What Bernie Sanders Gets Wrong About Authoritarianism

Well, almost everything.

By
31

Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, the frontrunner for the Democratic nomination for president, is praised by his admirers for being consistent. He’s been saying the same things for 40 years, they explain—as if this is an obvious compliment. I think that’s kind of weird. 

But I also like it because it gives me an excuse to make points I’ve been making for 20 years. Specifically: that authoritarianism doesn’t make people rich. 

Sanders refuses to apologize for his praise for some of the great accomplishments of authoritarian regimes, such as Fidel Castro’s Cuba. At a recent CNN town hall, he volunteered that there are things about China he likes, too. 

“China is another example, all right?” Sanders said. “China is an authoritarian country, becoming more and more authoritarian. But can anyone deny—I mean, the facts are clear—that they have taken more people out of extreme poverty than any country in history? Do I get criticized because I say that? That’s the truth. So that is the fact. End of discussion.”

Keep reading with a free account
Create a free Dispatch account to keep reading Get Started ALREADY HAVE AN ACCOUNT? SIGN IN
31
By
Comments (31)
Join The Dispatch to participate in the comments.
 
  1. Avatar photo
    NotOpie

    The challenge with today's "progressive" group think is that if you are not in agreement with the group you are an enemy of the group. Considered disagreement is unacceptable. This, then, gets extended to law and rule making. Don't want or need your health insurance to look like this, too bad, it is the way it must be. Don't want your business to be regulated in that way, too bad, tax policy gets leveraged as a bludgeon. All of this ties directly into an authoritarian mentality. It is a direct result of of the progressive elitist ethos. "We know better than you rube".

    Collapse
  2. Avatar photo
    Johntadian

    So, we can slam Orange-Man-Bad all we want; and justifiably so when it's warranted. But the thought of voting for Sanders, or staying home and not voting; with the chance that this useless pile of steaming "socialism" could assume the presidency, is a non-starter.
    Besides,there is a real possibility that 2020 could have the lowest turnout of demoralized democrat voters, resulting in, as in 2012 with Obama, the loss of another whole generation of democrat positions downstream.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      C C Writer

      You haven't listed all the non-binary-choice options or rationales for casting a non-binary vote.

      Collapse
  3. Avatar photo
    Sad Trombone

    Bernie's hero Vladimir Lenin described Bernie's brand of socialism in one of his books - "Left Wing Communism, An Infantile Disorder."

    Collapse
  4. Avatar photo
    Paul Reichardt

    Honest question: what does the writer mean by "that authoritarianism doesn’t make people rich."

    For example, the House of Saud seems to be doing quite well for itself. Sure, the wealth comes from the oil. But it's the authoritarianism that creates and sustains the system that allows that wealth to flow disproportionately to the Royal family.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      The Grand Wazoo

      I think he means the broader society and not just the Princes who rule the country.

      Collapse
  5. Avatar photo
    Pat Riot

    Sanders is doing the same thing that others do when they say things like, "the slaves were technically better off than they were before they were slaves", or, "there are great people on both sides", or, "Trump has done some good things", or, "Hitler had a Jewish friend". It's what I call, "conspicuously useless information". It's a form of dog whistle speech that serves no purpose but to dishonestly connect with those of odious allegiances.

    A man is known by the company he keeps, and politicians can be known by the dog whistles they blow. With his dog whistles Sanders is pandering to stoned Che Guevara-t-shirt-wearing college students (mostly boys) who want their student loans forgiven.

    Collapse
  6. Avatar photo
    Paul Reichardt

    The disconnect here is that Mr. Goldberg and conservatives in general are coming from a different ideological starting point than Bernie Sanders and the traditional old school Left. Conservatives have internalized the Hayekian neoliberal arguments of the 1960’s about the 1-to-1 connection between “people power” style democracy and totalitarianism and that liberalism can only grow in an established market-based ordered society—an ordering, if need be, to be imposed from above (or by a foreign power). This has become so axiomatic that it’s no longer recognized that it’s an argument that has to be made and that not everyone has bought it. This thinking is not without its blind spots for authoritarianism as well—Hayek had more than just a soft-spot for dictators himself.

    This is not generally speaking how people on the Boomer Left think. In their view, man is basically good and will naturally form cooperative units, if undisturbed by corrupting elements, be it like some kibbutz in Haifa or hippie commune in Mendocino. Order a society based on justice and equality, and liberalism and freedom will bloom as a matter of course. This is a gross oversimplification, of course, but this is the ideal. So when Bernie praises Chavez or Ortega or Fidel for their policies that are ostensibly aimed to empower people who they see are victims of economic injustice, he sees it as a step towards increased liberalism and freedom and there’s nothing for him to apologize for having supported it. The fact that those leaders also pursue tyrannical and murderous means to that end is not necessarily a consequence of the ends themselves—whereas for Hayekians they are one and the same.

    You can say Sanders is wrong and call him a froth-mouthed Commie or a socialist looking to install Chavismo policy in the US, but the real debate in the US is not about capitalism Vs. socialism; it’s about responding to the very real criticisms of neoliberalism, where Bernie and, say, Tucker Carlson have a lot of overlap, and whether the remedy is to move in a more socialist direction or in a more free-market direction, however incrementally. Putting dogma and ideological labels aside, whoever is the most persuasive is going to win in the long run.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      td12212

      That's the sort of utopian thinking that brought us the Bolsheviks and Mao and pol pot. Granted I don't think Bernie is a pol-pot but I do think his theories are crack pot. He's selling his followers a dream he'll never be able to deliver on which will leave them totally disenchanted with politics in general and could lead to other unforseen issues like the rise of weird leftist militia type anti government groups.

      Collapse
    2. Avatar photo
      Bill Nelson

      “Conservatives have internalized the Hayekian neoliberal arguments of the 1960’s about the 1-to-1 connection “
      Well, no. I am a conservative because I learned that the best way to live was to be self reliant, and thus more free.

      Collapse
    3. Avatar photo
      Isaac P

      Spot on. The only thing I would add is that the “Boomer Left” craves those small tribes who care — but don’t have enough imagination to see how voluntary cooperation extends to strangers. And the upcoming Millennial Left is too stuck on class theory, because they have never lived in a tribe as we know it. Their relationships are extremely specific and virtual: my online anime forum, the people I live-tweet The Bachelor with, the idiots in that Dank Meme group on Reddit... they duck in and out of hyperfocused communities for very specific ends.

      When your loyalty and membership is so scattered and granular, it’s no wonder you wouldn’t have the imagination to see how small groups can adapt to many different tasks.

      (Except for the Bern movement. They want to overthrow everything, and there is a zeal to that.)

      Collapse
    4. Avatar photo
      Pat Riot

      Good points. While Bernie doesn't help himself by dredging up these obsolete terms, the reality is that the *entire* economic discussion in the USA is about shades of the same mixed-economy welfare state. Unwashed masses waiting for Bernie to liberate Bloomberg's money to buy them a new flat screen TV are going to be waiting just as long as Trump's voters will for a tax cut.


      Collapse
  7. Avatar photo
    Ray Salemi

    I think support for Bernie Sanders boils down to Democrats being mad as hell. When they see Bernie pointing his finger and flinging spittle they say, "THIS guy gets it."

    You can draw a line from Merrick Garland to Bernie Sanders through Trump.

    Collapse
  8. Avatar photo
    C C Writer

    My local big-city daily picked up this column today. So more people are going to be exposed to the points Jonah has been making for 20 years!

    Collapse
  9. Avatar photo
    Bill Nelson

    A friend of mine votes for the candidate which will provide him the most entertainment value. So he has been thrilled with Trump. He is now a big Sanders supporter. Figures that will keep him in stitches for years to come.
    When you read Hillary Clinton's "It Takes A village", there is a lot of nice stuff we all agree on, but at the end of the story, you realize the only way the village works is because the really smart people are running things. This is hos Sanders sees the world. When he is in charge, there is no threat to democracy and rights because that would be wrong and he will never be wrong.
    Personally, I dislike politicians who shout at me. Ted Kennedy like to shout at me. Sen. Warren is a shouter. And I suspect that Sanders even shouts when he is home.

    Collapse
  10. Avatar photo
    Rick Harlan

    I've been worrying that BS's unexpected appeal to so many Dems is that he's really not the radical from the fringe that conventional wisdom says, but represents something familiar and traditional. While it's not the main point here, Jonah's historical recap confirms my fears.
    The god-king takes all your stuff and gives it to his favorites, but might let you keep enough to live on so you can make more stuff to take. I think they meant, "He's been saying the same thing for 4000 years."

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Man-Eating Cow

      You've just described the stationary bandit. The stationary bandit theory of the origins of the state is discussed in some detail in Jonah's recent book.

      Collapse
Load More