{"id":291,"date":"2023-02-08T00:15:24","date_gmt":"2023-02-08T05:15:24","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/analyticalbear.com\/?p=291"},"modified":"2023-02-08T00:15:24","modified_gmt":"2023-02-08T05:15:24","slug":"commenting-on-house-resolution-9-denouncing-the-horrors-of-socialism","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/analyticalbear.com\/index.php\/2023\/02\/08\/commenting-on-house-resolution-9-denouncing-the-horrors-of-socialism\/","title":{"rendered":"Commenting on House Resolution 9 – “Denouncing the horrors of socialism”"},"content":{"rendered":"

It turns out that one of the first initiatives undertaken by the newly elected Republican majority in the US House of Representatives was to demonstrate its unswerving commitment to the still apparently ongoing fight against socialism by enacting a resolution, H.R. 9, entitled “Denouncing the horrors of socialism”1<\/a><\/sup>. This resolution was duly passed on February 2, 2023, by a vote of 328-86 with 14 abstentions, indicating that approximately one half of the Democratic delegation decided to join in the fun. Of note, at least some media reports suggest that the 86 Democrats voting against H.R. 9 were not expressing any solidarity with socialist ideals, but instead thought that the resolution was “useless” and that it “does nothing”2<\/a><\/sup>. At least a handful of Democrats also demanded that the resolution makes clear to exclude existing US government programmes such as Medicare and Social Security3<\/a><\/sup>. Conversely, no-one argued, at least in public, that socialism ought not be so denounced, suggesting that away from the daily grind of parliamentary politics, both parties in Congress share more or less the same anti-leftist sentiments.<\/p>\n

The point of this post is not to delve deeply into the more than a century-old conflict between socialism and capitalism – although that day will yet come – but rather to examine the document as a piece of public propaganda. Because that is exactly what H.R. 9 is, whether one agrees or not with its substantive contents. There is no noticeable socialist revolutionary movement or political party in the US, or, arguably, anywhere in the Western world; there is not a congressional faction of socialists, nor a raft of legislative proposals to institute even a hybrid form of socialism in the country; there is not even a robust enough labour union movement to prevent Congress from unilaterally shutting down strike efforts and forcing union workers into less than favourable contracts, as had happened merely two months ago in the railroad industry. Even Bernie Sanders, whatever his personal beliefs might be, did not run, either in 2016 or in 2020, on a platform of socialist<\/em> measures. Rather, his platform can briefly be summed up as a quixotic attempt to bring back the Democratic Party agenda of 1965, which was in no way socialist, but rather a final iteration of New Deal ideals and policies.<\/p>\n

In a sense, denouncing socialism today is roughly as relevant to public policy as denouncing “sharia law” had been 10-15 years ago4<\/a><\/sup>. Rather, the exercise is, and should be regarded as, purely political. And so, let us begin by examining the structure of the document.<\/p>\n

The very first thing that stood out to me was that at no point in H.R. 9 was socialism ever defined<\/em>. To be sure, the resolution states that “socialist ideology necessitates a concentration of power” – why? for what reason? – that it is responsible for “many of the greatest crimes in history”. Partway through it mentions that “the Castro regime” – not “socialism” – “expropriated the land of Cuban farmers and the businesses of Cuban entrepreneurs”5<\/a><\/sup>, however this is sandwiched between famine, death, destitution and inflation, and at no point is it explained what the expropriations were for<\/em>. Both Jefferson and Madison are quoted defending “property”, although both passages clearly speak not of property in general but of wealth<\/em> held by the socio-economic elites – Madison going so far as to decry “arbitrary seizures of one class of citizens for the service of the rest”. And, towards the end, the “collectivistic system of socialism” is “fundamentally and necessarily opposed” to the “sanctity of the individual”. But why? What is<\/em> it? Did Marx, and Lenin, and, apparently, Nicolas Maduro, just wake up one morning and decide to indulge in random acts of violence and expropriation for the sake of it? Was there a plan? An overall goal? An actual economic system that can be compared with feudalism, capitalism, or any other -ism, and which presupposes certain political tendencies?<\/p>\n

Put differently, if, on the basis of this document, a randomly selected individual were asked to put together a one-sentence definition of socialism, what are the chances that the end result would come anywhere near to the formal definition of the concept, whether as expressed in earned Economics textbooks, or as set down in the Oxford English Dictionary or the Merriam-Webster?<\/p>\n

Which, of course, is the point. If a concept can be kept nebulous, though certainly evil and frightening, then anything<\/em> can be declared to be “socialist” to suit the political objectives of the moment. One recalls a vivid moment, early during the Obama administration, when Cap-and-Trade6<\/a><\/sup>, Cap-and-Trade<\/em>, a proposal written<\/em> by large corporations like Exelon Corporation, a proposal actually put forward <\/em>in Dick Cheney’s 2001 Energy Task Force report7<\/a><\/sup>, was denounced and rejected by conservative politicians and publications as socialism<\/em>8<\/a><\/sup>. But aside from this, fairly ridiculous example, the broader point is that the resolution deliberately employs two related propaganda techniques – undefined concept<\/strong> and taken on<\/strong> trust<\/strong>. I will tell you what socialism is, when the time comes, and you will not question how I define socialism or seek out said definition yourself9<\/a><\/sup>.<\/p>\n

The taken on trust<\/strong> technique continues with the examination of socialism’s crimes. Here, one could do an entire separate post on each individual bullet point. A few, however, stand out as especially, almost amazingly implausible. For starters, H.R. 9 proclaims that “tens of millions died in the Bolshevik Revolution”. Presumably the resolution actually references the Russian Civil War, which began some time\u00a0after<\/em> the Bolshevik Revolution, as the initial fighting in Petrograd and in Moscow during the actual seizure of power by the Bolsheviks produced casualties in the hundreds, not even the thousands. Even then, casualties and deaths from starvation or disease incurred in the course of a multi-party civil conflict, coming on the back of devastating economic and human losses incurred during World War I, not to mention the impact of the “Spanish Flu” pandemic, could hardly be blamed on “socialism”, and in any case, do not amount to “tens of millions”. Even the English-language Wikipedia page on the Russian Civil War lists a rather dubious estimate of 7-12 million total casualties<\/em>, not deaths, in the summary table up top, before referencing an Encyclopaedia Britannica entry for an estimate of “as many as 10 million” lives lost10<\/a><\/sup>.<\/p>\n

But this is all quibbling. As would be disputing H.R. 9’s references to “the gulags”, “Terror-Famine”, “the socialist experiment in Cambodia”, or even that “socialism” caused “a failed State with the world’s highest rate of inflation”, though I will note the curious capitalisation of the word “State” in this last part. What halted me dead in my tracks was, instead, the assertion that “the Castro regime…[exiled] millions with nothing but the clothes on their backs.” Millions. <\/em>Out of how much total population, I wondered aloud?<\/p>\n

Again, turning to the most readily available resource to either the general public or to congressional aides, Wikipedia’s entry on the demographics on Cuba11<\/a><\/sup>\u00a0 informs the reader that prior to Castro’s revolution, in 1953, the country’s total population stood at 5.8 million. Then, in 1970, 1981, and 2002, it rose to 8.6 million, 9.7 million and 11.2 million, respectively. This fairly robust population growth, apparently, was taking place just as millions<\/em> of Cubans were being exiled by Castro in the name of, presumably, socialism, which raises an interesting question regarding incredibly high doctrines paired with – as H.R. 9 suggests is the general rule with socialism – death, destitution, inflation, and so on. The point here is that getting to this data takes literally seconds. By implication, H.R. 9’s author or authors must have counted on the majority of their target audience not <\/em>bothering to even ask the question, never mind type the requisite query into an Internet search engine. The information is to be taken on trust<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

In a way, H.R. 9 takes on the characteristics of an old-style religious sermon. The laity is directed to heed the words of the designated religious authority figure – a priest, a shaman, a mullah – and to heed their words without question or argument. In this particular instance, the message of the sermon is much the same as it would have been during the height of the Cold War era, to proclaim socialism as a universal evil, responsible for the clear majority of death and suffering in the world over the past century or so. Consequently, any future proposal, initiative or item of legislative business which the selfsame designated authority figure terms<\/em> to be “socialist”, must take on the same quality and be opposed with every fibre of one’s being. As well, one cannot help but wonder if in any future confrontation between the US and China the latter will be accused of attempting to spread “socialism” so as to subvert American “democracy” and “freedom”, fairly vague concepts in and of themselves. Simply put, after having spent the 2000s and some of the 2010s railing against “islamo-fascism” and “sharia law”, we are back on the anti-communist beat, and the public – at least that part of the public captured by Republican-affiliated media organisations – must be brainwashed accordingly.<\/p>\n

One final footnote here is the identity of the resolution’s sponsor, one Marie Elvira Salazar, a second-term congresswoman from Florida who is not only herself the daughter of Cuban exiles, but whose congressional district encompasses the Cuban exile neighbourhood of Little havana in the city of Miami. Clearly, declaring one’s anti-communist credentials, and in particular railing against the perfidious Castro regime, is not only a politically shrewd move for this particular congresswoman, but might also be something she herself fervently believes in. After all, this pattern of even local-born children absorbing their immigrant parents’ political biases has been replicated in multiple “political” immigrant communities. Of course, whatever Salazar’s own motivations, it would not have been possible for H.R. 9 even to exist had the Republican House leadership not so wished, especially this early on in the new congressional session.<\/p>\n

I suppose all that is left to do now is to wait to see what, precisely, will be dubbed as “socialist” in the coming months and years.<\/p>\n

  1. The full text can be found at https:\/\/www.congress.gov\/bill\/118th-congress\/house-concurrent-resolution\/9\/text\/eh, retrieved February 7, 2023.[↩<\/a>]<\/span><\/li>
  2. Metzger, B., “86 House Democrats voted against a GOP-proposed resolution ‘denouncing the horrors of socialism'”, Insider<\/em>, February 2, 2023, retrieved February 7, 2023.[↩<\/a>]<\/span><\/li>
  3. Schnell, M., “House passes resolution denouncing socialism, vote splits Democrats”, The Hill<\/em>, February 2, 2023, retrieved February 7, 2023.[↩<\/a>]<\/span><\/li>
  4. Surely everyone remembers all the indignant Fox News tirades from the Obama era against dark and shadowy conspiracies to replace the US Constitution with rather nebulously defined “sharia law”…[↩<\/a>]<\/span><\/li>
  5. “In Cuba, American corporations have 5,913 claims that were worth $1.9 billion when they were certified in the 1960s.” Just saying. Taken from Scott, D., “US Corps Claim Billions In Assets In Cuba And Now They’ll Want It Back”, Talking Points Memo<\/em>, December 22, 2014, retrieved February 7, 2023.[↩<\/a>]<\/span><\/li>
  6. A market-based system to encourage emission reductions by enabling corporations to buy and sell “emission credits” on an exchange. No, it does not work. However, that is for another post.[↩<\/a>]<\/span><\/li>
  7. See https:\/\/wtrg.com\/EnergyReport\/National-Energy-Policy.pdf, page 3-3, retrieved February 7, 2023.[↩<\/a>]<\/span><\/li>
  8. For example, see Tyrrell, Jr., R.E., “Cap-and-Trade Socialism”, The American Spectator<\/em>, March 19, 2009, retrieved February 7, 2023.[↩<\/a>]<\/span><\/li>
  9. Really, it takes well under 30 seconds to find the formal definition in any reputable online dictionary…[↩<\/a>]<\/span><\/li>
  10. https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Russian_Civil_War, retriefed February 7, 2023.[↩<\/a>]<\/span><\/li>
  11. https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Demographics_of_Cuba, retrieved February 7, 2023.[↩<\/a>]<\/span><\/li><\/ol>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    It turns out that one of the first initiatives undertaken by the newly elected Republican majority in the US House of Representatives was to demonstrate its unswerving commitment to the still apparently ongoing fight against socialism by enacting a resolution, H.R. 9, entitled “Denouncing the horrors of socialism”1. This resolution was duly passed on February […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[62,57],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-291","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-media-propaganda","category-politics"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/analyticalbear.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/291","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/analyticalbear.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/analyticalbear.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/analyticalbear.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/analyticalbear.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=291"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/analyticalbear.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/291\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":292,"href":"https:\/\/analyticalbear.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/291\/revisions\/292"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/analyticalbear.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=291"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/analyticalbear.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=291"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/analyticalbear.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=291"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}