In this week's It’s Debatablearticle, Rick Rosen and Charles Moster debate whether the rise of democratic socialism is beneficial for America. Rosen retired as a professor from the Texas Tech University School of Law and is a retired U.S. Army colonel. Moster is the Founder of the Moster Law Firm based in Lubbock with offices in Austin, Dallas, Houston, and Midland. He is also a technologist, software developer, and author of numerous published books in the areas of AI, futurism, and the law. He has contributed legal articles and seminars on whether the coming conscious computers should be granted full legal rights by the Supreme Court.
Rosen concerned about rise of DSA
I am neither a Democrat nor a Republican, but when I was younger I was a “diehard” Democrat. For example, in
1972, I was a volunteer for U.S. Sen. George McGovern’s presidential campaign, driving his delegates at the Miami Beach Convention, canvassing precincts with my wife, and serving as a poll watcher to ensure our voters came to the polls. And when all 10 voted, I went home.
Although no longer a Democrat, I am an American deeply concerned by the hijacking of the party by the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA). DSA seeks to transform completely the character of American government by abolishing the Senate, the presidency, and the Supreme Court; opening the borders and abolishing ICE; eliminating prisons and defunding the police and the military; and redistributing wealth (i.e., private property) to fund their mammoth social programs and likely enrich themselves.
DSA advocates a parliamentary system under which the courts would be subservient.
Our constitutional rights would be wholly dependent upon the will of a parliament, threatening or jettisoning core constitutional principles such as freedom of speech and religion. DSA’s platform calls for the government seizure of the largest corporations.
And one of New York City Mayor Zohran Mandami’s chief aides believes that home ownership is a “weapon of white supremacy” and proclaims a governmental power “to seize private property” and “impoverish the white middle class.”
DSA’s key litmus test is Israel, which the DSA virulently despises, while applauding Hamas and Hezbollah terrorism. For example, Mayor Mamdani says he supports Israel’s right to exist but not as a Jewish state; he contends that no state should privilege one religion over another. Really? Mamdani apparently never read the Palestinian Basic Law, which declares that Palestine is an Arab state and Islam is its official religion, two provisions that appear in virtually every Arab state constitution. And the Palestinian Authority—just like Jordan which occupied the West Bank before June 1967—wants a state that is Judenrein (free of Jews), while Israel protects freedom of religion.
DSA claims that Israel is an apartheid country, thereby justifying terrorists attacks against Jews, and yet Israel is the only nation in the Middle East where all Arabs can vote and be elected to public office.
DSA asserts that Israel has committed genocide in Gaza without ever considering the fact that Israel is engaged in a war in Gaza, and that Hamas (1) started the war with a genocidal attack against Israeli civilians, (2) refuses to protect vulnerable Gazan civilians by permitting them use of its extensive tunnel network, and (3) places legitimate military targets in the midst of the civilian population.
Indeed, Hamas’ stated strategy is to generate Gazan civilian deaths, thereby spawning what Lenin termed “useful idiots,” like many DSA members, who then declare a genocide.
While Democratic Socialists are predominantly white, affluent, and have college degrees, many are clearly not well educated, and their election to office threatens to undermine the very foundations that keep our government strong.
Moster responds on DSA concerns
Rick paints a despicable picture of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) and I agree with his criticisms, particularly the virulent antisemitism and hostility towards Israel. I have no doubt that the mayor of New York hates Jews and would whole heartedly support a march celebrating Hamas. If that’s what democratic socialism is all about, count me out.
But it’s not. What Rick fails to state is that the DSA is a “political organization,” not an ideology. The concept of “democratic socialism” is an ideological construct which embraces programs many of us – particularly in Lubbock support. For starters, I have a Social Security card in my wallet which I am certain is shared by many of our readers. Recall that when FDR’s bill for social security was debated in 1935, critics far and wide branded it as a socialist poison pill.
U.S. Rep. William Ditter, R-Pennsylvania, warned during the 1935 congressional debate that Americans would become “puppets of a socialistic state.”
U.S. Sen. Frederick Hale (R-Maine) attacked Roosevelt's New Deal for creating “socialistic agencies.” Fortunately, Social Security passed and these extremists were proven wrong.
We collectively finance public education, firefighters, highways, and even the court system. No one would dare refer to any of these institutions as being socialist in nature.
Moreover, the utilization of public resources to serve social interests does not translate into the transformation to a totalitarian ideology, extremist religious sect, or storm-trooping Hitler fanatics. There is a clear demarcation between the horrific pronouncements of fanatical DSA adherents and loyal Americans who simply embrace economic initiatives which offer social benefits to tackle problems including universal health care, retirement, daycare, homelessness, etc.
Notably, many countries have adopted democratic socialism without jettisoning bedrock democratic principles. England and the Nordic nations are prime examples. These countries have private property, free elections, competitive free markets, freedom of speech – and critically – democratic elections and representative governments.
I personally believe that capitalism is the engine of innovation, creativity, and social advancement. That said, I have a serious problem with kids going hungry in Lubbock (22.2%), nationally (20%), and the daily outrage shared by military vets who face homelessness (32,495). We can and must set aside public funds to protect those in need without fear of losing our democratic ideals and basic humanity.
Rosen makes a second point on DSA
DSA is a political party driven by an ideology that wants to gut the Constitution. It advocates eliminating most major institutions that preserve and protect our Republic as well as the Republic itself. And DSA seeks to seize control of private property and the means of production; that is, abolish capitalism.
Charles mentions that citizens “collectively finance public education, firefighters, highways, and even the court system.” Of course they do, it’s part of what governments should do, and capitalism provides the resources to fund these activities. This is not socialism; the opposite of socialism is not nihilism or anarchy. I admit that Social Security may be a socialist enterprise, and like most socialist systems, it is poorly administered, rife with corruption, and nearly insolvent. I paid Social Security taxes for more than 60 years, and I wonder whether private investments would have been better.
Neither the Nordic countries nor England are socialist; they have free-market economies with private property and competitive businesses—the antithesis of what DSA wants. Moreover, DSA members are fanatical. Many flatly hate the United States and are utterly intolerant of those with whom they disagree—including so-called mainstream Democrats who they declare “don’t have the right values.” What is worrisome is that many of these same Democrats have “bent a knee” to these zealots, offering loyalty as a means of retaining their own power. DSA may ultimately subjugate the Democratic party and its weak leadership.
Many DSA leaders are the privileged recipients of their parents’ largess—acquired ironically through capitalism. Many have never punched a timecard or met a payroll; they have never held a “real” job. And for some reason, they have the gall to suggest that they have the experience to govern those who work hard every day, pay their taxes, and support themselves and their families.
DSA openly embraces communist dictatorships. Its principal influencer praises Mao Zedong as one of the world’s “great leaders,” even though Mao killed between 40 and 80 million people. DSA recently paid tribute to Cuba’s Fidel Castro on the 100th anniversary of his birth, ignoring the thousands he killed or imprisoned and the poverty he produced. DSA blames Secretary of State Marco Rubio for killing Cuban women and children by blockading critical resources. In fact, the United States does not maintain a blockade of Cuba; communism—the economic system DSA champions—caused Cuba’s economic demise decades ago.
Moster concludes It's Debatable on DSA
It seems like Rick wrote my argument—and very well, I might add. He agrees that Social Security might be a “socialist enterprise.” He is certainly not offering to give back the benefits which were accumulated over the years. Somewhat like pregnancy, you can't be a little bit socialist.
The point I'm making is that an ideology is different than a fascist political party, like the DSA, which is contrary to our very ideals as Americans. Similarly, the utilization of some economic socialist concepts does not transform me or anyone else into a socialist or communist.
As many of my readers over more than a decade can glean, I am an ardent capitalist without apology. The economic engine of free enterprise has brought forth a cornucopia for most of us, but not all. Critically, innovation resulting from competition has generated creative ideas and technology, which have transformed not only our society, but the world.
That said, I cannot forget the people left behind. I have worked incredibly hard over the years to build my law firm, which employs close to 30 people in Lubbock and four other cities. They depend on me to pay their mortgages and care for their families. I don't count on the government for anything except basic services, thank you.
But I've been fortunate. I had the benefit of wonderful parents, exceptional schools, and the inclination to never give up.
To be clear, I have no sympathy for the idle, useless, and knee-bending miscreants who blame America. They shouldn't get a dime. I have particular disdain for the entitled hypocrites like Hollywood elites and the likes of Brittney Griner. She should have stayed in Russia given her hatred of America. Putin had a very special place in his “gulag” just for her.
However, you can expand social benefits to starving children, disabled vets, and the homeless without embracing the DSA. People without fault should not be made to suffer. We are better than that as a society. Aren’t we?
The DSA can go to Hades and take the mayor of N.Y. along for the ride. I agree 100% with Rick's condemnation, but I literally would not throw the babies out with the bathwater.
This article originally appeared on Lubbock Avalanche-Journal: It's Debatable explores rise of democratic socialism in America
