Socialism and the myth of private property

Privatizing the economy is the only viable solution to the guarantee of private ownership. Without private ownership, the means of production are severely limited — this has been proved throughout human history — a “freer” society will always provide a safer, healthier, and more productive for its citizens than an “unfree” society. Government interference in the marketplace via taxes — subsidies, bailouts, stimulus checks — effectively put an end to private ownership. Publicly funded private profit — taxpayer funds given to private companies — creates an economy supported by socialist mandates and government market control. The result of socialism speaks for itself: mass poverty and a stagnate economy. Socialism and a free-market economy cannot coexist. The need to privatize everything, although extreme, is the most viable approach to wealth creation and private ownership of goods.

Marx was a socialist

Today’s political discourse creates a sharp distinction between “communism” and “socialism”. Although communism and socialism may overlap to a degree, it is argued, they are not the same.

However, disciples of Karl Marx’s Communist Manifesto considered themselves socialists. One of the largest communist parties in the early-1900s, the German Social Democratic Party, made no distinction between socialism and communism — referring to themselves as communist and socialist, interchangeably. Marx’s economic philosophy equates communism with socialism, with no room for degrees of communism. Although Marxist economics distinguishes between “higher” and “lower” phases of a communist society, neither could be distinguished from the other by differentiating between “communism” and “socialism”. For Marx, communism is socialism, and socialism is communism.

What is communism?

“Communism replaces private property and a profit-based economy with public ownership and communal control of at least the major means of production (e.g., mines, mills, and factories) and the natural resources of a society. Communism is a form of socialism.”

Marx did not invent communism — his task was to develop a theory to combat ideas opposed to socialism — arguing that, inevitably, people will, at a future point in time, revolt and adopt socialism. Marx called this the “law of history” — history’s march to reach its final stage in a communist society. The long march of communism is socialism. However, communism’s “inevitable march” needs a helping hand — man’s intervention, through government planning and economic control — are essential for achieving a socialist utopia.

Communism’s “inevitable march” has arrived on American shores through government intervention, crony capitalism, and the reckless abandonment of a sensible monetary policy. Marx’s prediction that society will inevitably adopt socialism with the help of a strong handed political class has come true. America is not “moving towards” communism. No, America has become communist through subsidies, tax payer funded bailouts, and much more.

The particulars of what separates a communist economy from a socialist economy are superfluous. By narrowing our focus to the all-encompassing term “socialism”, we are simplifying terms to explain libertarian ideologies more easily. Like Marx before him, Ludwig Von Mises made no real distinction between “socialism” and “communism” — defining both as:

“The system of social organization in which private property and the distribution of income are subject to social control.”

In Human Action, Mises makes the case for the praxeological character of socialism:

“The essential mark of socialism is that ‘one will’ alone acts. It is immaterial whose will it is.”

The “one will” who chooses, decides, directs, acts, or gives orders is paramount to the success of socialism. Those who are not the “one will” are merely following orders of the “one will”. It is important to remember that the “one will” is human — imperfect, imprecise, and prone to error.

According to Mises, the problem of socialism is summed up in economic terms, referring to the means, not the ends. It is impossible to calculate or plan an economy, thus, rendering socialism an unfeasible economic system to implement. Further, the “paradox of ‘planning’ is that it cannot plan, because of the absence of economic calculation.” Without the ability to calculate an entire economy, planning is not possible.

The “inevitable march” towards socialism in America

From a praxeological perspective, socialism will never work, regardless of the tools used to achieve those ends. There is no mathematical equation, no amount of brain power, and no political system that can create an optimal socialist economy. But that does not stop the call for socialism. Socialism has gained wide-spread acceptance among millennials and academics. Bernie Sanders, one of the most popular socialist politicians today, self-identifies as a proud “Democratic socialist” — embracing Marx’s dream of social control over private property. Sanders, worth millions, regularly vacations at his summer home in Vermont.

Social control over private property has taken a new meaning with massive government stimulus spending and welfare programs. In 2009, the U.S. government spent $50 billion to bailout General Motors. More recently, $4 trillion of taxpayer money was spent on coronavirus relief — sending billions of dollars to American companies and citizens — billions more to the Federal Reserve to “help stabilize” markets and to grant loans to companies like Wells Fargo and AT&T. Airlines in the U.S. received $25 billion in public bailout money — the government is funding an entire industry. President Joe Biden has proposed yet another round of “stimulus relief”, asking Congress to approve a $1.9 trillion coronavirus relief package, including billions in stimulus checks to American families. Such a massive amount of government spending is only possible through taxation. Capitalism is now funded by social control via taxation.

The separation of “social control” and “private property” has been muddled. The government has dumped trillions of dollars into the private economy, using taxpayer money for broader social means. The “one will” is the President of the United States, formally endorsed by Congressional Representatives and Senators. The American taxpayer has been subject to a government that believes a planned economy is the only way to solve for economic downturn that may arise through market fluctuations. How can “private property” exist when the government controls the monetary supply, funds business profits through taxation, and forcefully confiscates wealth to “stabilize” the economy?

Government subsidies — the illusion of private property

Private property means the owner has “full control of the services that can be derived from a good.” The legal conception of what “private property” is can change, based on local laws and statutes. Nevertheless, private property is understood by having “full control” over the services that can be derived from a good. Further, private property means that those deriving services from a good have control over how, and why, it is done. The socialist’s goal is to replace private ownership with public ownership — giving the public a means to control what is produced in private, via government representation.

Mises expands on this definition of private property:

“In the market society, the proprietors of capital and land can enjoy their property only by employing it for the satisfaction of other people’s wants. They must serve the consumers in order to have any advantage from what is their own. The very fact that they own means of production forces them to submit to the wishes of the public.”

“Employing” the use of private property to satisfy other people’s wants, in order to serve consumers, means that private property is not controlled by any interest group or individual who does not own the property in use. However, government subsidies have been used to give special favor to proprietors of capitol and land to publicly fund the private means of production. In other words, subsidies fund private profit via taxation.

Government subsidies have been used to expand political power in the economy for centuries. Those who do not benefit from government subsidies are hurt economically. Depending on the subsidy program, competitors to market share are deflected and those who benefit from government subsidies are shielded from harm. It is natural for believers in a private economy to seek-out and benefit from government subsidies. After all, what is better for business than a reduction in competition and publicly funded private profit!

Companies like Apple, Amazon, and Alphabet have received billions in taxpayer funded government subsidies. Amazon has received $1.5 billion in incentives from local and state governments. Google has received over $750 million in subsidies. Government has been funding, making special exemptions for, and favoring certain private companies in America for generations. Corporate “winners” and “losers” are chosen by a government bureaucracy. Most of the American economy is subsidized by taxpayers in some form or another. Laws are passed to favor one business over another. Subsidies are not just monetary. Laws, like Section 230, protect technology companies from market competition and unruly consumers. Is it any wonder why $3.4 billion was spent on lobbying in 2019?

The current American economy is not based on private property ownership, nor is it based on free markets. Instead, the American economy has become a massive bank account for government bureaucrats who choose what businesses thrive and what businesses do not, all funded by taxpayer dollars. Any notion of private ownership is eviscerated by Federal monetary policy, subsidies, corporate bailouts, and welfare funding. Private citizens spend money confiscated from their neighbor to purchase private goods — public funds used for personal gain. If there was any doubt about who “owned” means of production, government has forced companies to close, as a means to “protect” citizens from COVID-19. Business owners are wholly controlled by government mandate — and in some instances, government does not allow some businesses to operate at all. All in the name of “safety,” of course!

Monopoly through government coercion

Government’s massive intrusiveness in the market economy creates a monopolistic hole that can only be filled by entities chosen by law. Laws have been created to favor one business over another. Subsidies have been used to intertwine private profit with public funding. Corporations lobby to circumvent competition. Government-created monopolies are everywhere. Calls for “fair” market competition have been answered by socialism. As more laws are passed to “protect” a free market, the ability for a company to compete in such a market vanishes.

Subsidies are used to entice companies towards a specific behavior, resulting in an economy funded by taxpayers, for the benefit of those who agree to a deal with the Devil. Corporatism, private enterprise controlled by government policy, has consumed the market economy. Google, Facebook, Apple, are no longer “private companies”. They have become government subsidized companies used for private gain. Banks, the airline industry, automakers — all subject to the whims of the next bailout package. Entire cities pay for massive stadiums through tax funding. The taxpayer sees no return on his investment and must purchase a ticket to attend the show. The modern airline industry exists only because taxpayers are forced to foot the bill.

Where, then, can private ownership turn?

Practically? Nowhere.

Participating in a “free market” is no longer a choice. Government has created a monopoly on private industry through various laws and special exemptions. Calls to “use another product” are quickly silenced by the realization that “other products” are not possible without government permission. Federal and state agencies — FDA, Consumer Protection, OSHA, etc. — will only allow those who “play by the rules” the opportunity to participate in our feigned capitalist economy. Creating a “level playing field” has resulted in a “government playing field”.

Recently deplatformed companies, like Parler, have tried to structure their business in a way as to not depend on others for success. Government favored businesses, like Amazon, hold a de facto government sponsored monopoly. Further, marketing your business is not possible without the help of companies like Google, Facebook, and Twitter. If your product is not allowed to exist on the only platforms available for consumers to find and use your product, you have no product at all.

In theory, a private company could build their own infrastructure needed to operate independently of Big Tech and government. However, in our present-day socialist-corporatist economy, this is a far cry from achievable. A media blackout, deplatforming, and government sanctioned boycott will destroy any business venture that does not “play by the rules”. Efforts to go it alone will be met by a media purge, ensuing witch trial, and burning by stake.

Let’s privatize everything

The effects of socialism are widespread and pervasive. Government subsidies have created a publicly funded economy that reaps private profit for those who benefit from government favor. The result of crony capitalism is the concentration of power to select corporations and welfare programs aimed at helping businesses who wrap themselves in the chains of bureaucratic control.

Taxpayer funded monopolies control market competition with the blessing of lobbyist funded politicians. The only way to guarantee the right to private property is to privatize the economy. The entire economy.

No more subsidies, no more special favors, no more publicly funded private profit.

By abolishing all government interference in the economy, a free market can thrive, and Americans will no longer be on the hook for welfare corporatism. With private ownership, wasting $500 million on failed government startups, is no longer possible. True private ownership, through privatizing the economy, is a radical solution, but a necessary solution. A solution that is only possible by recognizing the need to rollback wide-spread government intrusion and corporate welfare programs.

Abolish socialism! Privatize everything!