Peter M. Smith of Princeton
The recent letter “Liberals are actually socialists” (Feb. 19) is such a fine example of far right wing thinking that it merits a response. This may be a futile gesture, when the writer has fallen into the trap of identifying the enemy as “them” or “these people” which boils the blood, engenders hatred and fear, and cancels reasonable discussion. Who exactly are liberals, what exactly is socialism?
Liberals by definition believe in individual freedom, and liberal philosophy was the foundation of American society. That would be the Constitution. Socialists believe in societies in which social needs are balanced against individual needs. It is a compromise between the extremes of Wild West individualism and the subservience of the individual to society (the commune) or leader (royalty).
The ideology of totally free individualism is not workable if there is to be any social structure. At the other extreme, the ideology of total state control has been found to be untenable and leads to societies inimical to individuals. Therefore most workable modern societies strike a balance between right and left extremes; in other words, they implement liberal socialism of various flavors. As with all compromises there is ongoing debate and room for improvement. Liberal socialism is a sensible and mature compromise, open to discussion, and not something hateful.
The letter stated that socialism gave us the monsters of the last century — Hitler and Stalin and their like. Unfortunately such monsters can also arise in right wing countries as well (the South American dictators). No social arrangement is immune from evil individuals. Power and not compassion is the driving forces of liberals? What about the greed and cruelty of the robber barons of unrestrained capitalism?
To the writer, socialism apparently means a balance set to the far left. It’s an “us vs. them” approach of no gradation. I recently noted a local bumper sticker “Obamaism = Marxism” and thought, that is really wrong. Mr. Obama is losing popularity because he is not making enough changes from the way things are. For the last few decades we have been enthralled by a system which is heavily biased against any government restraint, and people now realize that it is this lack of restraint which has led to environmental, fiscal, and social degradation. The ideology of free markets which has dominated American policy has been shown to be disastrous by recent economic failures. If Presdident Obama tries to shift the balance towards more social structure, this is what he was elected to do; but to call it Marxism is fear-mongering.
As for swipes at “manmade global warming” and health care reform: The rise in global temperature correlates directly with the rise in carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and with the consumption of carbon based fuel and our health care system is broken, with millions uninsured against illness. However, the problem with liberal discussion, as Mr. Obama is finding out, is that it is no match for the cheap and addictive emotions of fear and anger.
Peter M. Smith
Princeton
