The Left hates self-sufficiency

Classical Marxist socialism was based upon a presumed revolt of the working class.  Interestingly enough, in the more than 100 years since Marx, there has never been a single revolt of the working class in a capitalist country -- not one.  Why?  Because in capitalist countries, the working class has it too good.  Workers have no reason to revolt.  In fact, in capitalist countries, workers aspire to improve their lot until they themselves become members of management or business owners.  And such economic advancement is readily available to all who are willing to work hard, devote many hours of time, save and invest money, and accept and mitigate risk.  In America, remaining a lifelong employee is a choice.  It may be a good and appropriate choice, but it’s a choice nonetheless.

The failure of capitalist workers to do their part and revolt is perhaps a fundamental reason the Left has abandoned the working middle class and in its place adopted the strategy of creating multiple other oppressed groups and pitting them against imagined oppressors:  Females against males, Blacks against Whites, transgender against “cisgender,” immigrants against citizens, LGBTQ against heterosexuals, the newly woke against those proud to be American, and of course, poor against rich.

But I believe there’s another ideology at play here.  Despite its name, socialism is merely another form of sovereignty of the state.  And when the state is sovereign, it simply must have subjects over which to rule -- otherwise there is nothing or no one over whom to exercise sovereignty.  And that reality -- at least in a political system based on the oxymoron of “democratic socialism” -- requires a dependent class of subjects who perceive that they need the state to rule over them and care for them.

If you listen closely to any leftist political campaign rhetoric, it always consists of some form of, “We will provide for you and protect you!” against some form of oppressor du jour.  That’s all they have to offer.

So this illustrates at least one additional reason the Left has abandoned the working middle class:  They now view the middle class as an adversary.  Why?  Because the middle class is largely self-sufficient.  It doesn’t need a ruling class to provide for it.  It continually puzzles me when I encounter “classic” Democrats who still view that party as the “party of the working man.”  Are they simply willfully blind?  Or do they feel like they need the government to take care of them?  If so, they’re intentionally removing themselves from the self-sufficient working middle class and placing themselves in a lower and dependent class.

The Left’s hatred of self-sufficiency also explains its animosity toward strong, capable, and functional nuclear families.  Such families are also self-sufficient and have no need for an overweening government to provide for them.

This hatred of self-sufficiency explains the Left’s enmity toward religion -- specifically Christianity.  When people of faith encounter adversity, they rely on their faith more than bureaucracy.  In addition to spiritual and emotional support, they even tend to rely more upon their fellow believers for material assistance.

The Left’s hatred of self-sufficiency lies behind their endless male bashing indictment of “toxic masculinity.”  Here again, strong and capable men don’t need much government.

Bottom line:  The Left simply cannot tolerate any degree of self-sufficiency.  It undermines the need for a ruling elite.  Without the need for a ruling elite to preside over the oppressed, the Left is meaningless.

Image: Smithsonian

To comment, you can find the MeWe post for this article here.

If you experience technical problems, please write to