March 2022
Dear Friends and Family,
This is the first and only epilogue to the 20 segment series on Socialism that was published in the winter of 2018 -2019.
In the original series, we learned that socialism focuses on collectivism; centralized planning; erosion of civil liberties via censorship, restriction of speech, and canceling dissenters; plus attempts to abolish the family as a social unit. Meritocracy and the individual are shunned in favor of the group with equity outcomes.
Historically socialism, at its best, provides people with basic needs and not much else. At its worst, it has resulted in economic collapse, starvation, and famine (3 cases).
We also learned that socialism has been creeping into U.S. society since 1932. Today it is evidenced in our public school system, social programs, universities, and governance.
This epilogue’s excerpts opines that Socialism has continued its advance in the U.S. since 2019 despite efforts to reverse it by the Trump administration and that the Nordic countries have made some moves away from their democratic socialism, per the author Keven A. Hassett. Mr. Hassett was the Chairman of the President’s Council of Economic Advisors from 2017 to 2019.
Next: The next two epilogues will be for the Big Tech & AI series, starting with The Silicon Leviathan and finishing with AI Policy Making.
Happy Learning,
Harley
Dear Friends and Family,
This is the first and only epilogue to the 20 segment series on Socialism that was published in the winter of 2018 -2019.
In the original series, we learned that socialism focuses on collectivism; centralized planning; erosion of civil liberties via censorship, restriction of speech, and canceling dissenters; plus attempts to abolish the family as a social unit. Meritocracy and the individual are shunned in favor of the group with equity outcomes.
Historically socialism, at its best, provides people with basic needs and not much else. At its worst, it has resulted in economic collapse, starvation, and famine (3 cases).
We also learned that socialism has been creeping into U.S. society since 1932. Today it is evidenced in our public school system, social programs, universities, and governance.
This epilogue’s excerpts opines that Socialism has continued its advance in the U.S. since 2019 despite efforts to reverse it by the Trump administration and that the Nordic countries have made some moves away from their democratic socialism, per the author Keven A. Hassett. Mr. Hassett was the Chairman of the President’s Council of Economic Advisors from 2017 to 2019.
Next: The next two epilogues will be for the Big Tech & AI series, starting with The Silicon Leviathan and finishing with AI Policy Making.
Happy Learning,
Harley
SOCIALISM EPILOGUE
THE U.S. DRIFT TO SOCIALISM – EXCERPTS
All the excerpts in this segment are from The Drift by Kevin A. Hassett (2021)
INTRODUCTION: Almost every American has a vague sense that our country is hurtling in the wrong direction. Angry people online have abandoned all pretense of grace or courtesy. The nastiness between people on the right and left has risen to the point where Americans are literally shooting at one another. Moderate Republicans and Democrats might wish for a day where sensible, reasonable people represent their parties, but hardline socialists and outrageously offensive conservative tweeters dominate the discussion.
The renowned economist Joseph Schumpeter saw our age coming from almost a century ago. He wrote that socialists would take over our institutions of higher learning, indoctrinate our children to despise capitalism, gradually take over the media, and make it so disreputable to defend capitalism that respectable people would shrink from the task. The details of his analysis are so precisely descriptive of today, that one wonders whether he possessed a time machine. Socialism would win, he wrote, because there would be no one left to defend the free market.
SOCIALISM IN TODAY’S WORLD: Gallup reports that the largest response from Americans polled in 1949, defined socialism as government ownership or control of business. Most Americans today respond that socialism means greater economic equality, or the provision of free benefits like health care. When I served as chair of the Council of Economic Advisors (CEA) we grappled with the question of defining socialism. So, the CEA produced a report about socialism and its social costs.
To put it in non-wonky terms, socialism is an economic system in which the government controls how stuff gets made. There are two categories of stuff that makes stuff. Marxists call one category “the means of production.” We call it “capital” – the money and equipment required to realize a business vision. The second category is labor, the humans in the chain of production. You need both the humans, labor, and inanimate objects and financing, capital, to make the stuff that people want and need.
In a socialist system, the government can control the means of production in two ways. One is by controlling the supply of goods by controlling the major decisions of businesses and capital. Some government’s, like the People’s Republic of China, take this approach. The second way to have socialism is to let the supply side govern itself while intervening extensively on the demand side of economy. This is done by providing necessities like health care, childcare, housing, and goods free of charge. This is the path the Nordic countries took in the 1970s. Then there are communist countries that do both. They practice socialism from top to bottom. In Cuba and Venezuela today, the government controls all capital, all labor, all supply, and all demand. These countries, like the old Soviet Union and China under Chairman Mao, are, not surprisingly, the most oppressive.
Where does the United States fit on this spectrum? We have extensive regulations on capital, finance, and labor, with a tax code that further regulates and distorts the market. There is considerable provision of government health care, childcare, housing, and food to the poor. Overall, however, we still have a robust capitalist system.
History shows that socialism always degrades a country, making its people poorer and sapping its economy of innovation and excellence. Such a degradation is the inevitable next act of a socialist victory. This is because in a socialist system, there are no incentives, only bureaucratic directives that ignore the system’s non-performance. Hence the old joke about the Soviet Union, that the authorities pretend to pay wages, and the workers pretend to work.
One doesn’t have to look to the extremes to see the deficiencies of socialism. In the mildly socialist Nordic countries today, where business is now allowed to flourish, living standards are 15% below those of the United States. It seems that these countries are catching on. The Organization of Economic Cooperative and Development measures show that in some ways, Nordic countries now have less regulation that the United States. Tax rates on businesses have trended downward. Health care is no longer “free” but requires substantial cost-sharing. Nordic countries tax capital less and regulate product markets less than the U.S. The American socialists tout Nordic models that Nordic countries gave up long ago. These countries are becoming social democracies but not socialist countries. Clearly, they’ve learned something from experience.
And as the roots of American socialism deepen, it has begun to stretch its muscles and indulge its authoritarian impulse. You can see this in the informal authoritarianism of cancel culture, in which a youthful mistake or poorly worded statement leads to a brutal crushing of all prospects. You can see it in elaborate speech codes under which the use of the wrong pronoun makes one a target for harassment.
Dictators in Central and South America show that a regime can quash democracy in a perfectly “lawful” manner. A skein of laws can be enacted that give government an infinite range of negative incentives that can be wielded to punish dissent – all legally. This is what scholars mean when they speak of replacing “the rule of law” with the “rule by law.” Far from being more democratic, the very nature of socialism impels it to be anti-democratic, even cruel. The radicalism on display this year suggests that the control of respectability and the media and censorship and canceling on the internet are allowing Democrats to lead us to the end of capitalism.
KEY ELEMENTS OF THE DRIFT: Joseph Schumpeter was an admirer of capitalism who did not believe that capitalism could survive. He predicted a time when the Left would defeat capitalism once and for all. Schumpeter’s writing points to five factors that would eventually destroy capitalism which, in honor of Schumpeter’s famously brilliant horsemanship, I’ll call the Five Horsemen of the Apocalypse.
The First Horseman: Intellectuals: The first horseman is the entrenched hostility to capitalism by intellectuals. Schumpeter recognized that professors aren’t the only intellectuals. The term also includes people who we identify todays as journalists and various kinds of literary, television, cinematic, and online thought leaders. Schumpeter saw the intellectuals’ faith in socialism as a sort of passion, likening it to a lover’s blind belief that his infatuation represents something noble in his beloved. No matter how many lives are ruined by terrible public schools in urban areas, opposition to charter schools must be maintained. No matter how many states and administrations demonstrate that high taxes injure growth and family incomes, high taxes must never be questioned.
Frustration with democracy is an understandable impulse. Such intellectuals of the Left – and growing numbers on the right – are so impatient with the slow, herky-jerky progress of democracy that they are ready to degrade democracy, if not discard it altogether.
The Second Horseman: The University: Higher education molds the left-wing intellectual and bestows his or her credentials. Writing in the 1930s, Schumpeter foresaw that higher education would increase the importance and size as capitalism deepened. It would expand to educate the growing population of white-collar workers. The glut of graduates from universities, Schumpeter wrote, would likely drive their wages below those of manual blue-collar labor. Schumpeter saw that the college graduate is usually repelled by manual occupations.
So, the intellectuals drift … to become “intellectual spectators.” They cohere into an interest group around the educational system that produced them. They come to control the university’s greatest power, the university’s ability to confer or deny credentials, an immense but underestimated power: the power to grant, withhold, or rescind respectability. And armed with this power, the intellectuals inculcate a general hostility to capitalism among their students. Higher education has evolved to the point where a defense of free markets is an extraordinary act of bravery for a student or a young professor trying to earn tenure.
The Third Horseman: How Capitalism Weakens Religion: Schumpeter would not agree with Karl Marx’s characterization of religion as “the sigh of the oppressed creature.” But he recognized that capitalism set the stage for socialism’s rejection of religion.
Today, as we move through our day from our Zoom calls and emails, buying something from Amazon, purchasing stocks online through E*Trade, watching a new blockbuster on Netflix, the suggestion of taking time for the sacred, to read holy scripture or pray seem quaint and antiquated. Who has time for that? Capitalism, with a practical spirit that is rational and anti-heroic, does not kill religion outright. It crowds it out with responsibilities, entertainment, and other distractions. Yet this tendency of capitalism to smother religion still leaves a void within the human psyche, the niche once occupied by religion.
Like a religion, Marxism offers a “system of ultimate ends” that can give meaning to one’s life, “absolute standards by which to judge events and actions.” And he wrote, Marxism “implies a plan of salvation and the indication of the evil from which mankind, or a chosen section of mankind, is to be saved.” It promises “paradise on this side of the grave.” Even the supposedly religious are making a religion of wokeness.
The Fourth Horseman: The Campaign against the Nuclear Family: The “family motive” is noble. It draws us out of ourselves, Schumpeter wrote, by making us think not just of the long-term wellbeing of our inheritance, but of the kind of world our children and grandchildren will live in. it is the stuff of all our hopes and dreams.
Even the desire to have a family, in Schumpeter’s view prompts us to save, invest, and to try to excel. As capitalism arose, people shifted from consumption of farm-fueled subsistence diets to the accumulation of wealth. In 7th century Europe, capitalism emerged at least in part as the result of a struggle for property rights to ensure that one’s wealth would persist for generations.
But the dwindling of the nuclear family today brings us back to short-term thinking and selfish consumption. Look at the declining fortunes of parts of Europe today as fertility rates fall below the population’s replacement rate in many countries, plunging whole towns and villages into vacancy. It seems to me that the loss of family leaves many singletons caught in a kind of shallow hedonism that is ultimately nihilistic.
The Fifth Horseman: The Corporation against Itself: As pressure from progressives grows, many corporations make a conscious calculation. Because Republicans believe in free markets, low taxes, low regulation, and the rule of law, they see little price to pay in offending Republicans. But progressives are more willing to use powerful defamation and cultural and political pressure-tactics to humiliate and injure corporations. This explains why so many companies, from Coca-Cola to Delta Airlines to Nike, are suddenly so “woke.” Corporations tend to publicize their donations to left-wing cause and are reticent to acknowledge those to conservative causes. The best explanation for that pattern is that companies fear retribution from Democrats but not from Republicans.
The first horseman creates a class of intellectuals shaped by socialism who have become its stoutest defenders. Their ranks are swelled by the preponderance of higher education, which churns our left-wing youth with the efficiency with which the U.S. Mint spits our new coins. These intellectuals discredit the family, driving social dysfunctions that capitalist society seems unable to deal with. They’ve found that if you control the elite universities, pretty soon you will control the corporate media. And the media will strive to make it so disreputable to stand up to the politically correct socialist dogma inculcated at universities that capitalism will die. Schumpeter believed, because nobody will be courageous enough to stand up to a hostile media’s withering scorn and defend it.
THE WAY FORWARD: In July 1945, Winston Churchill faced the voters having rallied the free world against Nazi Germany to win one of the most improbable victories in history. So, in facing the socialist Labour Party and its leader, Clement Attlee, in a general election Churchill confidently went on the offensive. Churchill spoke in blunt, even brutal terms:
THE U.S. DRIFT TO SOCIALISM – EXCERPTS
All the excerpts in this segment are from The Drift by Kevin A. Hassett (2021)
INTRODUCTION: Almost every American has a vague sense that our country is hurtling in the wrong direction. Angry people online have abandoned all pretense of grace or courtesy. The nastiness between people on the right and left has risen to the point where Americans are literally shooting at one another. Moderate Republicans and Democrats might wish for a day where sensible, reasonable people represent their parties, but hardline socialists and outrageously offensive conservative tweeters dominate the discussion.
The renowned economist Joseph Schumpeter saw our age coming from almost a century ago. He wrote that socialists would take over our institutions of higher learning, indoctrinate our children to despise capitalism, gradually take over the media, and make it so disreputable to defend capitalism that respectable people would shrink from the task. The details of his analysis are so precisely descriptive of today, that one wonders whether he possessed a time machine. Socialism would win, he wrote, because there would be no one left to defend the free market.
SOCIALISM IN TODAY’S WORLD: Gallup reports that the largest response from Americans polled in 1949, defined socialism as government ownership or control of business. Most Americans today respond that socialism means greater economic equality, or the provision of free benefits like health care. When I served as chair of the Council of Economic Advisors (CEA) we grappled with the question of defining socialism. So, the CEA produced a report about socialism and its social costs.
To put it in non-wonky terms, socialism is an economic system in which the government controls how stuff gets made. There are two categories of stuff that makes stuff. Marxists call one category “the means of production.” We call it “capital” – the money and equipment required to realize a business vision. The second category is labor, the humans in the chain of production. You need both the humans, labor, and inanimate objects and financing, capital, to make the stuff that people want and need.
In a socialist system, the government can control the means of production in two ways. One is by controlling the supply of goods by controlling the major decisions of businesses and capital. Some government’s, like the People’s Republic of China, take this approach. The second way to have socialism is to let the supply side govern itself while intervening extensively on the demand side of economy. This is done by providing necessities like health care, childcare, housing, and goods free of charge. This is the path the Nordic countries took in the 1970s. Then there are communist countries that do both. They practice socialism from top to bottom. In Cuba and Venezuela today, the government controls all capital, all labor, all supply, and all demand. These countries, like the old Soviet Union and China under Chairman Mao, are, not surprisingly, the most oppressive.
Where does the United States fit on this spectrum? We have extensive regulations on capital, finance, and labor, with a tax code that further regulates and distorts the market. There is considerable provision of government health care, childcare, housing, and food to the poor. Overall, however, we still have a robust capitalist system.
History shows that socialism always degrades a country, making its people poorer and sapping its economy of innovation and excellence. Such a degradation is the inevitable next act of a socialist victory. This is because in a socialist system, there are no incentives, only bureaucratic directives that ignore the system’s non-performance. Hence the old joke about the Soviet Union, that the authorities pretend to pay wages, and the workers pretend to work.
One doesn’t have to look to the extremes to see the deficiencies of socialism. In the mildly socialist Nordic countries today, where business is now allowed to flourish, living standards are 15% below those of the United States. It seems that these countries are catching on. The Organization of Economic Cooperative and Development measures show that in some ways, Nordic countries now have less regulation that the United States. Tax rates on businesses have trended downward. Health care is no longer “free” but requires substantial cost-sharing. Nordic countries tax capital less and regulate product markets less than the U.S. The American socialists tout Nordic models that Nordic countries gave up long ago. These countries are becoming social democracies but not socialist countries. Clearly, they’ve learned something from experience.
And as the roots of American socialism deepen, it has begun to stretch its muscles and indulge its authoritarian impulse. You can see this in the informal authoritarianism of cancel culture, in which a youthful mistake or poorly worded statement leads to a brutal crushing of all prospects. You can see it in elaborate speech codes under which the use of the wrong pronoun makes one a target for harassment.
Dictators in Central and South America show that a regime can quash democracy in a perfectly “lawful” manner. A skein of laws can be enacted that give government an infinite range of negative incentives that can be wielded to punish dissent – all legally. This is what scholars mean when they speak of replacing “the rule of law” with the “rule by law.” Far from being more democratic, the very nature of socialism impels it to be anti-democratic, even cruel. The radicalism on display this year suggests that the control of respectability and the media and censorship and canceling on the internet are allowing Democrats to lead us to the end of capitalism.
KEY ELEMENTS OF THE DRIFT: Joseph Schumpeter was an admirer of capitalism who did not believe that capitalism could survive. He predicted a time when the Left would defeat capitalism once and for all. Schumpeter’s writing points to five factors that would eventually destroy capitalism which, in honor of Schumpeter’s famously brilliant horsemanship, I’ll call the Five Horsemen of the Apocalypse.
The First Horseman: Intellectuals: The first horseman is the entrenched hostility to capitalism by intellectuals. Schumpeter recognized that professors aren’t the only intellectuals. The term also includes people who we identify todays as journalists and various kinds of literary, television, cinematic, and online thought leaders. Schumpeter saw the intellectuals’ faith in socialism as a sort of passion, likening it to a lover’s blind belief that his infatuation represents something noble in his beloved. No matter how many lives are ruined by terrible public schools in urban areas, opposition to charter schools must be maintained. No matter how many states and administrations demonstrate that high taxes injure growth and family incomes, high taxes must never be questioned.
Frustration with democracy is an understandable impulse. Such intellectuals of the Left – and growing numbers on the right – are so impatient with the slow, herky-jerky progress of democracy that they are ready to degrade democracy, if not discard it altogether.
The Second Horseman: The University: Higher education molds the left-wing intellectual and bestows his or her credentials. Writing in the 1930s, Schumpeter foresaw that higher education would increase the importance and size as capitalism deepened. It would expand to educate the growing population of white-collar workers. The glut of graduates from universities, Schumpeter wrote, would likely drive their wages below those of manual blue-collar labor. Schumpeter saw that the college graduate is usually repelled by manual occupations.
So, the intellectuals drift … to become “intellectual spectators.” They cohere into an interest group around the educational system that produced them. They come to control the university’s greatest power, the university’s ability to confer or deny credentials, an immense but underestimated power: the power to grant, withhold, or rescind respectability. And armed with this power, the intellectuals inculcate a general hostility to capitalism among their students. Higher education has evolved to the point where a defense of free markets is an extraordinary act of bravery for a student or a young professor trying to earn tenure.
The Third Horseman: How Capitalism Weakens Religion: Schumpeter would not agree with Karl Marx’s characterization of religion as “the sigh of the oppressed creature.” But he recognized that capitalism set the stage for socialism’s rejection of religion.
Today, as we move through our day from our Zoom calls and emails, buying something from Amazon, purchasing stocks online through E*Trade, watching a new blockbuster on Netflix, the suggestion of taking time for the sacred, to read holy scripture or pray seem quaint and antiquated. Who has time for that? Capitalism, with a practical spirit that is rational and anti-heroic, does not kill religion outright. It crowds it out with responsibilities, entertainment, and other distractions. Yet this tendency of capitalism to smother religion still leaves a void within the human psyche, the niche once occupied by religion.
Like a religion, Marxism offers a “system of ultimate ends” that can give meaning to one’s life, “absolute standards by which to judge events and actions.” And he wrote, Marxism “implies a plan of salvation and the indication of the evil from which mankind, or a chosen section of mankind, is to be saved.” It promises “paradise on this side of the grave.” Even the supposedly religious are making a religion of wokeness.
The Fourth Horseman: The Campaign against the Nuclear Family: The “family motive” is noble. It draws us out of ourselves, Schumpeter wrote, by making us think not just of the long-term wellbeing of our inheritance, but of the kind of world our children and grandchildren will live in. it is the stuff of all our hopes and dreams.
Even the desire to have a family, in Schumpeter’s view prompts us to save, invest, and to try to excel. As capitalism arose, people shifted from consumption of farm-fueled subsistence diets to the accumulation of wealth. In 7th century Europe, capitalism emerged at least in part as the result of a struggle for property rights to ensure that one’s wealth would persist for generations.
But the dwindling of the nuclear family today brings us back to short-term thinking and selfish consumption. Look at the declining fortunes of parts of Europe today as fertility rates fall below the population’s replacement rate in many countries, plunging whole towns and villages into vacancy. It seems to me that the loss of family leaves many singletons caught in a kind of shallow hedonism that is ultimately nihilistic.
The Fifth Horseman: The Corporation against Itself: As pressure from progressives grows, many corporations make a conscious calculation. Because Republicans believe in free markets, low taxes, low regulation, and the rule of law, they see little price to pay in offending Republicans. But progressives are more willing to use powerful defamation and cultural and political pressure-tactics to humiliate and injure corporations. This explains why so many companies, from Coca-Cola to Delta Airlines to Nike, are suddenly so “woke.” Corporations tend to publicize their donations to left-wing cause and are reticent to acknowledge those to conservative causes. The best explanation for that pattern is that companies fear retribution from Democrats but not from Republicans.
The first horseman creates a class of intellectuals shaped by socialism who have become its stoutest defenders. Their ranks are swelled by the preponderance of higher education, which churns our left-wing youth with the efficiency with which the U.S. Mint spits our new coins. These intellectuals discredit the family, driving social dysfunctions that capitalist society seems unable to deal with. They’ve found that if you control the elite universities, pretty soon you will control the corporate media. And the media will strive to make it so disreputable to stand up to the politically correct socialist dogma inculcated at universities that capitalism will die. Schumpeter believed, because nobody will be courageous enough to stand up to a hostile media’s withering scorn and defend it.
THE WAY FORWARD: In July 1945, Winston Churchill faced the voters having rallied the free world against Nazi Germany to win one of the most improbable victories in history. So, in facing the socialist Labour Party and its leader, Clement Attlee, in a general election Churchill confidently went on the offensive. Churchill spoke in blunt, even brutal terms:
Socialism is inseparable interwoven with Totalitarianism and the abject worship of State … There is to be on State to which all are to be obedient in every act of their lives. This State is to be arch-employer, the arch-planner, the arch-administrator and ruler, and the arch-caucus boss … Socialism is, in its essence, an attack not only upon British enterprise, but upon the right of the ordinary man or woman to breathe freely without having a harsh, clumsy, tyrannical hand clapped across their mouths and nostrils.
As a political party becomes more dedicated to enacting socialism, it necessarily becomes more totalitarian and less accepting of pluralism and debate.
But the economic ravages of the pandemic, coupled with diminished prospects for Millennials trying to establish solid careers, have left many Americans exhausted and susceptible to socialism’s siren song. Like Attlee, Joe Biden is too mild-mannered and practical to seem like the enabler of radicalism that he is. But, like Attlee, Biden has the potential to be stampeded by his more radical supporters into running the country deep into socialism, and to do so with considerable public support.
One can hope that the more experience Americans have with progressivism and socialism, the more they will turn back to what is right and what works. The fate of America doesn’t have to rest in the hands of a distant elite. It come down to you. If you believe that the system we grew up with, for all its shortcomings and flaws, is morally and practically superior to socialism, you need to become an activist for freedom.
As social media transforms society and how people relate to one another, it is clear that the contest to control content will decide whether or not capitalism will be able to hold its own against socialism. If the winning ideas of the free market and the shining ideals of America’s Founding can find leverage online and maneuver around the cancel culture, we will have a fighting chance. The secret to defending capitalism is for many voices to spring up to defend it with courage. That defense is easy as an intellectual matter, since the facts will always be on the side of free markets. The ruling elites may try to bully and intimidate people into staying quiet as the Drift continues. But their defeat is inevitable if enough people recognize the game the socialist are playing and refuse to be bullied into silence.
Source: The Drift: Stopping America’s Slide to Socialism by Kevin A. Hasset, Former Chairman of the President’s Council on Economic Advisers (2021).
The unabbreviated version of the above can be found in the pdf document below.
But the economic ravages of the pandemic, coupled with diminished prospects for Millennials trying to establish solid careers, have left many Americans exhausted and susceptible to socialism’s siren song. Like Attlee, Joe Biden is too mild-mannered and practical to seem like the enabler of radicalism that he is. But, like Attlee, Biden has the potential to be stampeded by his more radical supporters into running the country deep into socialism, and to do so with considerable public support.
One can hope that the more experience Americans have with progressivism and socialism, the more they will turn back to what is right and what works. The fate of America doesn’t have to rest in the hands of a distant elite. It come down to you. If you believe that the system we grew up with, for all its shortcomings and flaws, is morally and practically superior to socialism, you need to become an activist for freedom.
As social media transforms society and how people relate to one another, it is clear that the contest to control content will decide whether or not capitalism will be able to hold its own against socialism. If the winning ideas of the free market and the shining ideals of America’s Founding can find leverage online and maneuver around the cancel culture, we will have a fighting chance. The secret to defending capitalism is for many voices to spring up to defend it with courage. That defense is easy as an intellectual matter, since the facts will always be on the side of free markets. The ruling elites may try to bully and intimidate people into staying quiet as the Drift continues. But their defeat is inevitable if enough people recognize the game the socialist are playing and refuse to be bullied into silence.
Source: The Drift: Stopping America’s Slide to Socialism by Kevin A. Hasset, Former Chairman of the President’s Council on Economic Advisers (2021).
The unabbreviated version of the above can be found in the pdf document below.
| soism_e1l_socialism_--_epilogue_1.pdf |