So I thought it pertinent to find out what Sklar says about socialism and capitalism today, and what he thinks about the direction Obama is moving our country in. The results will prove surprising, especially to John Judis.
First, Sklar- who coined the phrase “corporate liberalism” that became a mainstay of the New Left in the 60′s and 70′s- disagrees with Judis’ belief that the “mix has increasingly tilted toward socialism.” His argument, to the contrary, is that for decades, America has had an appropriate mix that already incorporates elements of what is traditionally called capitalism and socialism; that is why it is a mix. Sklar, like Judis, defines himself as a man of the Left, and in an article he has been circulating, titled “A letter to a Long-time Friend and Fellow Left-winger,” Sklar shakes things up. Sklar considers himself to be a “Freedom Leftist” who believes in a pluralist-democratic and “publically accountable left” as opposed to Obama who he considers a “left sectarian doing his mass work.” At his core, Sklar writes, Obama’s “world view is ‘Third-Worldist’ sectarianism.”
More surprising for a man of the left, Sklar believes that “Bush has been one of our more effective and progressive-left Presidents in domestic and international affairs.” Sklar believes that Obama’s economic proposals are based on high-tax, protectionist and a slow-growth program. Bush’s in contrast, was based on a lower-tax, low-cost energy, “high-growth/job stimulus” program, and was not “ensnared in the green business/academia lobby agenda of high-cost energy,” which would work to both restrict economic growth and workers’ incomes.
Moreover, Sklar is concerned, as he writes, that Obama will make “central to his presidency” what he calls “proto-statist structures characteristic of fascist politics- that is, ‘social service’ political organizations operating extra-electorally and also capable of electoral engagement,” that will lead to “party-state systems…in which the party is the state.” Thus, he notes that during the campaign, Obama favored armed public service groups that could be used for homeland security, that would tie leadership bureaucracies to him through the unions and groups like ACORN.
Thus Sklar argues, in a letter he provided to me written to a columnist in April of this year, that the real issue is not whether we move to socialism but whether we can maintain a liberal democracy based on the mix that nurtures “Liberty and Equality and Progressive Development.” This, he writes, is “something the Bush/Cheney administrations championed, and the reason I, a person of the left, strongly supported them, including the interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the (world) war against Islamist imperialism.” (my emphasis.)
Finally, in a personal letter to me, Sklar calls for a unified liberty movement of people who see themselves on the left or liberal side, and those who see themselves as conservatives, to defeat “the state-command sectarians,” and bring together those on the democratic left and right in an effort to rejuvenate “the prospects of liberal democracy.”
Clearly, the man who mentored John Judis has quite a different perspective on what to do to save our country—one that is more in accord with the views of a Jonah Goldberg than of John Judis. Sklar tells me that I am not a conservative, but a freedom leftist, as he is and beckons me to join his movement, but I guess he wouldn’t welcome John Judis into the ranks.
I am a libertarian and not an anarchist. The principle of subsidiarity underpins my economic thinking. The government should stay out of the way unless there is a very compelling reason to get involved. Rarely, if ever, do elected officials and government bureaucrats serve a valid purpose unless they are protecting the citizenry from lawbreakers and carrying out their limited duties. John B. Judis and his ilk are not to be trusted. “Well meaning” people are often very dangerous. They perceive themselves as benevolent and intellectually brilliant—and therefore should be our kindly dictators. Judis favors socialism because such a society is inherently dominated by elites. He is lying to himself if he says otherwise. A capitalist like myself is well aware that the masses don’t need me to be their babysitter. They are far better judges of their own needs and how best to satisfy them.
Murray Rothbard was a self-hating American. He so despised his own country that this libertarian philosophical giant even bowed down to the memory of the disgusting Che Guevara. However, this aspect of Rothbard’s life should not deter one from studying his economic writings. Ron Radosh should also mention him more often. They apparently were once close associates, if not outright friends.
Call it what you want…but denounce it as loudly and often as possible.
Those who scoff at the term “socialism” do not take the weighty issue seriously.
They will not take it any more seriously when labelled “corporatism” or anything else.
They simply refuse to take it seriously.
To do so would require them to acknowledge CONSEQUENCES of their actions/decisions.
And for THIS they must be exposed. Announce it as loudly and often as possible.
We have another name for the system of government now championed by Judis…it’s called Fascism. Sklar obviously understands this.
When Sorel and Mussolini developed the intellectual foundation of Fascism they were merely generalizing a specific theory of collectivist society. It is common in the sciences and mathematics to take a new development of a specific case and develop a generalized result or theory. Marxism was a specific case of a collectivist political, social and economic system. First Sorel and then Mussolini saw more possibilities of revolutionary collectivist political development then are apparent in pure Marxist thought. Marx couldn’t see the forest because of the constraints of his dialectic.
What Judis saw in the collapse of the Soviet system was not that “…politicians and intellectuals of the next century will once again draw openly upon the legacy of socialism…” but a validation of Fascist theory.
Gosh, I wish these authors would stop saying “our” economy. Not all of us are bought into capitalism/economies. Some of us are still Christians.
Author, readers, you DO see the pyramid scheme symbol on the back of the USA one dollar bill, right? You DO see the servitude infestation in capitalism, right? And do you see the “pay up or lose your wellbeing” Chicago mob-like felony extortion widespread within capitalism? Do you see the “join or starve” felony extortion done to the 18 year olds… by this ugly competer’s church called capitalism? See how forcing competer’s religions onto 18 year olds… kills membership in the cooperator’s church (Christianity/socialism)?? Do you understand that AmWay (American Way) (New World Order) got “the exclusive” (legal tender) on the TYPE of survival coupons (money) accepted in supply depots (stores) and leverages 18 years olds into the organization via that felony activity as well? (It puts AmWay-coupon slaving requirements called price tags… on all the survival goods). Do you understand how farmyard pyramids work… from your childhood?? Remember?? Upper 1/3 are “heads in the clouds” while the kids on the bottom ALWAYS GET HURT from the weight of the world’s knees in their backs? Still with me? Do you see anything illegal, immoral, or just plain sick… in any of this pyramid scheme’s activities?
Us American Christian socialists are still patiently awaiting the natural fall of the pyramid-o-servitude, or the busting of the free marketeers felony… by the USA Dept of Justice. Us Christians are VERY CLOSE to issuing a cease and desist order until the servitude and inequality goes away… which means it turns into a commune. Commune is a word we LOVE when used in the word “community”… but its one the caps HATE when used in the term “commune-ism”. Go fig. PROGRAMMED!!
Do a Google IMAGE SEARCH for ‘pyramid of capitalist’ to see a full color picture made way back in 1911, when capitalism was first discovered to be a con/sham instigated by the Free Masons/Illuminati. Folks sure bought into the thing… hook, line, and sinker just the same. The caps didn’t even check if a string was attached! Now THAT’S easy fishing, eh?
Time to level the felony pyramid scheme called capitalism. Abolish economies and ownershipism worldwide, and hurry. Economies just cause rat-racing, and rat-racing causes felony pyramiding. BUST IT, America! Look to the USA military supply/survival system… (and the USA public library system) for socialism and morals done right. Equal, owner-less, money-less, bill-less, timecard-less, and concerned with growth of value-criteria OTHER THAN money-value. Quit doing monetary discrimination immediately, and make it illegal. There are MANY measurement criteria of “value”… not just dollars. Try morals, efficiency, discrimination-levels, repairability, etc etc. Economies are cancerous tumors, and to cheer for their growth… is just insane. Profiting causes inflation, so if caps LIKE inflation, and if they LIKE a terrible time in afterlife when they meet the planet’s ORIGINAL OWNER before caps tried to squat it all with ownershipism, then keep it up with the felony pyramiding. I dare you. While us Christians are finally bulldozing that pyramid scheme back to level, lets make servitude and “join or starve” (get a job or die) illegal in the USA, and lets level the architecture seen in USA courtrooms, too. Right now, USA courtrooms are church simulators or “fear chambers”, by special design. Sick.
Isn’t that back-of-the-dollar pyramid… a Columbian freemason symbol? And WHERE is the USA gov located? District of Columbia? (Not even part of the USA!). How much more blatant can ya get? The “Fed” runs a pyramid scheme called the free marketeers. If you’re using the “federal reserve note” certificates, or using no-other-living-thing-on-the-planet entitles of ownership, you’re bought into a servitude/slavery con/sham… called capitalism. Pyramiding 101.
Larry “Wingnut” Wendlandt
MaStars – Mothers Against Stuff That Ain’t Right
(anti-capitalism-ists)
Bessemer MI USA
People who aren’t paying too much attention may grumble a bit about the socialist takeover and carry on with a reduced standard of living. But the totalitarian and thuggish nature of the Obama crew keeps poking it’s head up. These power junkies won’t know when to quit. Their high minded Orwellian blather doesn’t soothe anybody, just puts our BS detectors on alert. This is not Europe. Americans won’t put up with it. Messing with American cars may be the beginning of the end for this crew.
When does the US Constitution get mentioned in this conversation? Time for the deadheads on the Supreme Court to do their job!
Socialism is a pitbull that can’t be leashed pernamently. In this respect,capitalism has the saving grace of not being part of the government.
It’s good to see that at least a few on the Left are opposing this slide into fascism.
Elites? Power junkies? We’ve have them already. Nothing new here. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
I can accept as a general premise that America exhibits characteristics of both socialism and capitalism. In reality the old Soviet Union did the same. The difference was a matter of degree. The USSR functioned only as well as it did because soviet leaders tolerated the existence of a black market. Had collectivism been rigidly enforced, conditions would have resembled Pol Pot’s Cambodia.
Soviet agriculture is a good case in point. Half of all agriculture was generated by the collectives on 99% of the arable land. The other half was grown on small family plots representing 1% of the land. This statistic makes the case for the efficiency of free markets.
So, how much socialism is America willing to accept? It’s hard to say because the size of a black market is nearly impossible to discern. The more Americans are forced to work for the state, the more they will rely on moonlighting for the lion’s share of their income. Eventually statism gets so inefficient that nobody is actually doing his assigned job. As the saying goes, “we’ll keep pretending to work as long as the government keeps pretending to pay us.”
So why are we even bothering debating the issue? It seems to me that human nature will always recognize self-interest, and people will put their greatest energy into that which offers a maximum return. Statists, on the other hand, recognize that it’s more personally lucrative to redistribute wealth than to create it. Proudhon was wrong. Property is not theft. Socialism is theft. Our experiment with it is doomed to fail.
In my reading, it is disingenuous to argue that Socialism is distinguishable from the State Capitalism practiced by all “totalitarian” states (all socialist states are totalitarian in reality or aspiration, and vice-versa). Nor is it possible to separate the economic, political, and cultural consequences of the basic socialist egalitarian impulse. One must either establish as one’s lode star Liberty, and install equality before the law as an institutional aspect of it, or install Equality, which is a fiction – like equality before the law – that will ultimately devour, via semantic manipulation, the real practice of liberty. Within the Socialist camp there may be different emphases, and certainly not all socialists are Bolsheviks waiting to come out of the closet, but the fundamental problem on a philosophical level is that Socialism serves a Lie, “Equality.” A state built on a “equality” other than equality before the law is a house of cards ruled by a government that will sooner or later become a government-with-a-country in the manner of Pakistan’s Army-with-a-country.
Call it what you want, but denounce it as loudly and often as possible.
Those who scoff at the term “socialism” do not take the weighty threat seriously.
They will not take it any more seriously when labelled “corporatism.”
They simply refuse to take it seriously.
To do so would require them to acknowledge CONSEQUENCES of the ir actions/decisions.
And for THIS they must be exposed. Shout it as loudly and often as possible.
“The question of whether or not America is heading towards some form of “socialism” keeps popping up.”
But only in the minds of Ron Radosh and other wingnut losers.
Thanks Ron. This is one of the better articles on PJM this week.
People like me, former Marxists, came over from that side when we began to see the historical failures of hard socialist experiments as derivative of fundamental errors in the theory. However, it takes a mature and experienced mind, seasoned by a lot of reading and reflection on history, to then apply logic elegantly. It was voters under the age of 40 who put Obonga over the top. Many of them college and university students and grads. The defects of their education and the thorough indoctrination of the process is well-commented upon for years running now, so I need not beat that dead horse.
Thus, the question is: at what point will these kids begin to hit the wall of contradictions and re-think their own “what life ought to be” templates? Once they do that, the hard collectivists like Obonga will no longer have such appeal.
I believe in erring more on the side of a free market economy with some socialist elements thrown in as stabilizers. That kind of balancing act. The danger in it, as some may point out, is that those socialist elements may serve to dysfunctionally feed expectations for what government can do. Which aided and abetted the moment we have arrived at.
PatJ,
Can I have a dollar for every time you’ve used the word “wingnut” on PJM? Could be a lucrative deal for me.
Regulation and ownership are apples and oranges. An intelligently regulated economy is not a “mixed” economy; quite the contrary, it’s an economy built upon the adversarial model, with an added adversarial check/balance. Intelligent regulation lowers barriers to entry, and results in a more competitive economy.
Over regulation, or more commonly misregulation, is one problem, but it’s separate and distinct from creating an incestuous system of crony capitalism; in fact, crony capitalism almost guarantees that regulation will be used as a barrier to entry.
The real danger is the loss of the adversarial model. Once that happens, we have a banana republic economy, where business success is a privilege granted by the ruling elite.
This continuum model, like other continuum models, is intellectually lazy and wrong. It’s economics for dummies.
There’s a new one for the oxymoron list. I mean it worked so well for China, right?
Let me expand on the continuum model thing. One of the other fictions that this article underscores is the fallacy of the left/right continuum. It seems odd that avowed leftists would support, for example, low taxes and cheap energy. But in theory, this is all good for the consumer/worker, and leftists should embrace it.
The real oddity is that conventional leftists hold the consumer and worker in such disdain. The conventional “left” in the west is actually the bourgeois.
These kinds of warps are due to the fact that left and right are themselves a false cartoon. The libertarian diamond is a better, though still imperfect, model of the political universe. The “left”, as we commonly use the term in the west, is a group of bourgeois elitists pretending to be populists. It’s really not that contradictory; the economic tack that 0bama is taking will have the effect, just as in Europe, of cementing the successful in their stations in the economy and freezing the upstarts out.
Soros and the rest of the sail-eared simpleton empty-galabia glove-puppet’s fearsome criminal gang of brown-shirts and other sinister Svengali-like minders and as-loathsome cronies don’t want the state to own the means of production, manufacture, distribution and sale. Singapore-style, they want to maintain the illusion of “free enterprise” while the state but regulates and controls (and they all loot) the means of production, manufacture, distribution and sale.
And that’s how they’re defined:
They’re Mussolini-modeled modified Marxists.
Or, by any other name, are fascists.
Brian Richard Allen
Los Angeles Califobambicated 90028
And the far Abroad
I hope Sklar will develop and fully publicize his analysis. This view of Obama as an authoritarian Third World leftist as opposed to a socialist or democratic socialist makes a crucial distinction far too many conservatives fail to appreciate. Hence they never clarified the significance of the Jeremiah Wright/Bill Ayers connections in Obama’s past. These do not make Obama a socialist, that is, they indicate at least his proclivity for authoritarians who have contempt for democratic process. Please, urge Sklar to do more with this.
Wingnut, “He that will not work, let him not eat,” was St. Paul’s words, not Adam Smith’s. You, sir, are a loon. Every community has an economy, just as every person has a diet. The type will vary, but it is impossible by definition not to have one. Simply put, an economy is a system of producing and distributing goods and services. Any method of producing and distributing goods and services, including a commune, is an economy by definition. If you don’t have one, you starve- not because anyone is making you starve, but because you don’t produce or procure food. Notice that I said don’t, not can’t. If you don’t have an economy, then by definition, you produce nothing and you trade nothing.
DEMOCRAT GOVERNING COALITION FALLING APART
Interest and identity groups are discovering the swindle.
http://greensrealworld.blogspot.com/2009/06/democrat-nightmare-special-interest.html
6. Wingnut:
Whoa, put down the bottle…why do you hate AmWay or any other MLM or the structure of our government or the Freemasons? Oh, yeah, and the structure of your own Church? You make Christians look like idiots.
To those on the left, Christians don’t act like this. Wingnut is a fake!
Most of the people that prattle on about the dangers of “socialism” or government takeover of this and that are also the very people who are busy sucking away at programs like Social Security, Medicare and VA benefits, all of which are based on a socialist model. Obama is far from a socialist, however. If you look closely at what he has proposed on many fronts it is more along the lines of neo-Corporatism. This is what many western European use as the model for economic policy, especially Scandinavian nations.
One good example of this would be the model that seems to be taking shape for healthcare reform. Many conservatives argue that the Obama plan is going to be like Canada of Britain. Actually, that’s incorrect. The systems in Canada and Britain are indeed more socialist but that’s not how Obama and the Democrats are intending to structure the healthcare system. Their plan will be more along the lines of Germany and France, who incidentally have the best healthcare in the world. These systems are a mix of both public and private with strong government oversight. The French are very pleased with the healthcare they receive and it costs less overall than what we pay here. Here in the states 2/3 of bankruptcy’s are due a health crisis. You never hear of people going broke due to a health crisis in France. In fact it NEVER happens. Moreover, the US spends more on healthcare than any industrialized nation and we rank #1 in obesity. Something is terribly wrong. So, quit your conservative whining about what Obama has planned. It will be far better than what we have now.
You have an odd definition of economy, mythbuster. I think you KNOW what definition I was using. Addictions to tokens that cause enjoyment addictions that lead to cookieplate-chasing (rat-racing) that leads to childlike “nikker piles” that are pyramids. Devices such as money and ownership, that cause folks to try to get a leg up on each other. (phew!)
7. Gary Ogletree: Here’s a word to look for in the media: Overreach. We’re going to be hearing more and more of it as the Democrats push forward their agenda. I contend that we’ll hear it a lot more as the Dems start pushing for universal healthcare-just as we heard it more and more during Clinton’s administration with Hillarycare. It eventually became such a hue and cry that it derailed Clinton’s plans concerning healthcare.
Politics always swings on an unstable pendulum. As the Democrats overreach, that pendulum is going to swing wildly back to the right just as it swung wildly to the left in the last two election cycles. As Americans become more fearful of Socialism or Socialism-lite, they will begin to realize that the Dems are in favor of big government and greater (I would say stifling) regulation of the economy and higher government spending and taxes, as well. So there will eventually be a revolt at the ballot box that will shift the country to the right once more. The only questions I have are: How much of their agenda will be enacted before they are voted out of the majority; and when will that be? Historically, it is very common for the party in power to lose control of congress if they have control of the Presidency as well in the first midterm elections. Will it be 2010 or 2012 when the Dems lose Congressional control? The more folks get worried, the sooner it’ll happen.
Just remember, folks: “Overreach.”
regards
Honestjon wrote: “How much of their agenda will be enacted before they are voted out of the majority; and when will that be? Historically, it is very common for the party in power to lose control of congress if they have control of the Presidency as well in the first midterm elections. Will it be 2010 or 2012 when the Dems lose Congressional control? The more folks get worried, the sooner it’ll happen.
Just remember, folks: “Overreach.””
“Overreach” would be applicable to those things that the public doesn’t want. They DO want healthcare reform. The DON’t want the Republican status quo alternative. Even the US Chamber of Commerce is behind the Democratic version of healthcare reform (doesn’t get more conservative than that). You’re incorrect regarding the party that holds the White House generally loses control of congress. They do generally lose seats, however (maybe that’s what you meant). The two outcomes are quite different. The fact that the Democratic majority is so huge it is highly unlikely that they will lose control. Even the most seasoned Republican operatives admit this.
I would guess that it will be neither 2010 or 2012 when the Democratic Party loses control of anything. One of the main reasons are demographic. Obama and the Democrats won the youth vote by an astonishing 2 to 1. Studies indicate that the party an individual casts their first vote for is the party they generally stay with for life. The GOP lost an entire generation last two election cycles. We won’t even get into the female or minority vote, both equally dismal for the GOP. As old white conservatives die off they are being systematically replaced with energetic young liberals and progressives. Unless the GOP makes some serious changes to the agenda they propose they look to be on the out for a long time (decades). Obama will most certainly be a two term president and many young people like myself will be working to make sure that happens for the good of the nation (after the GOP screwed it up).
Well the way I figure it with the government taking over GM and Chrysler the selection of cars will look like the one below.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dJfSS0ZXYdo
I do not like the selection, and hope that both companies do survive but with the restrictions and regulations being piled on these companies I am not so certain.
FREE MARKET TRUMPS EURO-SOCIALISM
Always has, always will.
http://greensrealworld.blogspot.com/2009/06/whos-hiring-unemployed-company-unions.html
If Pat J. couldn’t say “wingnut” anymore, he’d lose 50% of his vocabulary.
When they (the radical leaders) have made the populace ready and greedy to receive bribes, the virtue of democracy is destroyed and it is transformed into a government of violence and the strong hand. For the mob, habituated to feed at the expense of others, and to have its hopes of a livelihood in the property of its neighbors, as soon as it has found a leader sufficiently ambitious and daring… produces a reign of violence. Then comes tumultuous assemblies, massacres, banishments, re-divisions of land.
Polybius – circa 150 BC
Our government was set up with a two party system,and will never work with only one. The drastic thing is it’s being run by one,and so liberal,we’re comiting suicide.
30. Praetorian: The public doesn’t want government run healthcare. WE do want the reform thereof.
I was incorrect and you are right that the party in power normally loses seats in Congress (and not control) during midterm elections. However, there are many “blue dog” democrats that could side with the Republicans in a cinch.
Ahh, it’s all perceptions. Being perceived as the party of old white guys is silly. It will be proved to be silly as soon as a few Hispanic or black conservatives start making their voice heard. I may be wrong that it will happen as quickly as I related previously, but it will happen. Many blacks are conservatives and so are many Latinos, but most of both groups are young. Give it a little time and those minority groups will probably end up voting for the party which best represents them. Just give it a minute…
The rest of your post rebuts my gut feeling with your gut feeling. Touche. “…energetic young liberals and progressives…” All get older and become more conservative…
“Obama will most certainly be a two term president…” Your opinion. It’ll be decided by voters.
“…after the GOP screwed it up…” Again, your opinion. Many factors were involved concerning the economic hardships that we are now living through. The truth will come out eventually.
regards
Banks have huge debts, but they’re getting a helping hand from the federal government. If you have overwhelming debt–perhaps from bad investments, or maybe a job loss, a medical crisis or just plain overspending–you’re probably on your own. Check the website http://obamadebthelp2009.blogspot.com
to see if they can help. I am glad I did read it before I talk to my CC company and it helped – Jane Jim, California
HonestJon wrote: “The public doesn’t want government run healthcare. WE do want the reform thereof.”
I would disagree with this also. Obama certainly made his intensions well known with regard to the way he wanted to reform our healthcare system during the election. What he talked about then is what is being proposed now, so he is delivering on his promises and what the people voted for. The “government run” boogeyman won’t fly because it doesn’t have wings. No matter what kind of healthcare system you have there WILL be controls be it government or private. If you read about the healthcare plan it seems to be very much like the healthcare system in France or Germany. If we get that we will be very lucky as they have the best healthcare in the world. See article.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=92419273
“All get older and more conservative.” I’m not sure I agree with that either. Certainly my parents and grandparents seem prudish to me in some ways (the sensible shoes, etc.) but as far as politics are concerned they couldn’t imagine ever voting for a Republican and people like Rush Limbaugh and Glen Beck are viewed as low class trash or snake oil salesmen to the ignorant. In fact, they seem to get more liberal as they get older! They taught me everything I know!
30. Praetorian:
From National Journal: “The post-World War II historical average for a midterm election in a president’s first term is a loss for his party of 16 House seats and a wash in the Senate.”
And, “This election’s overarching dynamic will probably be whether voters are happy with the country’s direction and the leadership of Obama and congressional Democrats, or whether voters will want a check on the president’s far-reaching agenda.
Given the state of the economy and the administration’s aggressive moves in the financial and auto sectors, as well as its pursuit of health care reform and cap-and-trade energy proposals, voters will have plenty to mull over. They are unlikely to be ambivalent by the end of next year. Voters sought change in 2008, and 2010 will determine whether the results of the past two years were what they had in mind.”
http://www.nationaljournal.com/njmagazine/cr_20090606_3396.php
A good article all around.
regards
Mr Radosh, thanks for an interesting article. You remind me of a Bob Brown I used to know, who was about the only intelligent leftist I’d ever met. While I am rather anti-left, I would that all leftists were as thoughtful and honest as yourself. Thank you.
When can we see Sklar’s article/letter itself?
LEFT COMMING UNGLUED
What conservative media bias?
http://greensrealworld.blogspot.com/2009/06/ej-everleft-journalist-dionne-author-of.html
When Mark Levin wrote Freedom and Tyranny, he very thoughtfully used the word Statist to lump anti-democratic and anti-republican ideologies and their offshoots under the one label. Communism, Socialism, Progressivism, Corportism, Imperialism, Liberalism, Nazism, etcetera ad infinitum all are subsumed by Statism. The fact is—a fact he underscored brilliantly—there are only two genuine alternatives: liberty and tyranny.