Socialism: Just Do It

Transcript

Real socialism has never been tried, socialists are fond of saying. My question has always been: Then why don’t you try it? In other words, socialists always talk about seizing the means of production. Even “democratic” socialists concentrate on seizing wealth. But why do they have to seize anything? If their system is so great, why don’t they build it?

Take Neville Roy Singham—an admirer of Mao. Singham has donated millions to anti-capitalist organizations, street rioters, and other socialist causes like Antifa. All want to take or destroy. But how did Singham make his millions? He founded Thoughtworks, an IT consulting company that provides custom software and consulting services, which he sold to a private equity firm for $785 million. So Singham knows how to build an organization. Why doesn’t he invest in socialist experiments?

For example, instead of running for Mayor, suppose Zohran Mamdani wanted to start a chain of no-profit, co-op grocery stores. If this were a sustainable model, people would freely come and patronize the co-op, and Maoist millionaires like Singham could subsidize any losses—for a while, anyway.

If the co-op couldn’t run without tax subsidies, why on earth would any socialist want it to exist? Revenue in excess of costs indicates sustainability. Losses show resources are being wasted. The socialist might think that wasting resources is okay as long as they’re taken from rich people. But in a fully socialist society, there would be no rich people to subsidize the failures. It’s equality of outcome, right? This is why there were so many Soviet bread lines.

Here’s another example. Imagine a group of idealistic champagne socialists pooling their resources to acquire some land or a multi-unit building. They decide to operate it as a commune or a rent-controlled building, as the case may be. Why not? Show us what you’ve got! Why does their ideological paradise depend on expropriating the property or funds of people who actually build and run firms sustainably? If the socialists’ preferred system is so awesome, they ought to be able to just do it. Instead, they get PhDs in radical activism and poison the minds of a generation.

Doesn’t this prove that most socialists just want to take to consume? They don’t build. It would be a sad indictment if socialism couldn’t exist without the productive capacities of private businesspeople. In short, socialism would just be parasitic on capitalism.

But wait—there’s more! According to the latest comprehensive data from the 2023 Worker Cooperative State of the Sector Report, about 750 egalitarian worker cooperatives operate in the United States. This figure represents a 20% increase from 2021. Well, I’ll be. It looks like there are people out there just doing it! So if worker control of the means of production is possible without having to seize anything or ban other forms of organization, why isn’t socialism taking over the economy?

If more successful egalitarian co-ops emerge, it should become increasingly clear that socialist enterprises are the way to go. Criticize by creating. More and more people can freely migrate away from traditional corporate forms into these worker-owned co-ops. Personally, I doubt that democratically run co-ops are the best-run organizations, because I’m not sold on the idea that the median voter is in the best position to make decisions. But at least worker co-ops are voluntary. Funny how capitalist societies allow for socialist enterprises, but socialist societies don’t allow for capitalist enterprises.

Indeed, most socialists opt for the political means, which—at the end of the day—are violent. That’s because most socialists are Takers, not Makers. But if I’m wrong, show don’t tell. Better yet, don’t threaten, build. Because if socialist enterprises work sustainably, more power to ‘em.

But if your model depends on seizure, once you run out of everybody else’s stuff, there will be nothing left but an oppressive dystopia and the detritus of a once-prosperous civilization.