By Dennis “DJ” Mikolay
October is typically associated with all things spooky: ghouls, monsters, and jack-o-lanterns have come to typify the tenth month of the year. And while these supernatural traditions may send a chill up the spine of even the most skeptical individual, there is another infinitely more terrifying tradition associated with October: Socialism.
While May Day is traditionally viewed as the time of year where Socialists of all ilks gather with their comrades, the month of October also holds a special place in every Red’s heart. It was during this month that Vladimir Lenin led the successful military coup that seized control of the Russian government. His victory gave birth to the world’s first Socialist state, forever altering the lives of billions of people around the globe.
It seems fitting, given the month’s leftist past, that October would host the “Occupy Wall Street” protest, a series of grassroots demonstrations that seek to counteract the various ills that plague the American political system.
Students from around the country have descended upon America’s major cities to demand an end to corporate politics. And while most Americans, conservative and liberal alike, would agree that the political system needs to be taken out of the hands of the special interest groups, the Wall Street protestors have made one dire mistake: they have welcomed Socialists into their ranks.
Now, one must recognize that not all these protestors sympathize with the radical left. That said, the lack of a structural hierarchy within this movement has allowed some of the more extreme activists to steer the masses. These individuals demand more than the much-needed political reform: they espouse the wonders of Socialism, open borders, and blanket debt forgiveness.
If the “Occupy Wall Street” protestors are serious about reforming the government, they need to ditch these folks. Not only are Socialist ideals detrimental to the movement’s mainstream credibility, but if these policies were actually implemented they would prove entirely counterproductive.
Just think: many Socialist protestors blast the extreme “wealth gap” between the rich and poor in the United States. They argue that the implementation of a Socialist system would alleviate this inequality, thus providing a level playing field for all Americans. That sounds good in theory, but why would anyone seeking to eliminate poverty abandon capitalism, an economic system that creates jobs, produces incentive, and allows social mobility, only to replace it with one that has historically wrought nothing but aridity and depravation?
Think of the web of despair that Socialism cast upon the Slavic world following the 1917 Russian Revolution. Incentive died, widespread famine swept the Ukraine, and corruption ran rampant. The system couldn’t sustain itself, and after decades of decline, it finally imploded.
This is the only outcome Socialism can produce. These leftists don’t recognize the fact that their views cannot be applied in the real world.
Their ideas, however, don’t stop at the nation’s economic policy. Many leftists view America’s immigration policies as being “racist.” Their proposed solution is the abolition of the country’s borders, thus allowing for a free-flow of individuals to and from the United States.
Aside from the potential this creates for terrorists to sneak into the country, one must wonder why, if anyone were seeking to mend the United States’ ailing economy, would they encourage a massive influx of immigrants to compete with domestic workers?
Former Governor Dick Lamm (D-Colorado) sees the problem with this plan:
“What is the difference between exporting a job and importing a worker,” said Governor Lamm. “Modern nations who care about their own workers must have control of their immigration flow. Why are skilled and semi-skilled workers finding it so hard to get ahead? Corporate greed and liberal immigration policies.”
Governor Lamm’s warning is wholly justified: by opening the floodgates of immigration, American workers—the same individuals whom these Socialists claim to defend—will have to compete with a much larger base of competition; a demographic that is often willing to work harder for less monetary gain! The newly opened borders would spell the end of domestic labor.
The goals motivating the “Occupy Wall Street” movement are undoubtedly noble. We need to return government to the people, and seize away electoral control from banks, corporations, and special interest groups. Both parties are two heads of the same hydra, and we need to restore the Republic to its former glory.
In that respect, many Conservatives, including former Governors Jesse Ventura (I-MN) and Buddy Roemer (R-LA), have enthusiastically endorsed the protests. But these students must be wary: if the Socialists that have already positioned themselves as leaders of this movement seize control, “Occupy Wall Street” will become a polarizing, and wholly ineffective, movement. The Conservatives, Moderates, and Libertarians will disappear, as will any chance of electoral reform.