Per Merriam-Webster, envy is ‘painful or resentful awareness of an advantage enjoyed by another joined with a desire to possess the same advantage’. Basically, envy is wanting what someone else has. But envy is also a kernel of discontent, used by many to breed us-vs-them divides. The advocates of Socialism play the envy instrument like a virtuoso musician. Let’s dig.
Is there anything easier than comparing one’s income to Jeff Bezos, the current ‘World’s Richest Man’, to find oneself inadequate? Bezos is worth somewhere around $196B, so everyone else is looking up at him, in a financial sense. With median family income in the US at around $60K/year, it would only take slightly more than 3 MILLION YEARS to accumulate (I hate big numbers math—I hope I did that correctly). Suffice it to say, it will NEVER happen. So, now what? The normal person sees this situation, and continues living their lives, without a second thought (other than a dream). Because normal people are fully aware that there are larger and smaller income earners in the world. Those income numbers are based upon a myriad of things: hard work, effort, luck, skill, artistry, talent, perseverance, planning, education, timing, risk, vision, creativity, more luck, etc. Not everyone has what it takes to even start a business, much less a successful one. And the world is littered with failed businesses, regardless of the efforts of their respective owners—that is the ‘risk’ part. And that is absolutely OK. Some are better suited to work at companies, others are best to just be customers of businesses. In Capitalism, if you cannot produce a product or service, at a price enough customers want to pay, at a cost to produce low enough to generate a profit at that price, your business will fail. Many generate a profit, but not enough to satisfy the effort and risk needed to do so.
The problem is when that envy factor creeps in: why does a successful person make more than ME? This is the heart of the position used by advocates of Socialism to try to sell it to The People. Note that those advocates only need a few LOUD proponents to gain momentum for their ideology. Also note that the advocates have a steady supply of adherents to their cause: every year, high school and college graduates swell the available customers of Socialism. High schoolers, because they are brand new to the economic work world, and college grads, because they are frequently starting at LESS than zero, with college debt. There MUST be a better system than the current one, right? This one is so UNFAIR! Look at how much successful people make vs US! That the successful folks may have taken DECADES to achieve their current status means nothing to the Socialists. That they took enormous risks, put all of their resources into the endeavor that made them successful, is not relevant to the youngsters. We want similar success NOW! Think of the Socialist as the adult version of the participation trophy—they want the results, without the risk or effort—just like the losing kid with the meaningless trophy. Except Socialists don’t even really want to suit up in the game at all—just rake in the rewards of others.
Socialism is the lowest common denominator of economic systems. In order to pay all folks at the same general income level, it must reduce the income of the producers to pay the less- or non-productive. That is also the reason that Socialism must be implemented by governmental or military force: producers are generally less than enthusiastic at supporting those others—those that cannot or will not produce for themselves. Note: productive people will succeed in nearly any economic system, at least to the limits that such systems allow. But as long as the non- and low-producing folks can be made envious of the assets, income, and lifestyles of the productive, Socialism will have its champions. The eternal hope is that the youngsters grow up. They get experience. They work, earn, and spend. They learn how Capitalism works. They become producers, at whatever level their efforts, talents, and luck, takes them. Then they learn that Socialism takes from THEM to pay for other less productive folks, and then they decide it is a poor system. The cycle continues. Now, not all youth grow up. Some just let their envy fester for decades, decrying how unfair the Capitalist world is for them. Somehow, Capitalism did not provide them the income they thought they deserved—and envy feeds that fire like gasoline. Further adding to that flame are teachers, at every level of education, instructing young minds of the evils of Capitalism. Maybe those teachers are unhappy with THEIR income levels, that such degreed folks should be paid better? Whatever the cause, the result is the same: a new crop of Socialism advocates, created by their instruction.
There are political animals that favor Socialism. I don’t know if it is a chicken-egg construct: do politicians, that are pure overhead for taxpayers, trend toward Socialism; or do Socialists tend towards politics, for the same reason? There is a reason I lump politicians into the low- and non-producing category. In the non-political world, failure has a steep price for the person failing; in the political world, it frequently has none (to the politician). Hell, sometimes, they get re-elected for DECADES, without any productivity or success at all. Whether the citizens pay for the failure is subject to debate.
Thank you for taking the time to read my article! Feel free to add comments (good or bad) in the box below. In addition, there is a link at the bottom of the article to view other items I’ve written at Global Liberty Media. Enjoy!
