You’re More Communist Than You Think You Are
Holly Wood, PhD 🌹
445

Wow Holly Wood, you really lived up to your strap line in this one!

If you want to change things significantly you will need to move mountains. You will need to prove that Communism can work in the modern era. That a Government which owns the means of production and takes significant operational responsibility for the delivery of services can thrive in the present globalised context. Which amongst many other things means such a Government will be in debt to the Private Sector to the tune of $trillions always unless the lenders decide otherwise!

In my career I have worked as a civil servant, within the private sector and within the quasi private sector. I have also been the provider of services to many Government bodies. I am clear based upon forty years of direct observation where the means of production should sit and I am clear about what Government does best and what it cannot do well at all. I have also benefitted personally from the opportunities which a liberal free market system offers those of modest ability who work hard and achieve.

If I thought there was a better way to lift the poor out of poverty and afford world class public services would I not first need to relinquish all the benefits I had accumulated under it’s auspices before promoting a different way. Otherwise I must be a hypocrite. In other words to authentically lead a socialist revolution I must first atone my sins. I can’t do this because I don’t believe it. This is not proof that I don’t think it is important to attack poverty and positively support those who need and deserve it. It is proof that I don’t think socialism is the best way to achieve it. And it would be nice if this could be acknowledged more often by those who hold opposing views.

But you may be able to do what I cannot. You may be able to lead a sincere and authentic discussion on the merits of Communism applied to the Real World in its present context. You may be able to articulate the policy differences which would follow and demonstrate the beneficial changes which such policies will bring. You may be able to cost these policies and present clearly the long term impact on public sector finances. And on debt and taxes. You may be able to articulate the uncertainties and risks and explain the contingency solutions which are in place should things stray from the path intended. You may be able to explain why such systems of Government have failed so many others in the past. If you can do all of this you may be able to convince enough people to depart a system which has worked fantastically well ( though with some well known flaws) and opt knowingly for something radically different. If you stay with the substance, I wish you well.

PS I know it would be easier to simply identify those presently disenchanted, help to exaggerate their ill feeling and then offer them everything on a plate. History will call this Trumpism. History will also show that, if this is what we reduce politics to, we will have squandered our future. We need to raise not lower the quality of public debate.

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.