capitalism and free enterprise. It is free enterprise and capitalism which funds the socialized aspects for rich Europe.

But it is the loss of personal freedom in N. Korea, Cuba, and pre- Soviet breakup Eastern Europe which need a hearing.

If you tax away 70-80% percent of a person's economic income, he may rise up. There the state must have a boot, to place on his neck. To say,

"No Hans, you cannot go to the West." The East Germans renounced the socialist state, plain and simple, with their own footsteps into the free West.

Now to oligarchy and crony capitalism: The benefits of capitalism and free enterprise must reach the working class, or forget it. And in much of the West that question needs new vigor.

When we negotiate trade, we SHOULD be protecting our workers, against unfair foreign competition where the state effectively subsidizes the enterprises.

I trust a businessman to better understand all of this, than I trust a career political hack. By political hack I mean the usual suspects, from both entrenched parties. 

[Maj. Bill Martin]

That's exactly the response his supporters give.  And many conservatives just keep reverting to the same old "but what about Venezuela" lines.

Right.  You cannot convince people to adopt your views by making the arguments that appeal to you.  You have to make the kind of arguments that appeal to them.  That doesn't mean adopting their views, but it does mean understanding the biases with which they approach an issue, and disarming those first.