Mamdani's democratic socialism is a lie

 As someone from a country that combines communist authoritarianism and imperialism, when I was young, I once pondered: if we could combine Western democracy with the state-controlled economy, enforced equality, and universal welfare of communist countries, could it produce a society superior to capitalism and the existing Soviet and PRC models? But this is impossible. A truly democratically elected government, governing the country according to the principles of democracy and the rule of law, cannot use coercive violence to impose so-called equality among its own citizens. Democratic socialism is like saying there exists a person who loves freedom but simultaneously enjoys being oppressed.

Below is a deep dive into democratic socialism—its conceptual core, historical attempts, theoretical contradictions, practical outcomes, and why the original text calls it an oxymoron. I’ll structure it in clear sections for readability.

1. What “Democratic Socialism” Claims to BeCore promise (in one sentence):
“Use peaceful, democratic elections to win state power, then use that state power to enforce economic equality, nationalized industries, and universal welfare—all while preserving civil liberties and the rule of law.”
Key pillars (as articulated by figures like Bernie Sanders, Jeremy Corbyn, or the DSA in the U.S.):
  1. Political democracy (free elections, free speech, independent courts).
  2. Economic democracy (worker co-ops, heavy redistribution, public ownership of “commanding heights”).
  3. Non-violent transition (no revolution, just ballots → policy).
2. The Central Contradiction (Why the Text Calls It Impossible)
Democratic Principle
Socialist Goal
Conflict
Voluntary consent (citizens vote in policies)
Enforced equality (tax 70% of top earners, seize private firms)
Once a majority votes against redistribution, the system must either (a) respect the vote and abandon equality, or (b) override the vote → end of democracy.
Rule of law (predictable, impartial)
Class warfare via state (expropriate “the rich”)
Laws must be applied unequally to achieve equality of outcome → corruption of law.
Exit rights (leave jobs, move capital)
Planned economy (capital controls, bans on private schools/hospitals)
Citizens who opt out are punished → coercion.
Mathematical analogy (game theory):
Imagine a repeated voting game where:
  • Round 1: 51% vote for 70% wealth tax.
  • Round 2: The 49% (now poorer) plus some defectors vote to repeal it.
    To lock in equality, the socialist government must:
  • Rig future votes, or
  • Use force outside democratic channels.
    → Nash equilibrium = either democracy dies or socialism dies.
3. Historical Stress Tests (Real-World Data)
Country / Experiment
Democratic Input
Socialist Output
Outcome
Sweden (1970–1990)
Genuine multiparty democracy
100%+ marginal taxes, wage-earner funds to nationalize firms
Backlash: 1980s tax revolts, SAP lost power, privatized funds. Socialism scaled back to preserve democracy.
Chile under Allende (1970–1973)
Freely elected (36% plurality)
Nationalized copper, 600+ firms
Coup: Military crushed both democracy and socialism.
Venezuela (Chávez → Maduro)
Started with elections
Price controls, expropriations
Hyperinflation 1,000,000%, opposition jailed → neither democratic nor socialist (just authoritarian cronyism).
Yugoslavia (Tito)
Worker councils (sort of democratic)
Market + state planning
Collapsed into ethnic war; no sustainable model.
Pattern: The closer a regime gets to enforced equality, the more it must suppress dissent → democracy erodes.
4. Micro-Level Proof: The “Forced Equality” ParadoxSuppose a democratic socialist state mandates:
“No household may earn >3× the median income.”
  • Year 1: Tax/subsidize to enforce.
  • Year 2: High earners work less, hide income, or emigrate (human capital flight).
  • Year 3: Revenue drops → state must seize assets or ban emigration.
    → Violence enters, even if disguised as “law.”
Empirical:
  • East Germany built a wall to stop exit.
  • Cuba jails “desertors.”
  • Even mild capital controls (e.g., 1970s UK) caused brain drain.
5. Intellectual Autopsy: Can You Square the Circle?
Proposed “Fix”
Why It Fails
“Participatory budgeting” (Porto Alegre style)
Works at municipal level for parks, not for nationalizing Amazon or Tesla.
Universal Basic Income (UBI) + democracy
UBI is redistribution, not socialism. Funded by taxes → still voluntary (can be repealed).
Worker co-ops only (market socialism)
Voluntary co-ops (Mondragón) thrive, but forcing all firms to be co-ops requires state violence.
6. Conclusion: Why the Original Text Is Correct
“Democratic socialism is like a person who loves freedom but enjoys being oppressed.”
  • Freedom = you can vote the socialists out.
  • Oppression = once they’re in, they must prevent you from voting them out to protect “equality.”
Thus:
  • Pure democracy → inequality persists (people vote with self-interest).
  • Pure socialism → democracy dies (state overrides votes).
  • Hybrid → collapses into one or the other.
Final analogy:
It’s like designing a car that runs on gasoline and must never consume fuel. The moment it moves, the contradiction is exposed.

评论

发表评论

此博客中的热门博文

The five stages and strategies of South Africanization of the United States

图片
In today's globalized world, the United States, as the beacon of Western democracy, faces unprecedented internal challenges. From racial tensions and economic inequality to surging waves of immigration, these issues are not isolated but interwoven into a complex web that subtly reveals an unsettling similarity—to South Africa's post-apartheid era. After ending apartheid in 1994, South Africa should have ushered in prosperity, yet it has been mired in long-term stagnation due to failed land reforms, economic decline, and persistent racial antagonism: forced expropriation of white farmers' land led to a sharp drop in agricultural output, gun control policies exacerbated skyrocketing crime rates, and government corruption along with media control further eroded social trust. Today, certain social dynamics in the United States seem to be replaying this trajectory: the infiltration of extreme left-wing ideologies, the proliferation of identity politics, and the cultural shoc...
阅读全文

The Third Way of Governing a Diverse Nation：Black people have the right to establish their own autonomous state

图片
    The fate of Britain after World War II—victorious yet defeated—stemmed not only from the successful implementation of the Soviet-American strategy to suppress Britain but, more critically, from Britain’s inability to devise a system capable of establishing an acceptable order for the vast territories and diverse peoples conquered during its imperialist era. In essence, the challenges confronting the United States and European nations today mirror those faced by Britain post-World War II: how to create an order that citizens of different cultures and ethnicities are willing to accept. In my judgment, the Trump administration is clearly incapable of achieving this task. Indeed, the nature of the problems it faces parallels those encountered by the British government after World War II, as well as by Caesar and Augustus in ancient Rome. Under pressure from the United States and the Soviet Union, post-war Britain opted for contraction, shrinking into a small, single-ethnicity ...
阅读全文

The overthrow of the white South African regime should be seen as aggression：Correspondence between the increase in illegal immigration in South Africa and the collapse of white rule in South Africa

图片
South Africa does indeed face an immigration issue, and the increase in foreign immigrants may have been closely tied to the overthrow of white rule (apartheid), particularly as their presence and involvement played a role in this historical shift. Below, I’ll analyze the correspondence between the rise in foreign immigration and the collapse of white rule in South Africa, as per your request, drawing on historical data and context. 1. Historical Context of Immigration in South Africa South Africa has been a hub for labor migration in southern Africa since the 19th century, especially during the mining boom (gold and diamonds), when large numbers of black workers from neighboring countries like Mozambique, Lesotho, and Eswatini were recruited. During the apartheid era (1948-1994), these immigrants were tightly controlled, treated as temporary labor without permanent residency rights, and deported after their contracts ended. Meanwhile, white immigrants, primarily from Europe, were priv...
阅读全文