Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
How ‘democratic socialism’ disempowers minorities
How ‘democratic socialism’ disempowers minorities
Jul 5, 2025 11:54 AM

Progressives are known for their blanket denunciations of “big business” and consolidated corporate power. Yet amid their sweeping disdain, such critics somehow manage to maintain a peculiar affection for the consolidation of much, much more.

Alas, although today’s so-called “democratic socialists” try to claim distinction among their peers by emphasizing popularcontrol—as opposed to the typical authoritarian shtick—the “democratization” of all things via political control will still surely lead to greater consolidations of power at the expense of many—particularly minorities and the least powerful.

In a review of the movement, Conor Friedersdorf highlights the underlying irony, noting that democratic socialists fail to foresee the various fruits of inequity that are bound to bloom. “To most Americans, ‘democracy’ always sounds appealing,” Friedersdorf writes. “But many young people who say they’re ‘democratic socialists’ may fail to grasp all that minorities would lose if democracy were radically less constrained by the political and economic system under which we currently live.”

As an example of the prevailing attitudes, Friedersdorf points to a Jacobinessay, in which the authors argue for the “socialization of power” and that “capitalists shouldn’t be able to hold all that power and impact all of society—it’s undemocratic and unjust.” They continue: “The core aim of socialism is not just the state gaining control of industry, but empowering the broad masses of people—in their workplaces, in munities, in their homes, in their schools, in their politics—to be in the driver’s seat of society.”

And how should such democratization actually manifest? Through “grassroots state planning agencies, workers’ cooperatives, participatory boards.”

This, of course, ignores the reality of the current capitalistic status quo, through which everyday consumers,not “capitalists,” hold the actual economic power. If you doubt this, ask the “capitalists” of MySpace, Compaq, Blockbuster, Sears, AOL, or any other big-business casualty of non-political economic “democratization” and bottom-up individual empowerment.

In weighing these alternatives, Friedersdorf aptly identifies the basic contradiction and conceit of “democratic socialism” and where it ultimately leads:

Instead of individual capitalists deciding what to produce in their endlessly varied, peting private businesses, “without any democratic input from the rest of society,” control over industry and decisions about what to produce would reside in state planning agencies. And imagine their decisions perfectly, if improbably, reflect the actual democratic will of workers, whether in the nation; or a state, like Ohio or Utah; or a metropolitan area, like Maricopa County or Oklahoma City.

Popular control is finally realized! So: How popular is Islam? How many Muslim prayer rugs would the democratic majority of workers vote to produce? How many Korans? How many head scarves? How much halal meat would be slaughtered? What share of construction materials would a majority of workers apportion to new mosques?

Under capitalism, the mere existence of buyers reliably gives rise to suppliers. Relying instead on democratic decisions would pose a big risk for Muslims. And Sikhs. And Hindus. And Jews. And maybe even Catholics.

Right now, under capitalism, vegetarians and vegans have more options every year. But there aren’t very many of them. Five percent of Americans are vegetarians. Three percent are vegans. Would “the workers” find a societal need to produce vegan meat or milk substitutes? No one knows the answer.

How important would worker majorities consider hair products for African Americans? What if a majority of workers decided that only mercial reading material should be printed in the United States?

The cognitive dissonance is real, and once we fully flesh out the implications, the supposed distinctions of the socialism’s “democratic” variety mostly disappear.

“Today’s democratic socialists earnestly want to avoid mass atrocities,” Friedersdorf concludes. “They believe they can do so by substituting extreme democracy for top-down socialism. But that very es with its own unique problems, and their ‘solution’ wouldstillconsolidate power that is now widely dispersed across different realms of society with different hierarchies.”

Let us remember: The democratic socialist’s proposed utopia is a world in which power across the economic order (and beyond) is taken from the hands of consumers and consolidated in “state planning agencies.” Citizens who don’t like the products or services or economic es are robbed of any recourse outside of the next election, in which the minority’s economic grievances will surely be blips on the majority’s radar. You’re not imagining things:All of this sounds oddly familiar,and

Indeed, while America’s progressives are already eye-ing the tip-top of the top-down, the reality is that even the most rosy of the proposed mechanisms fall terribly short. From “grassroots state planning agencies” to “workers’ cooperatives” to “participatory boards,” each is far less responsive and more prone to collectivist, discriminatory mischief than capitalism’s bottom-up alternative: simply empowering individuals to freely trade, invest, and consume, offering market feedback using plain old price signals and the mundane glories of entrepreneurship and economic exchange.

If we truly hope to “decentralize” or “deconsolidate” economic power, the answer is not the politicization of all things, which is what these calls to “democratization” actually are. If we hope to raise free and virtuous citizens who pioneer new paths and institutions for genuine munity and human relationship, the answer is not to throw our economic decisions to the whims of political mobs—“grassroots,” “democratic,” “cooperative,” or otherwise.

Rather than forming new mittees munity politburos, we should focus on diminishing corporate-political cronyism and barriers to entry where they actually exist, unleashing and empowering the creative spirit of each individual, in turn.

Image: David Shankbone(CC BY 2.0)

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
Hostility Towards Religion Continues To Grow In America
Liberty Institute, a legal organization in Plano, Texas, has released the report, “Undeniable: The Survey of Hostility to Religion in America, 2014 Edition,” featuring more than 1,300 cases of religious hostility, persecution and/or Constitutional violations of rights in the United States. According to the report, Hostility to religion in America is still growing. Because religion is so vital to a free and well-ordered society, our goal is to expose and document this growing hostility to help Americans confront and reverse...
What Patricia Arquette Should Have Said About the Wage Gap and Women’s Rights
During last night’s Oscar ceremony, Best Supporting Actresswinner Patricia Arquette used her acceptance speech to rail against unfair pay for women: To every women who gave birth to every taxpayer and citizen of this nation, we have fought for everybody else’s equal rights. It’s our time … to have wage equality once and for all and equal rights for women in the United States of America. The wage equality that Arquette is referring to is the gender wage gap—the difference...
Florist Chooses Conscience Over Settlement
Last year Washington State’s Attorney General sued Arlene’s Flowers & Gifts on the basis of consumer protection. Florist Barronelle Stutzman had refused to sell flowers to a long time customer when the arrangements were to be used for a same-sex marriage ceremony. Although Stutzman did not have any qualms about serving serving gay customers, she “didn’t want to be involved in a same-sex marriage.” “I just put my hands on his and told [the customer who made the request] because...
Women and the Academy Awards
Patricia Arquette’s passion is fabulous, says Elise Hilton in this week’s Acton Commentary, but she’s wrong on economics: Ms. Arquette’s passion is fabulous, and I’m sure that’s what makes her a great actor. But she’s wrong on economics. The “women make 23 cents less than men” canard is far less accurate than Arquette thinks it is. Women are more likely to work part-time, to choose careers that pay less but offer more flexibility in scheduling (such as teaching) and often...
Worldwide Flight From Family Is Killing Us
In the 1970s, Paul Ehrlich tried to warn us: human beings were in trouble. We were reproducing so rapidly, Ehrlich opined, that millions of us would soon be starving. Ehrlich got one thing right: we are in trouble. But he pletely wrong about overpopulation. Today, just the opposite is true. There aren’t enough of us human beings. And a lot of people are seriously disinterested in making more. Nicholas Eberstadt calls this the “flight from family.” All around the world...
Why is NYC Discriminating Against Churches?
New York City owns almost 1,200 public school buildings that sit empty on nights and weekends. To earn some extra e, the city rents out the empty schools to tens of thousands munity groups for any meetings that might be of interest to munity: Boy Scouts, drama clubs, labor unions senior citizen groups, etc. In 2011 alone, the NYC issued over 122,000 permits for using the schools. But there is one group that is forbidden from using the facilities: churches....
Landmark Human Trafficking Case Concludes With $14 Million Settlement
While sex trafficking gets a lot of attention in the media, labor trafficking is actually mon. It largely affects middle-aged men, most of whom are looking for ways to support themselves and their families. Often faced with overwhelming poverty, these men make ill-informed and risky choices, hoping that what they are being told by potential employers is true. In a landmark case, a Gulf pany, Signal International, has been ordered to pay $14 million in damages to men they had...
Economic Freedom Isn’t Enough
We know that, for economies to thrive, people must be free to start their own businesses without taxing regulations, that free trade must be the de facto means of doing business, and that cronyism and corruption must be eradicated. But that’s not enough. At the Institute for Faith, Work & Economics, blogger (and former Acton intern) Elise Amyx says we have to have human flourishing as well. Economic freedom is only ponent of human flourishing. We should think about it...
Death And Redemption In Ukraine
Bohdan Solchanyk was not a materialistic young man. He did not seek worldly pleasures, but rather took delight in his studies, his fiancee, his faith. What Bohdan wanted -what they both wanted – was live in the Ukraine with dignity and freedom. Bohdan’s dream died last week at a peaceful protest against the government, where he and 80 others were “brutally shot and killed by government snipers in the central square of the capital of Ukraine, as the world’s TV...
Religious Activists Push Back Against ‘Blunt Instrument’ of Fossil Fuels Divestment
Your faithful correspondent last week exposed the fossil-fuel divestment endgame of religious shareholder activists. As You Sow President Danielle Fugere sees her group’s activities as awareness-raising exercises for climate change, but AYS’s alignment with environmentalist and divestment firebrand Naomi Klein suggests they’d settle for nothing less than nationalizing panies. This week, I’m happy to report another group frequently called to task in this space, the Interfaith Center on Corporate Responsibility, opposes the AYS divestment onslaught. Reporting in last week’s Wall...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2025 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved