There was a book written post WWII named “The Road Ahead”, I believe. It was in my late Dad’s college books and warned about the forthcoming invasion of Socialism in the US.
It discussed how Socialism took over Britain after World War I and had immaculated it. It warned about socialists in the US, naming a Congressman, Hubert Humphrey as one of them.
After the Germans were defeated, the Brits turned out Churchill in favor of socialists promising free stuff.
Happy Hubert Dad called him. Most politicians could get Dad fuming but Humphrey sent him to new levels disgust and condemnations of being a ______ _______ Communist _______ and then he would really get going.
Free stuff wins just about every time unless the sheeple can see they are in grave danger.
I think you meant “emasculated.”
I like to define socialism, not as “government ownership of the means of production,” but more generally as cynicism towards society, and concomitant faith in, and naiveté towards, government. This is in contradistintion to the socialist’s cynical equating of society and government:SOME writers have so confounded society with government, as to leave little or no distinction between them; whereas they are not only different, but have different origins. Society is produced by our wants, and government by our wickedness; the former promotes our happiness POSITIVELY by uniting our affections, the latter NEGATIVELY by restraining our vices. The one encourages intercourse, the other creates distinctions. The first is a patron, the last a punisher.Cynicism towards society and naiveté towards government lead directly to the policies of communists, fascists, and socialists of any other stripe.Society in every state is a blessing, but Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one . . . - Thomas Paine, Common Sense (1776)