Letter to the editor: Socialism distinctions

To letter-writer Richard London (“We all benefit from ‘socialism,’ ” Feb. 13 TribLIVE): The following are corrections to some of the things I believe you’ve got wrong.

The definition of socialism does not change relative to its practitioners. It still means government control over business and industry no matter who’s doing it.

Socialism may provide public works, but all public works are not socialist.

Socialism and socialization are completely different things.

Unlike social justice, which is not justice at all, democratic socialism is not a different kind of socialism. Adolf Hitler’s socialism was just as democratic as Obamacare. What makes socialism democratic is that a majority gets to impose their will on a minority. It’s still socialism.

Moreover, the morally significant thing about socialism is that it is collectivist, viz., that it operates on the assumption that individual human rights may be abridged for the sake of some amorphous notion of the common good. This is what all socialists have in common with Hitler, Pol Pot, Mao, Stalin and the rest of the gang of genuinely evil people who all act in the name of the common good.

Until you come to grips with these basic truths, your advocacy of socialism is either naive or disingenuous. Without the protection of individual rights, anyone can be marginalized or trampled outright by government. Every day we see the evidence of their eagerness to do so, both here and throughout the world.

Arthur Moeller

New Florence