Socialism Does NOT Work | Daniel Hannan | Oxford Union

mr president ladies and gentlemen who said this i'm a socialist and a very different kind of socialist from your rich friend count revenkloff it was 1930 and the speaker was a rising german politician called adolf hitler in 1930 the contention that fascism had emerged out of socialism was accepted across the board it was an observed historical fact fascists marched under red banners on may day their leaders believed in high tariffs in workers control of factories in a moment in uh common production of and distribution and uh and exchange as we just said go on um will the speaker agree that the first inmates of the concentration camp in nazi germany were communists and socialists and there was a reason why you say where i was it is absolutely true that socialists of the national and leninist varieties were bitterly opposed they were fishing in the same pool they were competing for the same kind of voter the one kind of person that neither brand of socialist had any time for was the classical liberal what they called the decadent anglo-saxon bourgeois capitalist why because theirs was an ideology that elevated coercion over freedom now why do i begin with this godwin's law high stake opening two reasons first of all as a corrective as a corrective to the self-righteousness that we've already started hearing where people who claim to be socialist then start claiming uh credit for everything from the extension of the franchise to the extension of universal education but my real point is this one socialism rests on compulsion its defining ethic is not equality but coercion socialism and capitalism are matrices they are economic systems within which people can be generous or greedy they can be selfish or altruistic human nature comes whether from our genes or from our maker it isn't something that's created by an economic system but what's unique about socialism is the readiness of the state to deploy coercive force now we've evolved a great vocabulary to describe this we talk about things like asking people to pay a bit more tax right see what happens if they choose not to behind all that polite sounding asking them to pay their share to contribute is the threat of prison now of course there are some occasions where any society will need to rely on coercive force on incarceration there are some taxes that are necessary in any system we all accept that but the use of coercive and ultimately lethal force by the state is its most awesome and awful power we should tilt the balance as far as we can to liberty before you think of that power should be used as the prayer book says of marriage reverently discreetly advisedly soberly the idea that as we just heard from katie that those of us on this side are in favor of dog eat dog if by dog eat dog you mean the desire for material improvement that is a fundamental inhuman nature under all systems you had it under the communist regimes you had it under feudal regimes but what is unique about capitalism is that it harnessed that ambition to a socially useful end under every other system devised by human intelligence a group of people sat on top and the way to get rich was to suck up for those in power whether they were kings or bishops or commissars we uniquely in this country and we then exported it came up with a system where you satisfied your ambition by serving the rest of your fellow citizens under the law we channeled that desire for self-improvement in a socially productive way and that's why socialist countries are not just less wealthy than capitalist ones but less free that's the categorical difference between east germany and west germany between north korea and south korea it's not just that socialism doesn't work in the sense that it fails to provide material advance it doesn't work in that it takes away human dignity and civil rights above all our freedom to make choices as autonomous individuals yes sir how is it freedom to not have your daily bread to not be able to go to a reasonable school to not have any opportunities to develop yourself as a young person or even as an adult who wants to work that's who has not been given sure i mean let's leave aside whether you mean positive or negative freedom if you want those opportunities if you want decent schools if you want a rise in living standards would you go to north korea or south korea would you look at socialism to provide it or would you look at the free market now it's an interesting thing karl marx who of course invented the thing let's not gloss over that fact karl marx thought that as time went by it would become more liberal that he could take the constraints off that people wouldn't need to be told what to do and like every other prediction that karl marx made that was the opposite of the truth it's extraordinary marxists uniquely claim that theirs is a scientific rather than a political doctrine they claim that their truths are empirical they're not just opinions and yet every single forecast that marx made that there would be more and more unemployment under capitalism that there'd be a smaller group of oligarchs and a larger group of proletarians every single one of them turned out to be the opposite of the truth i want to tackle one other thing this i do yes of course i have i i have a pleasure i have the pleasure like a number of people here are studying at an old university where we were obliged to read these things if we did a history this is going to have to be my last one um there seems to be a lot of confusion on the side of the proposition about what actual systems we're talking about first of all we're talking about social democracy in britain as was in the 60s and 70s which of 50s and 60s and 70s which i lived through and was the best time of my life i'm not sure this is a point of information yes we're using the dictionary definition that was helpfully put before the house by my colleague tony daniels when he when he explained that what socialism means is the collective or state ownership of the means of production distribution and exchange now that you know if you have a quarrel with the authors of the oxford english dictionary that's fine but that seems to me a perfectly neutral definition to be using in this debate now i want to take on the idea because it runs through the debate that somehow on this side we are more materialistic greedier less humane that we have less by way of fellow feeling and sympathy than those on the other side if you contrast socialist and capitalist economies you see precious little evidence of that but for what it's worth i'm a conservative politician i spend a lot of my time with libertarians conservatives and free marketers of every stripe i can tell you hand on heart i have never met anyone who derives more pleasure from a healthy bank balance than from listening to beethoven or playing with his children or going for a walk in the country but what is it that enables us to do those things it's economic progress the fact that you have a dishwasher and don't have to spend all your time doing the washing by hand means you can go for that walk in the country the fact that you've got a car and don't have to queue up at the tram station means you have more time to listen to beethoven symphonies the fact that you don't have to spend six weeks working just to feed your children means you can spend the weekend playing with them and where did those economic advances come from from the system that unlocked the inventiveness of a creative people that tapped into the unlimited potential of human innovation and that raised our species to a standard of living that a couple of generations ago would have been unimaginable now that has happened for about a billion people in the world those who can afford the car those of us who can afford the dishwashers there are six billion people i'm sorry i'm getting any more time there are six billion people who cannot afford the cars and the dishwashers but they will they will as free exchange and specialization and comparative advantage run their course raising people to a higher and higher standard of living unless we go down the road of cuba or zimbabwe or any other socialist country because this motion isn't it doesn't work don't make the mistake of judging socialism as a textbook theory but judging capitalism by its necessarily imperfect outcomes judge like with like in the real world you find me a functioning socialist country that has delivered more than a free market alternative now i'm going to finish with this point katie in her speech cited a number of the great heroes of our indigenous radical tradition and among them are some of the greatest heroes who have lived or argued in any language she cited the levellers three of whom fell in burford church in an act of cold-blooded execution which disturbed even the morbid sensibilities of 17th century england what was it that the levellers those far-sighted heroic men who looked forward to the universal franchise who looked forward to something that we would now recognize as constitutional liberty and democracy under the rule of law what was it that they believed what was the starting point of their ideology what was it that richard overton argued for in his arrow against all tyrants self-ownership he began by saying i own my mind i own my body and if i am free to trade the products of my own labor then without the intervention of prelates or princes then i will be fulfilled and happy these were proto-libertarians they were radicals all right but they understood that freedom was linked as they constantly said in the very paper that katie quoted that liberty and propriety ownership and freedom were inextricably linked let me close with some words of their great contemporary another libertarian hero john milton capitalism this thing that raised our species developed in some of the italian northern city states was then refined by the dutch but it was in this country that it reached its fullest flower and was exported addressing the lords and commons in 1644 milton said remember what nation it is whereof ye are a nation not slow and dull but quick and piercing of wit we got the whole thing going and we ended slavery and we exported property rights and we exported the rule of law and it was all based on raising the individual above the state rather than the other way around when you walk out of the doors tonight vote for freedom and remember what nation it is wherever you are you

Channel: OxfordUnion

Views: 1,134,373

Rating: 4.5410357 out of 5

Keywords: Socialism Does NOT Work, Daniel Hannan, Oxford Union, Socialism, Does, Not, Work, Daniel, Hannan, Oxford, Union, MEP, MP, European Parliament, Left Wing, Politics, Ideology, Freedom, Socialist, Society, Collectivist, North Korea, South Korea, Opportunity, Education, Living Standards, Poverty, Economy, Equality, Communism, Wealth, Rich, Poor, Failed, Social, Britain, UK, Karl Marx, Argument, Opposition, Proposition, Oxford Union Society, Oxford University, University, Debates, Debating, Interview

Id: 7QaZEGcoGXo

Length: 13min 19sec (799 seconds)

Published: Wed Dec 18 2013

Reddit Comments

[u/Tinkrr2]

He's actually a rather interesting fella. Check out "The New Road to Serfdom" which he wrote, it's a very good read and doesn't just lean on "The Road to Serfdom" as it explores new ideas that are related. It really does frame the whole Brexit thing very well too.

[u/SuspenseSmith]

It's an old one but still as relevant as ever. The people in the audience are insufferable. And the smug, dismissive look on his opponents' faces. Makes me so mad

[u/[deleted]]

Tell em

[u/[deleted]]

wHaT AbOuT sCaNDaNaVIa?

[u/[deleted]]

"But it hasn't really been tried yet"