Mediaboss Marketing

Minimal government doesnt remove power from our lives

There are two articles currently on the Times home page an opinion piece by Corey Robin, and a news analysis by Neil Irwin that I think should be read together. Taken as a pair, they get at a lot of whats wrong with the neoliberal ideology (and yes, I do think thats the right term here) that has dominated so much public discourse since the 1970s.

What, after all, were and are the selling points for low taxes and minimal regulation? Partly, of course, the claim that small government is the key to great economic performance, a rising tide that raises all boats. This claim persists because there are powerful interests that want it to persist even though the era of neoliberal dominance has in fact been marked by so-so economic growth that hasnt been shared with ordinary workers:

The other claim, however, has been that free markets translate into personal freedom: that an unregulated market economy liberates ordinary people from the tyranny of bureaucracies. In a free market, the story goes, you dont need to flatter your boss or the company selling you stuff, because they know you can always go to someone else.

What Robin points out is that the reality of a market economy is nothing like that. In fact, the daily experience of tens of millions of Americans especially but not only those who dont make a lot of money is one of constant dependence on the good will of employers and other more powerful economic players.

Its true that, as Brad DeLong says, many of Robins examples would actually apply in any complex economic system: Ive wasted time dealing with both Verizon and the Social Security Administration, and in both cases my socioeconomic status surely made it a lot easier than it would have been for a minimum-wage worker. (I have, on the other hand, had consistently good experiences at the much-maligned DMV.) But the idea that free markets remove power relations from the equation is just nave.

And its even more nave now than it was a few decades ago, because, as Irwin points out, large economic players are dominating more and more of the economy. Its increasingly clear, for example, that monopsony power is depressing wages; but thats not all it does. Concentration of hiring among a few firms, plus things like noncompete clauses and tacit collusion that reinforce their market power, dont just reduce your wage if youre hired. They also reduce or eliminate your options if youre mistreated: quit because you have an abusive boss or have problems with company policy, and you may have real trouble getting a new job.

But what can be done about it? Corey Robin says socialism but as far as I can tell he really means social democracy: Denmark, not Venezuela. Government-mandated employee protections may restrict the ability of corporations to hire and fire, but they also shield workers from some very real forms of abuse. Unions do somewhat limit workers options, but they also offer an important counterweight against corporate monopsony power.

Oh, and social safety net programs can do more than limit misery: they can be liberating. Ive known many people who stuck with jobs they disliked for fear of losing health coverage; Obamacare, flawed as it is, has noticeably reduced that kind of lock in, and a full guarantee of health coverage would make our society visibly freer.

The other day I had some fun with the Cato Institute index of economic freedom across states, which finds Florida the freest and New York the least free. (Is it OK for me to write this, comrade commissar?) As I pointed out, freedom Cato-style seems to be associated with, among other things, high infant mortality. Live free and die! (New Hampshire is just behind Florida.)

But seriously, do the real differences between New York and Florida make New Yorkers less free? New York is a highly unionized state 25.3 percent of the work force while only 6.6 percent of Florida workers are represented by unions. Does this make NY workers less free, or does it empower them in the face of corporate power?

Also, New York has expanded Medicaid and tried to make the ACA exchanges work, so that only 8 percent of nonelderly adults are uninsured, compared with 18 percent in Florida. Are New Yorkers chafing under the heavy hand of health law, or do they feel freer knowing that theyre at much less risk of being ruined by medical emergency or cast into the abyss if they lose their job?

If youre a highly paid professional, it probably doesnt make much difference. But my guess is that most workers feel at least somewhat freer in New York than they do in FL.

Now, there are no perfect answers to the inevitable sacrifice of some freedom that comes with living in a complex society; utopia is not on the menu. But the advocates of unrestricted corporate power and minimal worker protection have been getting away for far too long with pretending that theyre the defenders of freedom which is not, in fact, just another word for nothing left to lose.

Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook and Twitter (@NYTopinion), and sign up for the Opinion Today newsletter.

Paul Krugman has been an Opinion columnist since 2000 and is also a Distinguished Professor at the City University of New York Graduate Center. He won the 2008 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences for his work on international trade and economic geography. @PaulKrugman

See the article here:
Opinion | Capitalism, Socialism, and Unfreedom

Since the Civil Rights movement of the 1950s, young people have played a critical role in American politics. They have been a tremendous force for both political and cultural change in this country: in limiting the USs options in the war in Vietnam, in forcing corporations to divest from the racist South African regime, in reforming universities, and in bringing issues of sexual orientation and gender discrimination to public attention. Though none of these struggles were fought by young people alone, they all featured youth as leaders in multi-generational progressive coalitions. Young people are needed in todays struggles as well: for universal health care and stronger unions, against welfare cuts and predatory multinational corporations.

Schools, colleges and universities are important to American political culture. They are the places where ideas are formulated and policy discussed and developed. Being an active part of that discussion is a critical job for young socialists. We have to work hard to change peoples misconceptions about socialism, to broaden political debate, and to overcome many students lack of interest in engaging in political action. Off-campus, too, in our daily cultural lives, young people can be turning the tide against racism, sexism and homophobia, as well as the conservative myth of the virtue of free markets.

Join our student section, Youth Democratic Socialists!

Read more from the original source:
What is Democratic Socialism? Q & A - Democratic Socialists ...

Stalins gulag, impoverished North Korea, collapsing Cuba...its hard to name a dogma that has failed as spectacularly as socialism. And yet leaders around the world continue to subject millions of people to this dysfunctional, violence-prone ideology.

In The Politically Incorrect Guide to Socialism, Kevin Williamson reveals the fatal flaw of socialismthat efficient, complex economies simply cant be centrally planned. But even in America, that hasnt stopped politicians and bureaucrats from planning, to various extents, the most vital sectors of our economy: public education, energy, and the most arrogant centralplanning effort of them all, Obamas healthcare plan.

In this provocative book, Williamson unfolds the grim history of socialism, showing how the ideology has spawned crushing poverty, devastating famines, and horrific wars. Lumbering from one crisis to the next, leaving a trail of economic devastation and environmental catastrophe, socialism has wreaked more havoc, caused more deaths, and impoverished more people than any other ideology in historyespecially when you include the victims of fascism, which Williamson notes is simply a variant of socialism.

Williamson further demonstrates:

Why, contrary to popular belief, socialism in theory is no better than socialism in practiceWhy socialism cant exist without capitalismHow the energy powerhouse of Venezuela, under socialism, has become an economic basket case subject to rationing and blackoutsHow socialism, not British colonialism, plunged the bountiful economy of India into stagnation and dysfunctionand how capitalism is rescuing itWhy socialism is inextricably linked to communism

If you thought socialism went into the dustbin of history with the collapse of the Soviet Union, think again. Socialism is alive and kicking, and its already spread further than you know.

Read this article:
The Politically Incorrect Guide to Socialism (The ...

The birth of the first modern socialist thought brought not only the changes in our modern politics but also new forms of art that promoted the views of the utopian socialism movement. Although any modern socialist movement can technically be called utopian, this term is today most often applied to the earliest socialists who lived during the early 19th century, where the name "utopian" negatively described their unrealistic ideas. Examples of that can be found in the initial works of socialist founders such as Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels whose visions of the future were mostly focused on the expansion of the principles of French revolution which did not always aligned with a modern depiction of peaceful utopia. Their views of utopian society were not always peaceful and consisted from rigidly conforming to the scientific method of creation of balanced society.

The root of modern utopian socialism can be found in Ancient Greece and the works of the famous philosophers Plato and Aristotle who both described in their works perfect societies. Those old ideas were forged into utopian socialism movement by philosophers who started opposing the appalling consequences of industrial revolution. Tremendous increase in the manufacturing capabilities and the creation of new class of oppressed workforce pushed some of the best minds of the 19th century into open opposition to capitalism. The works of the utopiansocialism authors reflect their wishes for more just humanitarian world, where inhumanities of their age would be eliminated, and the future in which modern society will finally found balance between men, work, education, progress, and nature, with open opposition to the indifference of the rulers, rigid laws, selfishness and acquisitive individualism. Utopian socialist also very muchpromoted their futuristic views of the world with strong morals, hope, happiness and faith, which caused strong reactions of both inspiration and ridicule in the population who came in contact with their works. Almost all socialists authors adopted these ideals, but where utopian socialism movement differed from general socialism was in the means of how mankind could reach this better state (the ways in which current power would be taken from a government for example). Influential Marxs socialism movement was based on the grounds of strict scientific approach, while utopian socialism ideas were much looser and based on looser ideas, rhetoric and pure belief that modern societies can organize themselves better using consensus and peaceful public discussion.

The first utopian socialist was without the doubt the English philosopherand author Thomas Moore (1478-1535). His 1516 novel "Utopia" (which popularized word "utopia" in modern times) described the need for the creation of a state that practiced religious toleration, freedom of marriage, simpler communal life, free education and health care. He wrote this highly influential book guided by his frustration with the current political state in late 15th and early 16th century England, where he directly served English King Henry VIII as councilor, and for three years as Lord High Chancellor of England. The book Utopia (whose title was a pun on two Greek words ou-topos (no place) and eu-topos (good place)) followed the fictional narrator who compared the struggles of modern life in the city of Antwerp to the situation in the imaginary Greek island where life was made simpler by the much simple laws, promotion of public social gatherings, communal ownership, equal education for everyone and almost complete religious tolerance.

After the release of Utopia, many authors across England and Europe took its ideas and used them to create the new literary genre that managed to survive all up to modern time. This genre was not closely connected to socialist movement but was instead used to explore various thoughts. Francis Bacons utopian novel New Atlantis from 1624 explored future society where discovery, knowledge, and generosity were highly praised. This book served as the direct inspiration for the creation of the British Royal Society in 1660, which promoted education, exploration of new modern sciences, sharing of knowledge, and fueled the creation of first modern universities.

Moore's utopian vision gained additional popularity in the 19th century with the publication of several highly influential socialist works. Although they did not call themselves "utopian", ideas of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels talked about visions and goals for the creation of utopian societies where people lived like equals. The distinction between utopian socialists and other modern movements were made in the Friedrich Engels' 1892 book called "Socialism: Utopian and Scientific", in which he described them as ones who want to transform France into country with rational society, economy and their willingness to make those changes without struggle between classes or political revolutions. To him, utopian socialists claimed that they could achieve their goals with the help of like-minded people within existing society.

The popularity of utopian socialism gave birth to one of the biggest waves in utopian literature. During the 19th century, many utopian philosophers and writers tried to describe their ideas either in written form or by trying to realize their dreams in reality. Successful Welsh businessman Robert Owen (1771-1858) with help from philosopher Jeremy Bentham managed to reform the way of life for the workers that were employed by them. They created the lifestyle for them that included fewer work hours, distributed work, schools for children and renovated housing. Own was also responsible for creating few of the first utopian settlements in the United States. His new found commune called "New Harmony" collapsed after Own lost substantial wealth in a robbery, but this village greatly contributed the rise of future socialist movement by showing the entire world that human social behavior is not fixed and that it can be organized into any kind of society.

In addition to Robert Owen and Jeremy Bentham, some of the other notable utopian socialist philosophers and authors were: Erewhon (1872) by Samuel Butler (utopian satire of 19th century Victorian society), Candide by Voltaire, Charles Fourier (1772-1837, who influenced many other authors), Etienne Cabet (1788-1856, who created Icarian movement of utopiancommunities), Edward Bellamy(1850-1898, whose Christian socialist book " Looking Backward" became worldwide bestseller), William Morris(1834-1896, who disagreed with Bellamy's views in book " News from Nowhere"), Pierre-Joseph Proudhon (1809-1865), Peter Kropotkin (1842-1921), Augustin Souchy (1892-1984), B.F. Skinner (1904-1990) and Ursula K. Le Guin (1929-present).

Read the original post:
Utopian Socialism - The Utopian Socialism Movement

A rising up "from the depths" threatens to disturb a gilded party in the above cartoon published in 1906 byThe Appeal to Reason, the most popular revolutionary socialist newspaper in US history. The tuxedoed and bejeweled rich, enjoying a grand ball in what looks like the Metropolitan Museum, recoil in horror as a clenched fist smashes up through the dance floor. Below, in an allegorical view offered by scientific socialism, we see the suffering and resistance of the working class. In squalid darkness, women and children strain to hold up the roof - or is it the floor - while their kind are crushed by exhaustion, age and injustice. One among them however has put his burden down and leads the fight upward. This is what Socialism in America looked like in the Age of Monopoly.

The Age of Monopoly begins with the end of Reconstruction and the Great Uprising of 1877. Subject to waves of violent conflict, a second Civil War seemed ready to break out, whether on the frontier or in urban America as with the Haymarket bombing of 1886 or Homestead strike of 1892. In 1901 the US Steel became the biggest corporation in history, the Socialist Party is founded in Chicago, and a anarchist assassinated President McKinley, the man who three years earlier invaded the Philippines. The struggles of the Age of Monopoly reach a kind of peak with World War I (1916-1918) and the Red Scare (1919-1922) that followed. Victorious in the class struggle, monopoly capitalism and Wall Street reign uncontested until the age comes to a cataclysmic end with the Great Crash of 1929.

Throughout the era, in all parts of country, the American people rose to challenge the power of capitalism under the banner of building the "cooperative commonwealth." Denouncing the unaccountable power of Robber Barons and Plutocrats, a generation of industrial workers, midwestern farmers, urban immigrants, civil rights activist and feminists, as well as a progressive middle class, built Socialism into a mass movement. Rising and falling between the 1880s and 1920s, American Socialism was many things to many different groups, but through the lens of radical cartoonists we can see that at its root, Socialism encouraged people to challenge the sanctity of the free market, to demand the expansion of democratic rights and civil liberties, and to consider the real possibility of progressive, even revolutionary, change.

Original post:
Cartoons for Socialism Cartooning Capitalism