When Oil Prices Drop, Socialism Doesn’t Look All That Good
Especially in Venezuela. A few links from the past couple of weeks regarding the socialist "utopia".
When oil prices fall, suddenly Hugo Chavez can no longer afford to buy big guns, to finance terrorism, and to spread the wealth around.
Awash in oil, Hugo can’t even keep the lights on; electricity shortages to go along with food shortages. As Pejman Yousefzadeh puts it, "I would delight in the Schadenfreude, but after having read this story, I feel more sorry for the people of Venezuela than I do happy to see yet another indication that the regime of Hugo Chavez is failing to provide basic services."
And when Hugo gets cranky, he starts to ponder jailing the opposition. Without any specific charges, Chavez said of his former presidential rival, "I am determined to put Manuel Rosales behind bars. A swine like that has to be in prison." Yup, now there’s a freedom fighter.
Filed under: Doug • Economics & Taxes • Venezuela
Like this post? Subscribe to my RSS feed and get loads more!
Okay with a degree in Social Policy and Masters in Economics and Sociology a person who has studied Karl Marx and “Socialism” at length I feel compelled to speak out on the word “Socialism”. What is socialism?
According to Marx, socialism comes about through a transformative process of upheaval, let’s remember Marx’s dialectical materialism. Therefore in order for true socialism to occur, the capitalist system turns into a beast and the greed of the capitalist causes it to consume itself and what’s left over a longer period of time is socialism. Contained in this process is the advancement of technology and the globalization world economies. The world economies become so interlinked that they become almost indistinguishable Therefore socialism is a global phenomenon. It can not occur in one or two instances because it relays on the availability of global resources. But at the heart of Marx’s prediction, is overturning of a system by the masses, not its government or other elite members.
The catalyst for socialism is therefore a conservative agenda. Why do I say that? When the system is left to its own devices, ie Wall Street/Al Greenspan quasi laissez faire economy, greed takes hold. Greed by the masses as they look to obtain more, and greed by the capitalist all come into play. Our founding fathers understood this, read James Madison Federalist Paper 10. But that’s another discussion. Now if the system continues down the path of greed it will devour itself, but the liberal movement, an oxymoron of sorts instead of liberating the people, it liberates the system, i.e. it stops the beast from eating itself Actions to stop the upheaval thereby prolong capitalism, as it pacifies the masses and the capitalists preventing a class war. Classic example of this is the $700 billion bail out, supported by Bush and liberals. The infusion of cash is an attempt save the capitalist system. Left to most conservatives one might theories that the system would have collapses.
So with that mind, the underlining policy of Obama is a pacifier for the masses. As long as the masses are pacified they can’t over turn the system. So Obama, is actually the anit-socialist.
Even Neo-Socialism or Neo-Marxism refers to a broad set of economic theories of social organization advocating state or collective ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods. Key word here is the word ownership of the means of production and the distribution of goods. Tax policies do not establish ownership.
Now let’s consider this the John McCain of 2000 said, “As I said, there are tax breaks and money for the richest in America and the very rich, but I think that it’s clear that there’s a growing gap between rich and poor in America, the haves and the have-nots. And many studies have indicated that, and I think that the people who need it most and need the relief most are working middle-income Americans and that’s what I want to give to them. And at the same time, the greatest benefit that I can give them is to make sure that their Social Security benefits are there. And I also don’t think it’s fair for us to lay a $ 5.6 trillion debt down on future generations of Americans.” This is the same John McCain who voted against the taxes cuts Obama wants to roll back. Is John McCain a socialist?
No because McCain and Obama seek to maintain a capitalist state. Both of them buy into the idea of a class system. To that end, many have augured that Obama is an elitist, so he can not be a socialist. In fact if we hear Marx’s worlds he states, “The oppressed are allowed once every few years to decide which particular representatives of the oppressing class are to represent and repress them.” Socialism is a workers movement, not an elite movement.
If fear socialism then you want a liberal inventions approach to government to prop-up capitalism at every turn, a non-interventionist or limited interventionist state however leaves room for workers to unite and over turn the system.
Chavez is a petty dictator, reveling in anti-American slogans and propaganda. I admit I’ve not looked into the details of Venezuelan politics and society, so I don’t know just how “socialist” it really is.
What I do know is the Venezuelan economy is not that strong, especially with plummeting oil prices. Never mind precious little other infrastructure. Plummeting oil prices doesn’t help in the least.
Barika, I’m mostly interested in pointing out how the more pure socialist a country gets, the worse it does economically. Different countries are at different stages, indeed, but Chavez seems to want to go the whole route. In order to do that, though, he required an influx of cash from oil to keep up the facade that his socialism is working. It’s not.
Indeed, the $700 billion bailout is a piece of socialism that indeed may have been needed in this specific situation. But there are plans to un-socialize it once things are righted. Chavez doesn’t have that. The more “socialistic” policies that we in the State implement, and keep in place, the worse for our economy, I believe.
No government of men will ever be perfect, but I believe that a bigger lean towards capitalism is the way to go, and indeed has made this country as prosperous as it is. To decide that we need our policies more in line with countries that don’t even compete with our prosperity is nutty.
You make a good point Doug. I’m only suggesting that Chavez isn’t a socialist. Because socialism is a process and can’t be implanted this was Marx’s point. I think in this case what you have is a man claiming to be a socialist in a government that is really a dictatorship, not a government ran by the people who own the means of production. Some would argue that real socialism requires democracy. I think the critique is more on Chavez then on any economic philosophy.