| Photo by Ilse Orsel on Unsplash
Part V of “Socioeconomics Reforms” Series
There is still time for New York City Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani, a Democratic Socialist leader, to fine-tune or even reverse his promises to voters. Because Socialism does not work in democratic countries, especially in nations with crony or cartel capitalism (masquerading as free enterprise or free market), it controls finance, industry, commerce, and even healthcare. Perhaps the Mamdani Administration must adopt the best features of cooperativism, some of which were previously discussed in this column.
Here are some apparent reasons why “democratic (sic) socialism” worked only in countries with socialist political systems that feature single-party rule and authoritarianism. And where the state maintains control over key industries, though most have introduced alleged market-oriented reforms to spur economic growth. Success in these nations often means significant state-directed economic development and touted social progress indicators like improved literacy and healthcare for the ruling class, but not for minorities (who usually total more than the controlling cliques’ population).
But they usually face challenges such as human-rights concerns, economic instability, and a lack of political and religious freedoms. These countries often use prison labor, and inmate workers are usually not paid at all. Many of these socialist nations pay skilled and educated workers at a maximum rate, frequently reported as equivalent to US$17 per day, and often without fringe benefits or perks. No worker in New York City, or anywhere else in the United States or other developed countries in the Free World, will like this system, especially the pay.
The best example is the People’s Republic of China, which the Chinese Communist Party governs, and the regime tolerates no other party. China uses a “socialist-oriented market economy” or “state capitalism” model that, while it lifted hundreds of millions out of poverty and achieved massive economic growth, has left many hundreds of millions more poor. While it became the world’s second-largest economy, very few foreigners like to migrate to China.
Some countries in Scandinavia practice social-democratic systems (that are actually “mixed economies”) with some successes. But these nations are democratic-market economies that incorporate hybrid socialist policies, such as universal healthcare, free education, and robust social safety nets, funded by progressive taxation. They are often considered “successful” by high standards of living, low inequality, and high social progress. But many Scandinavian families do not consider their homelands utopias and have migrated to other developed countries with lower taxes and better economic opportunities.
Here is reality: if the Chinese people are indeed happy, how come tens of thousands of affluent Chinese — with the right political connections in their homeland — use anchor babies to remain in the United States and, with the aid of high-priced immigration lawyers, eventually become American citizens? But before China, the former USSR, which backed the Chinese leaders, also practiced a command economy. But the Soviet system eventually collapsed in the 1990s.
“Perhaps American politicians must study seriously the turning of vital industries to cooperatives, banks to credit unions, and other co-op ventures. Even failing rural hospitals and small-to-medium farms can be saved…. [b]y turning them into co-ops owned by their workers, consumers or patients, …”
In Part III of this series, this column said: The recent victory of New York Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani, a Democratic Socialist leader, reminded this columnist that his grandfather-in-law, the late Senator Isabelo (Don Belong) de los Reyes, is acknowledged as the father of Filipino Socialism, the prime mover of the Philippine Labor Movement, and the first Filipino Renaissance Man. He also founded the Philippine Independent Church, which works together with the Episcopal Church of the United States and the Anglican Church of the United Kingdom.
Democratic Socialism did not even work in the Philippines when it was a U.S. colony. And unfortunately, its founder, Senator De los Reyes, died in 1938, eight years before the United States returned to the Filipino people their political independence on July 4, 1946. Independence made matters worse for all — except for “The Imperial Manila” (TIM) and its cronies in politics, business, industry, commerce, and even the churches. An estimated 100 Filipino families, their kin, and in-laws make up TIM’s leadership. They still control the Philippines.
Even the labor movement that Don Belong de los Reyes also founded has failed to protect workers for nearly 80 years now. Why? Many labor-union leaders were allegedly controlled by politicians who, in turn, were manipulated by the TIM lords and their cronies. Jimmy Hoffa (God bless his soul) would pale in comparison to top Filipino labor leaders.
Perhaps American politicians must study seriously the turning of vital industries to cooperatives, banks to credit unions, and other co-op ventures. Even failing rural hospitals and small-to-medium farms can be saved. How? By turning them into co-ops owned by their workers, consumers or patients, their kin, and other participants in public-private partnerships.
