Ice Cubes and Socialism

Regular readers may recall that I am a native son of Brooklyn, NY. Like so many other natives sons and daughters of that storied borough, I am first-generation. As in, both my parents were born outside America's borders. In my case, it was kinda-sorta the birthplace of democracy, as in culturally and ethnically proximate to Athens (neither of my lineages are rooted in Greece's capital city, but as they say, close enough for government work).

So, no surprise, I spent many of the summers of my youth in Greece. And, no surprise, there was the equivalent of "when in Rome..."

Except when it came to ice cubes.

Being an America-raised kid, I liked my beverages cold. So, when I enjoyed a soda (or pop, or Coke, or whatever regional euphemism you insist on labeling your carbonated soft drink), I'd drop a bunch of ice cubes into the glass from which I consumed.

Hoo, boy, did I get yelled at. "Ice is expensive!!" my uncle would intone. Being a kid, I didn't get it - ice was one of those things that simply was - always available, unless one failed to replenish the ice trays (no ice makers or in-door dispensers back then). Indeed, decades later but a decade ago, there was the routine scolding by another relative, our crusty old uncle who lived on coffee and Dewars, up at our country house: "First thing you do is refill the ice tray!"

My in-Greece uncle wasn't an outlier. He shared the prevailing Continental attitude toward ice, i.e. that it is a luxury to be used sparingly. Countless other examples of relative sparseness of lifestyle exist, and they are reflective of a notable difference in mindset between Americans and Europeans, to make a broad generalization. Most of Western Europe defaults to a 'welfare state' or 'safety net' mindset, where government is more heavily involved in the economy, many more aspects of life are managed or provided by the government, and people are taxed more heavily to pay for those socialized services. This "government provides" approach overlays somewhat market-based economies, meaning that these nations with socialized services aren't "socialist" in the according-to-Hoyle sense. They are commonly referred to as "social democracies," but that is a misleading substitution for the more apt and accurate label, "welfare capitalism."

One example of welfare capitalism is the Nordic Model, i.e. the form of government practiced in Scandinavian countries such as Sweden and Denmark. Back when Bernie Sanders still got screen time, he would point at those nations as good examples for the US. Unfortunately for Bernie, it eventually got out that he was promising their outcomes but not coming even close to advocating for their practices.

I covered that here.

Nor is welfare capitalism aka "social democracy" what the Democratic Socialists are advocating, though they try awfully hard to mask the truth. Which I touched upon here.

"Socialism" has been softened and fuzzied up in today's common vernacular to include the welfare side of welfare capitalism, i.e. the notion that things like health care, education, retirement, and economic safety nets should be provided by the government and paid for via taxation. The capitalism side, however, does not resemble the Nordic model or any other variant of managed capitalism. It is far closer to economic fascism, where business ownership remains nominally private-sector, but businesses are regulated to the point of mooting that nominal sense of private ownership. Excepting, of course, business risk. As in, the private sector eats losses, but profits get soaked up by the government via taxation and other means.

Yes, it's that gross, and that stupid, but it is what America's socialists desire. In that pursuit, they promise utopia to the voters.

Give us power, and we will give you all the benefits of European welfare states but without taxing you Europe style. We'll get that money from Other People.

Most Europeans, I believe, understand that they pay for the services they get, via flatter income tax codes and VAT taxes that burden everyone. This produces, or aligns with, a very European sense of fatalistic egalitarianism, as exhibited in such things as the Law of Jante.

Thus, better to rail against excessive ice cube use than seek changes to the system that makes the cost of ice cubes significant.

This is a caution against the modern Left's desire for "equity," which is the coercive equalization of outcome, and stands in stark contract to the ideal of equality of opportunity. One is about big government "balancing" the books, no matter individual effort or merit. The other is getting government out of the way so that people can make their own futures.

I close with a re-share of Harlan Ellison's cautionary tale, Harrison Bergeron. Keep this in mind next time you enjoy that ice cold soda.

---