
Recent primary victories by Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) candidates in New York, Washington, D.C., and Los Angeles are being hailed in certain left-wing circles as some sort of a grassroots movement, when it’s anything but.
Those familiar with the wretchedness of communism have for years been doing their best to sound the alarm bells about the ideological seepage that has been occurring in our own country.
In a way, the DSA victories are serving a purpose in that more and more influential political and media figures are beginning to speak out about the dangers of veiled communist constructs and their inevitable road to ruin.
The philosophical playbooks, which the recent candidates and potential officeholders embrace, mirror the early stages that transformed previously free societies into economic and humanitarian catastrophes.
It may not be an exact replay of history’s songbook, but the anti-liberty refrain is eerily familiar. In the name of equality, activists pursue ideas about concentrating economic power.
If we look at communist countries prior to their becoming glorified prison camps, each experienced a state-controlled takeover of healthcare, energy, housing, and wages, usually accompanied by the fomenting of hostility to private enterprise, a redistribution of wealth, and a continuous erosion of individual freedom.
Venezuela is one of the more modern examples. Its tilt toward communism didn’t begin with tanks in the streets. It started with the holding of elections.
In 1998, Hugo Chávez was democratically elected on the promise of being a fighter of poverty and corporate greed. He called his platform “21st Century Socialism.”
He quickly nationalized the oil, steel, and food industries, imposing price controls, currency restrictions, and massive wealth transfers. Communism had slithered its way into a once-free country.
Supporters hailed the new way of life as empowering the people against the wealthy. Within a brief time period major production collapsed, shortages appeared, hyperinflation exceeded one million percent at peaks, and GDP cratered.
Millions fled, opposition leaders were jailed, and media were muzzled. What started as popular redistribution required an ever-greater coercion to sustain. What Nicolas Maduro inherited, he further hardened.
With regard to Russia, after 1917 the Bolsheviks promised land and bread. Factories and farms were seized under “war communism.” Then Vladimir Lenin’s New Economic Policy gave way to Joseph Stalin’s total collectivization. The results were engineered famines, gulags, and a police state that murdered millions to enforce central planning.
China’s Maoists promised peasant liberation. The Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution resulted in the deaths of millions from famine and purges, all the while private property and markets were being decimated.
Cuba’s Castro followers seized power. They promised democracy and justice, but turned around and built a tyrannical one-party system that practiced rationing, surveillance, and confiscation.
In each of the above cases, the initial pitch was the same: End exploitation, give power to the working class, and use the state as an instrument of justice.
The mechanism used was also the same: Replace voluntary exchange and dispersed knowledge with government allocation of resources.
When results were disappointing, and they consistently were, leaders blamed fake scapegoats such as saboteurs, foreign interference, or insufficient commitment to Marxist principles.
More power was demanded to fix what a prior power grab had broken. Liberty eroded bit by bit, and the system collapsed because it is impossible for central planners to replicate the information and incentives of free markets.
DSA platforms and candidates drape their major themes in American garb. Proposals such as “Medicare for All” and “Green New Deal” have them dreaming about massive new federal control over trillions in economic activity.
“Housing for All” and “Tenant Rights” campaigns end up being a means of imposing rent control, while restricting development and reducing supply.
Criticism of “corporate greed” and calls for the public ownership of businesses use the same twisted logic that was used to justify nationalizations in Moscow, Havana, Beijing, and Caracas.
For decades the United States has retained stronger constitutional guardrails, federalism, an armed citizenry, and a culture of individual rights, unlike nations that have succumbed to communism.
However, the trajectory of ideas in the leftward direction is particularly concerning for our country precisely because, more often than not, it is an incremental process.
Each step is typically defended as temporary and necessary. Each step makes reversal more difficult and failure more costly.
Americans who value prosperity and freedom should treat DSA advances, not as quaint democratic socialism but as the latest iteration of failed communist ideology.
The United States built its wealth and mobility on the opposite principles. Vigilance begins with a total rejection of the premise that concentrated political authority over production and distribution is superior to individual choice.
It’s best to listen to those who have suffered under leftist totalitarian regimes. They are sending us a message to immediately banish communism from our midst.
We fail to listen at our own peril.
