Democratic socialism. It’s not the same as socialism socialism, because it’s democratic. Right? Or something, right? People are buying that; people buy that now, right? Apparently. As though adding the word “democratic” in front of a word changes what it means. Just because we toss something to a vote doesn’t change what that something is, nor does it alter whether that something is inherently good or bad.

A couple of examples, because I know you’ll ask: Hamas was democratically elected as the government in Gaza – despite the fact that the destruction of not only Israel, but the eradication of all Jews, is in their official charter. Robert Mugabe, or Bobby Mugabe if you prefer, was democratically elected by a loving majority in Zimbabwe. Zimbabwe! How’s that working out?

Venezuela? Well, Hugo Chavez, noted personal favorite friend of Sean Penn, to whom he constantly pointed as being unfairly characterized as a dictator when, in fact, he was democratically elected as a socialist.

Well, how’d that workout for Venezuela? Well, it’s now on the brink of collapse despite it being one of the most resource rich nations in the entire world. Basic things like eggs, milk, flour, and toilet paper are either too expensive for the average Venezuelan or simply out of stock… out of stock, mind you... democratically. I know, some of you will say, “Well that’s not fair, because really we knew all along it technically was a dictatorship.” Ok – that’s fair; let’s move on to example number two.

Denmark? Ok, here’s the time where you point to an entirely homogenous population about one sixtieth the size of America’s, and you point to that as the blueprint? Ok – let’s go there. This is a place where the middle class can’t even afford a car because of the 180% new-car tax. And the Prime Minister was so fed up with Americans pointing to it as a beacon for socialist success that he felt compelled to clarify, “I would like to make one thing clear: Denmark is far from a socialist planned economy; Denmark is a market economy.”

Sweden? I love Sweden! Ok, great bikini team, and thanks to that country my armoire now doubles as a bookcase. Speaking of which, the founder of IKEA – let’s be honest, the only real cool export from Sweden aside from a few good hockey players – left Sweden because of the stifling high tax rate. So, Sweden – good place, not bad people – but a successful model for a viable economy in today’s global market? Incorrect.

The fact is that, over time, the greatest enemy of socialism is reality. The reality that human nature will invariably pull certain people toward individualism and success and others toward laziness and collectivism. The tension between the makers and the takers always – always! – leads to socialism’s inevitable collapse. But I know that I can give you examples of failed socialist economies until I’m blue in the face, and you won’t care. Because at least socialism is inherently more morally altruistic than the evil, greedy capitalistic war mongering seen in the West.

Greed? What’s more greedy than wanting to take from someone else something that you haven’t earned? Unlike capitalism – free enterprise, which can only occur truly through voluntary transaction – socialism can only occur at gunpoint. That’s what it comes down to. If you don’t pay your taxes, once you get through the IRS and the auditing and the lawyers and the PR stunts, people make you give the government your money, increasing amount of your money the more successful you are, or they send in scary men with guns to take you away.

Now, so long as the people having their stuff taken away at gunpoint are in the minority, and the majority feels that they’ll get to benefit from more said taken stuff, you’ll always be able to win that decision through a popular vote and claim the moral high ground through democracy.

Putting the word “democratic” in front your socialism doesn’t make it any inherently more moral, nor less violent.

Did you get that, American wannabe socialists?

Also, get a job. Please, like a real job… You’ll probably have to shave first.

Venezuela—where I was born and still have family—bad.

Cuba—bad.

Zimbabwe—bad.

Soviet Union—bad.

China under Mao—bad.

Sweden, Denmark, Norway—good.

This is the socialist report card as it currently stands.

Never mind that Venezuela, Cuba, Zimbabwe, the Soviet Union, Mao’s China were once good. Once they go bad, they stay bad and are quickly forgotten, lost down the memory hole.

But those Nordic paradises? They never let you down.

Whenever Bernie, the “Squad”, and the growing horde of Democratic Socialists ever get cornered, there’s always “like Denmark” to come to the rescue.

“No, no, we don’t want anything like what’s going on in Venezuela. Denmark is what we have in mind.”

Except they don’t.

And it’s time we all figured this out.

Before it’s too late.

Here’s what you need know about Scandinavian countries:

They are capitalist in wealth creation and socialist in wealth distribution.

They have low corporate taxes, around 20 percent, no higher than in America.

Unlike America, neither Norway nor Sweden nor Denmark has a government-set minimum wage.

Most make it very easy to start a new business.

Most have private healthcare and education options.

Yes, the Nordic countries have an expansive welfare state, but everyone pays into the system—rich, middle class and poor.

Nobody escapes the tax man: because nobody escapes the 25% value added tax. This sales tax, a tax on what you buy is regressive, meaning it falls much more heavily percentage-of-income-wise on the poor and middle class than it does on the rich.

This concept is a complete non-starter for American socialists who want only “the rich” to pay more, even though America’s tax system is already steeply progressive: “The rich,” the top 10 percent, pay about 70% of all income taxes. But for the socialist it never seems to be enough.

So, if the American Left has rejected the Scandinavian model, which model is it embracing?

Well, where do the leading figures on the American Left, from Sean Penn to Michael Moore and Bill Ayers go when they want to praise socialism? Here’s a hint: When was the last time you saw Bernie in Copenhagen?

First it was the Soviet Union. Then it was Cuba. Then it was Venezuela.

Venezuelan socialism, like current American socialism, is based on sowing social division. The Left in Venezuela divided the country not merely between the rich and the poor, but white and black or brown—between Europeans, Africans, and indigenous people. Hugo Chavez made much of his black and Indian roots. Venezuelan socialists were bringing down statues of Columbus long before American leftists did.

Once you establish the villain class, taking away their wealth is not hard to do. Whatever Chavez and now his successor Nicolas Maduro wanted, they took—or, if you care about moral clarity, they stole—always, like the French and Russian Revolutions, in the name of “equality.”

It didn’t start out that way, of course. It never does. Chavez portrayed himself as a moderate in his early presidential campaigns. Expropriations came later. What Chavez and Maduro achieved at the end of a gun, the American Left would achieve through extremely high taxation on income, wealth, and inheritance.

But we shouldn’t leave guns out of the discussion. In 2010, Venezuelan socialists started a campaign to disarm law-abiding citizens under the guise of stopping gun violence. They called it Desarma la violencia.

When citizens, now unarmed, began to protest the corruption and tyranny of the socialist government, Chavez and then Maduro unleashed a group of criminal thugs—the colectivos—to terrorize them. Their specific targets included small business owners, entrepreneurs, farmers, and clergy. There are no colectivos or Antifa in Scandinavia.

Venezuela is now a cautionary tale. All the people you see on the news rummaging through garbage cans or standing in line to get food, toilet paper, and gas—those are the ordinary citizens. The country’s leaders aren’t missing any meals. The socialist elite, the so-called Chavistas, eat in fine restaurants and go on European vacations. Miraculously, it always works out that way.

The American Left keeps telling us they want to take us to Stockholm, but its policies point in the direction of Caracas. My birth country was once prosperous and free, but socialism destroyed it.

Take heed, America.

Socialism is a term that takes in a very broad number of economic- social systems from Communism to democratic socialism as exists in many Western European countries.
Socialism started out as the ideology of European workers. It never caught on in this country because of labor unions. Communism is an international movement calling for violent revolution to overthrow capitalist society. All or most traditional parts of the old order such as religion exist to keep working people down. In order to protect the revolution, a dictatorship of the proletariat must be established until a time when there are no more capitalist nations in the world. Then a world of plenty can be created for and by the workers in a classless society. The credo of communism is " from each according to his ability, to each according to his need. Good poetry, but terrible economics.
Democratic socialism is very different. It favors a govt. takeover of certain industries, but not all. It is evolutionary rather than revolutionary. It gains power when voted into office by the majority, and transfers power to the winner of the election, when defeated.