Excerpt from Socialism, by Ludwig von Mises

Mises Institute free book ^ | 1932 | Ludwig von Mises

[theBuckwheat]

From Socialism, by Ludwig von Mises (1951, Originally written in German, 1932)

Part V, Deconstructionism, Chapter I, The Motive Powers of Desconstructionism, Section 1, The nature of deconstructionism.

To the socialist, the coming of Socialism means a transition from an irrational to a rational economy. Under Socialism, planned management of economic life takes the place of anarchy of production; society, which is conceived as the incarnation of reason, takes the place of the conflicting aims of unreasonable and self-interested individuals. A just distribution replaces an unjust distribution of goods. Want and misery vanish and there is wealth for all-- so the laws of historical evolution tell us-- we, or at least our heirs, must at length inherit. For all history lead to that promised land, and all that has happened in the past has only prepared the way for our salvation.

This is how our contemporaries see Socialism, and they believe in its excellence. It is false to imagine that the socialist ideology dominates only those parties which call themselves socialist or – what is generally intended to mean the same thing – “social”. All present-day political parties are saturated with the leading socialistic ideas. Even the stoutest opponents of Socialism fall within its shadow. They, too, are convinced that the socialist economy is more rational than the capitalist, that it guarantees a juster distribution of income, that historical evolution is driving man inexorably in that direction. When they oppose Socialism they do so with the sense that they are defending selfish private interests and that they are combating a development which from the standpoint of public welfare is desirable and is based upon the only ethically acceptable principle. And in their hearts they are convinced that their resistance is hopeless.

Yet, the socialist idea is nothing but grandiose rationalization of petty resentments. Not one of its theories can withstand scientific criticism and all its deductions are ill-founded. Its conception of the capitalist economy has long been seen to be false; it plan of a future social order proves to be inwardly contradictory, and therefore impracticable. Not only would Socialism fail to make economic life more rational, it would abolish social co-operation outright. That it would bring justice is merely an arbitrary assertion, arising, as we can show, from resentment and the false interpretation of what takes place under Capitalism. And that historical evolution leaves us no alternative but Socialism turns out to be a prophecy which differs from chiliastic dreams of primitive Christian sectarians only in its claim to the title 'science'.

In fact Socialism is not in the least what it pretends to be. It is not the pioneer of a better and finer world, but the spoiler of what thousands of years of civilization have created. It does not build; it destroys. For destruction is the essence of it. It produces nothing, it only consumes what the social order based on private ownership in the means of production has created. Since the socialist order of society cannot exist, unless it be as a fragment of Socialism within an economic order resting otherwise on private property, each step leading towards Socialism must exhaust itself in the destruction of what already exists.

Such a policy of destructionism means the consumption of capital. There are few who recognize this fact. Capital consumption can be detected statistically, and can be conceived intellectually, but it is not obvious to everyone. To see the weakness of a policy which raises the consumption of the masses at the cost of existing capital wealth, and thus sacrifices the future to the present, and to recognize the nature of this policy, requires a deeper insight than then that vouchsafed to statesmen and politicians or to the masses who have put them into power. As long as the walls of the factory buildings stand, and the trains continue to run, it is supposed that all is well with the world. The increasing difficulties of maintaining the higher standard of living are ascribed to various causes, but never to the fact that a policy of capital consumption is being followed.

In the problem of the capital consumption of a destructionist society we find one of the key problems of the socialist economic policy....

From pages 457-457 in the (free) PDF version. Link: http://mises.org/library/socialism-economic-and-sociological-analysis

[Moltke]

Small correction: The German original was first published in 1922, not 1932.

[nicmarlo]

I agree. Those on the dole should not be allowed to vote for those who give them the “free” phones and other crap that are appropriated unto themselves from the “collective” others who are forced to work for and pay for it, which is nothing more than “legalized” theft.

[nicmarlo]

Another book I recommend as a must read is Bastiat’s The Law.

[riri]

Thanks for posting.

Mises is life changing. <3

[dfwgator]

You can even show this to your kids, and they will see where things are heading

The Road to Serfdom
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0QD75lUm51s

[GreensKeeperWillie]

The Frankfurters dominated everything. If it sounded ‘scientific’, like anthropology (see Boaz/Meade) or like psychoanalysis (see Freud/Jung) or perverted pedophile pederast homosexuals (see Kinsey) it found a home. WTF were we thinking. (All Jews, by the way,)

[Defiant]

When they oppose Socialism they do so with the sense that they are defending selfish private interests and that they are combating a development which from the standpoint of public welfare is desirable and is based upon the only ethically acceptable principle. And in their hearts they are convinced that their resistance is hopeless.

What a great description of the Republican party.

[P.O.E.]

Hayek called it the “Fatal Conceit”.

[stockpirate]

Bttt