In reply to Stewart B. Epstein’s letter to the editor (“Social Democrats Aren’t Socialists,” 8/15/21 TPP): nnStewart is right that socialists lack the common sense that God gave chickens. But where socialists are lacking because they’re humans, capitalists are lacking a thousandfold because they are anti-humans, anti-chickens, and anti-continuance-of-life-on-Earth. At least chickens have better sense than to actively destroy the ability for their species to continue living on this planet. At least socialists are dreaming up alternatives and attempting to reverse course. Capitalists and status-quo Democrats seem willing to continue a mindless drift into extinction. (While Republicans seem to mindfully and eagerly run towards the cliff).
There are as many definitions of the word “socialist” as there are people claiming to be one. Right-wingers will use that word or degrade any other word (e.g. “communist”, “radical-left Democrat”, or plain “Democrat”) for fear-mongering name-calling, so why do so many people get bogged down in arguing semantics instead of hashing out good policy proposals? Look at the roots: “social”, “community” vs “capital”. Do we want a society where we value money above all or instead value life? Do we want a democratically-run loving community or a heartless plutocracy? Seems like a no-brainer to me. Instead of taking offense to the word, I encourage people to read up on the history. If you approve of regulations on work-day hours and child labor, environmental protections, minimum wage and all the good things a democratic government can do when it’s used for the common good instead of the interests of the ruling class, then you have socialists and communists to thank, among the people who fought and died for these progressive improvements in our country. Many brilliant leaders identified as socialists. Stewart, you are out of touch. Socialism is widely favored over capitalism and use of the word is only hurting “your” Democratic party in the sense that the corporate and ultra-rich lackeys in it feel threatened.
LILLIE POTTS, Athens, Ga.
I count it progress that the right-wing noise machine is demonizing “socialism.” The [Joe] McCarthy persecution of red (then pink) metastasized under Reagan to the degree that “liberal” became a pejorative—and finally “progressive” (that accommodationist brand of justice that declines to inconvenience the overprivileged! Perhaps that, too, improved on the ’60s when the hippy ethic of Peace & Love was branded anti-American by, among others, the clueless Christian right.).
In very broad strokes, authentic socialism reserves utilities to public control. The most vital of these under free enterprise is capital. Every capital function — banking, insurance, credit cards — must be state operated, without the waste of profit and without discriminatory market pricing. (“A market is anything but fair.” — Milton Friedman. “It’s expensive to be poor.” — me.) State revenues are entirely generated through a steeply progressive income tax. The fundamental purpose of socialist government is providing every citizen a floor of subsistence: food, shelter, security—the means of self-reliance. The political spectrum, from heartless conservative to soft-touch liberal, concerns how generous the floor will be, and how much of strife’s profit the idle rich may keep. Under no circumstances may personal wealth accumulate to the end that the wealthy are immune from crises afflicting community.
The phenomenon of billionaires in space is pure legerdemain, not a serious bid to abandon Earth. (I’m pretty sure the gas chamber at Auschwitz had clearly marked EXIT signs. Not exits, of course, just signs.) Foolish proles convinced of a space escape aren’t monitoring the malefactors of great wealth, as they corner commodities and devise water futures and develop exclusive enclaves in remote corners of the globe, say New Zealand, or a suddenly temperate Siberia.
Everything wrong with the world is the fault of the oligarchs who succeeded the prevailing monarchy model. The Enlightenment informed their ascent and deluded the masses to their intent. Nothing presently wrong is whatsoever the fault of socialism, which has never had a thoroughgoing trial, even in the “socialist” democracies of Europe. The priority of global socialism must be to “exterminate” the wealthy. This is a benign matter of canceling their wealth. (If a paupered swell or two slits his own wrists, so much the better!) Contrast my cruelty to that of the oligarchs, who intend to manage global warming by lightening the planet some 30% of its human burden through — apparently random and chaotic-resource management.
M. WARNER, Minneapolis, Minn.
I was delighted to read my fellow TPP contributor Sam Uretsky’s citing of the song and film “The House I Live In” in his 8/1/21 column, “Republicans Think America Can’t Handle the Truth.” As a film historian I’d like to add a few truths.
In 1946, this short anti-racist film about tolerance won an Academy Award and Golden Globe. Furthermore, according to Hollywood Blacklist scholar Dave Wagner, House’s screenwriter, Albert Maltz, was a card-carrying, dues-paying member of the Communist Party USA. So was Abel Meeropol, who wrote “House”’s lyrics, as well as Billie Holiday’s anti-lynching classic, “Strange Fruit.” After the state murdered Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, Meeropol adopted their orphaned sons. Maltz was “rewarded” for writing “House” and the WWII morale boosters “Destination Tokyo” and “Pride of the Marines” by being blacklisted and becoming one of the persecuted Hollywood Ten only a year after co-winning an Oscar for “The House I Live In.”
According to Wikipedia, the song’s composer, Earl Robinson, was also a CPUSA member when “House” won that coveted golden statuette. Robinson’s other songs included the beloved ballad “Joe Hill”, which was covered by Paul Robeson and, famously, Joan Baez at Woodstock.
The Communist Party had its flaws, but I think it’s fair and accurate to say that, from its founding in 1919 until the 1960s, the CPUSA fought more for racial justice than any other American mass organization that had a predominantly white membership. Artists like Maltz, Meeropol and Robinson rendered socialist ideals in art. As we undergo our current racial reckoning, and socialists like Buffalo’s mayor-to-be India Walton emerge, it’s important to remember the role socialism has played in the struggle for equality. As Meeropol put it: “That’s America to me.”
ED RAMPELL, Los Angeles, Calif.
Mark Anderson’s article ”Adopting a Sane Energy Policy Need Not Divide the Country” [8/15/21 TPP], argues that a mix of fossil and renewal fuels will provide the basis for unifying the country behind the effort to control climate change. His point is pretty much summed up by his remark: “there’s no hardcore reason to retire gasoline usage altogether …” The article is, one hopes, the last gasp of the deniers. The efforts of the anti-intellectual, anti-science forces have turned an emerging crisis into a disaster, perhaps even at the extinction level. The American West is burning; Germany and China face massive floods; and the temperature recently reached 120 degrees above the Arctic Circle. Mr. Anderson’s suggestions might have been valid 30 or 40 years ago, but delay in acting has forced us to shift from limited or moderate change to serious sacrifice. Failure to unite behind the full-scale effort means that our grandchildren will roast. Pussyfooting around in making that choice only drains the remaining dregs of hope we have.
FRED R. VAN HARTESVELDT, Fort Valley, Ga.
Re: “Abandon Afghanistan and don’t look back” [8/1/21 TPP] nnRather than abandoning Afghanistan, we are retreating from that country, – just as we retreated from Vietnam. And let’s hope our government has learned at least two lessons from that colossal fiasco: 1) to abstain from unbridled vengeance, no matter how strong the urge; and 2) to control the hubris of our military leaders’ power.
Even though none of the 9/11 terrorists who killed 3,000 Americans were Afghans, our military has killed many times that number of civilian Afghans. The propaganda that has sustained the epic devastation and bloodshed in that country calls it “a war against terrorism.” In reality, however, it’s toxic vengeance — not one American life for one terrorist life, but more than 10,000 Afghan lives for one American life.
The second lesson is from history: For centuries already, Afghanistan is known as the graveyard of empires. Afghans have earned the reputation of being among the world’s fiercest warriors, and their terrain is no bed of roses in which to engage them in combat. Even the military genius Alexander the Great could never conquer that country. And only a precious few of Great Britain’s imperial army ever returned home. It’s no wonder that Afghanistan is now referred to as the “Soviet Union’s Vietnam.”
Extreme wealth, power and arrogance, without prudence, is a guaranteed formula for failure.
DAVID QUINTERO, Monrovia, Calif.
We have 5,000 years of world history to look over today as we try to understand “how we got here.” Add to that the billions of people who have existed and are still living on this planet. Add to that all the opinions, theories, religions and wars swirling around constantly and at great speed. It would be seemingly impossible to figure out exactly how we got here, when even “here” keeps changing.
Every culture, past and present, seems to have Beliefs. With or because of those Beliefs, they have laws and ideas of good and evil, taboos and “virtues,” insiders and outsiders, friends and enemies, gods and non-gods. Every culture.
We may be able to communicate with every person on the planet via our technologies, but that doesn’t seem to end our problems. At least not yet.
From Abraham came Isaac and Ismael. From them came Jews and Arabs. Some “father,” and then different gods/Gods — Jehovah and Allah (among others — though they all claim they only worship the “One True God”/the “Only God”). The “Ten Commandments” are their doctrine, they all claim, one way or the other. Yet all are literally killing each other because of their gods/God. Confusing, yes?
One must follow after the “ways of peace” in order to have peace — right? Whether or not “the Other” believes as one does, there are things all can do in order to have peace. America has had wars against its original inhabitants ever since Europeans “discovered” it, especially because Europeans were more numerous, more technologically advanced and more sure of their “right” to live on this land. Indian rights were mostly ignored and Europeans’ deity seemed to agree.
Fighting over land and resources is what people do, it seems. There are ways to settle things peacefully and there are conditions to set up for that to happen — or not.
The situation and set up in Palestine/Israel seem to make peace possible, but it is up to the People to do what makes it possible. Just think how peaceful everyone would be if they actually followed/believed the leaders/founders of their religions that they gave the world! That is what’s so frustrating about the Middle East: too much religion, not enough peace.
CHERYL LOVELY, Presque Isle, Maine
From The Progressive Populist, September 1, 2021
Blog | Current Issue | Back Issues | Essays | Links
About the Progressive Populist | How to Subscribe | How to Contact Us
PO Box 819, Manchaca TX 78652