Democratic Socialism

My guess is that 2019 will be the year of "Democratic Socialism"—a euphemism for an leftist ideology that is anti-capitalist and anti-business, pro big intrusive government (BIG), pro-income redistribution and most importantly, advocates "social justice" that is defined solely by people who fervently believe that they and they alone exist on a higher moral plane than anyone who questions their positions.

Currently, Democratic socialism is being sold as 'socialism-lite' with the catch phrase—"We can do better, if we do it together." But in reality, democratic socialism is socialism with all of real dangers it implies.

If you listen to its adherents, you'd think that over 240 years of free enterprise and individual freedoms have counted for nothing, that Bernie Sanders and his followers have somehow come up with a better, more just and effective solution to the challenges we all face. They. Have. Not.

How can I say that? Because history has proved me right over and over and over again.

It's worth considering a video that asks more than a few inconvenient questions about socialism and the people who advocate it:



To quote Glen Reynolds:

“Under capitalism, the rich grow powerful.

Under socialism, the powerful grow rich — and everyone else grows poor.”

And in the extreme, everyone being poor is the least of the damage that socialism can do.

UPDATE (12/27/2018):
-----------------------
As we watch the tragic collapse of Venezuela under the socialist regime of Chevez/Maduro—a place where things have gotten so bad that millions have left and other millions are relegated to selling everything from their hair to their bodies to survive, there's a grim old joke that's worth repeating:

Q: What did socialists use before they used candles?
A: Electricity.

UPDATE (12/29/2018)
----------------------------
Of course, hard core progressives will never admit the there may be problems with the way socialism in Venezuela has worked out. Note the tweet by someone named "Dr. Madeline Seers, PhD" [as someone with an earned PhD, I can tell you with absolute certainty that when a person identifies with "Dr." before their name and uses PhD afterward, they're rather enamored of themselves] and the response by Richard Fernandez (Wretchard):

"Dr. Madeline Seers, PhD" is representative of a class of progressives who live in a fantasy of their own construction. In their fantasy world, their high minded moral preening is all that matters. Outcomes? Oh ... that's for people of low intellect and lower morals. Pathetic.

And then, of course, there's the fundamental question: Why doesn't "Dr. Madeline Seers, PhD" emigrate to Venezuela right now so she can gain the benefits she implies?