Communism Deserves the same Stigma as Fascism

By Brandon Chesner

 Protester wearing a Che Guevara t-shirt, despite him being a mass murdering tyrant.

Protester wearing a Che Guevara t-shirt, despite him being a mass murdering tyrant.

Fascism is central planning of private property with oppression stemming from an elite class. Communism is the central planning of public property, forcibly stolen by the state, with a tyranny of the majority teaming up with an elite class. Two sides of the same evil coin. Both put the individual last behind the interests of the state. Under a wide lens, the general principles behind the two, and the deadly consequences of their beliefs manifesting in society, are dangerous and morally reprehensible. The differences are in the small details. Who owns the property, where the theft originates, which group does the oppression, etc.

Yet, surprisingly to anyone who had survived the horrors of communism, these beliefs are becoming trendy. Why does saying “I’m literally a fascist” carry far more disgust and social stigma than people saying, “I’m literally a communist”? When discussing horrific examples of socialism or communism you’ll usually get the cookie-cutter “that wasn’t real socialism/communism” response. How many nations need to try, and completely fail before it actually is real communism? The Soviet Union, North Korea, Cuba, Venezuela, China, Laos, Vietnam, Cambodia, East Germany, Somalia, the list goes on.

Maybe, if you're lucky, they’ll say, “what about Scandinavian countries?” Just don’t say that to the PM of Denmark, a go-to example of ‘successful socialism’.  In a speech, he acknowledged the large welfare state, but noted his country “is also a successful market economy with much freedom to pursue your dreams and live your life as you wish”. Redistribution of wealth may be a key part of a socialist regime, but with a free market, you're far from the textbook definition. Resources and industry rely on private decisions and the market, not a collective order from the state.

Why do I used ‘socialist’ and ‘communist’ interchangeably? As Lenin would say, “socialism is the stepping stone to communism”. They’re two different steps on the same ladder to a failed, starving nation. Socialism is the evil economic system of a communist government. Communists utilize authoritarian rule and oppressive regimes coupled with the violent theft of property and self-determination.

When you think of great American socialist politicians… ‘great’ probably isn’t the right word. Socialists aren’t great. But, anyway, you normally think of FDR and Bernie Sanders. Just to illustrate how similar the philosophy of fascism, a universally hated set of beliefs, is to socialism, take a look at what history’s ‘favorite’ fascists had to say about The New Deal. Hitler had praised the way FDR took charge of the economy, and Mussolini openly labeled his policies as fascist. Was he, as the left loves to phrase it, ‘literally Hitler’? No. He did lock up over a hundred thousand Japanese for the crime of being Japanese, but he wasn’t anywhere near the level of evil those two were. I’ll save that label for the real communists, like Stalin or Rocket Man.

A good communist believes in theft, slavery, murder, and conformity. You’d never hear them outright advocate for these violent ideas, but listen carefully, for they’ve become experts at masking ideas with loving language.

‘Paying your fair share’ is the predecessor for their justification of stealing the earned income and wealth of the innocent for the ‘good of society’. What is a ‘fair share’? Is it fair that the top 1% pays 39.5% of income tax, or even that the top 10% pay 70% or income tax? Is it fair that those contributing the most, employing the most, and making the American dream accessible to millions, are demonized for alleged greed? You know what they say; taxation is the price we pay for not being thrown in jail for tax evasion. The evil bourgeoisie, or capitalists, as a communist would say, are the most generous in society.

I could easily go on about how the 1% makes up one third of all charitable donations, and the fact that America donates far more than any European country, 1.67% of our GNP, which is twice the amount of the next most charitable country, Britain. Or that conservatives donate 30% more than liberals. But I won’t bore you with the obvious.

What makes the free market and the wealthy the most generous and most deserving of keeping their wealth is why they’re rich. First, most of the billionaires’ net worth isn’t in their income or hoarded in the bank. It’s a massive stock portfolio where their wealth lies in the value of the companies they own.

To get to that massive level, one must provide a good or service that people want at a price people are willing to pay. In some way, all these millionaires and billionaires have made the world a much better place through innovation. Where would the world be without telephones, or light bulbs, or iPhones, or washing machines? These brilliant people saw a way to line their pockets, and they pounced. And in pursuing the ‘greed’ communists despise, the greed claimed to be ruining the world by evil men, what happened? Thousands of workers have the opportunity to feed themselves and their family, millions of people have access to a once luxury now affordable good that monumentally makes life easier for them, dozens of inventors were able to use that idea to further innovation, and the man who brought all this to the world gets financially rewarded. They didn’t get that way via compulsion. No one forced people to buy what they’re selling. In a free market society, all transactions are completely voluntary. You give them your money because you want something they have. They became rich because you liked what they made enough to pay them for it.

What do communists think these heroes of society deserve for bettering the world? They want the government to hold them up at gun point and demand they return the money the people voluntarily gave them in exchange for the products they sold. Forced wealth redistribution is an inherently violent idea. Give up the wealth you’ve earned or face forceful separation of you from that wealth and a long jail sentence.

The forced at gunpoint redistribution of wealth is small potatoes next to the abolition of private property. The things you own, that you’ve worked countless hours for, no longer belong to you, because 51% of the population said so. Think about it; you work hard building a company that provides a product which millions benefit from. You employ thousands, spend years without pay building it up, all to have a mob come by and claim possession of your hard work. Hardly fair. All while being demonized for taking large compensations for hard work and creating jobs. And if you refuse to hand over your property to those who have not earned it, you die.

You are a slave to the state. The fruit of your labor doesn’t belong to you, like they’d have you believe. Everything you do goes to the government for them to decide who gets what. You are a slave to those who refuse to work as hard as you. Your work goes to them, not you, the rightful owner of your money or company. Motivation to work goes down for those on top. Why put in effort when anything in excess of the collective average is stolen? The bottom slack because they’re being taken care of. People starve, factories close, innovation grinds to a halt, the system collapses. Eventually, they run out of other peoples’ money to steal. No more bourgeois to harvest from. Everyone’s equally poor. Communism done right.

All that’s left are the victims of communism. We’ve all heard the horrible anecdotes; people fleeing communist nations for capitalist ones to avoid certain death from either starvation or murder by the dictator permanently in power. Before I get into the hard data, people don’t convert old doors into boats to escape nations with high standards of living. People regularly fled Cuba on garbage, risking drowning across hundreds of miles of open ocean, because of how bad true communism is.

A hundred million people have died as a direct result of communist policies, far more than those who have died under fascism. While both are evil, if we are using the hard numbers of who suffers and who loses their lives to a political system, communism wouldn’t be touched with a hundred-million-foot pole. I suppose because communism indiscriminately kills and starves the people (besides the elites of course) it’s fine in the eyes of social justice warriors. Fascism, on the other hand, usually victimizes a single group. However, the body count speaks a heart wrenching tale for itself.

Should we censor communists? Should communists and socialists be excluded from civil public discourse? Are they not entitled to the same rights of speech as everyone else? Simply, no. While an ideology that openly discriminates against hard workers and violently punishes people for taking care of themselves and their families is textbook ‘hate speech’, by the standards of the left, we should push these loony ideas to the forefront of discussion. Only then can treacherous ideas be adequately debated and subsequently dismissed by the masses. Let crazy ideas be heard so society can be reminded to never go down that path.