On June 13, 2022, the Victims of Communism museum opened in Washington, D.C. The goal of this institution is to remember and commemorate the supposed 100 million victims that died under brutal communist regimes.
Authoritarian regimes are responsible for some of the bloodiest parts of the 20th century. Under Stalin, about 20 million Soviet citizens died. The Cambodian genocide, carried out by the Khmer Rouge (the Communist Party of Cambodia), resulted in the murder of up to 30% of Cambodia’s population. That’s why it’s important to commemorate and remember those who suffered under communist regimes.
However, if we’re going to remember the horrors of our past, let’s remember all of them, especially the ones happening today. Capitalism — and its imperialist overreach — has actively worked to enrich a small majority while undermining the needs of both its own working class and those overseas. Whether it’s stealing oil from Syria or exploiting the rich lands of Africa, capitalism is surely not only contained within the bounds of its home country.
That’s why, if we have a museum dedicated to the victims of communism, we must have one dedicated to the victims of capitalism. Are we commemorating those who lost their lives to these authoritarian regimes, or are we using their deaths to unjustly glorify capitalism? It’s also worth noting that, ironically, homeless people — themselves victims of capitalism — have been spotted sleeping outside of the museum.
Clear ethical paradoxes arise in a country that proudly promotes anti-Che Guevara T-shirts while allowing former President George W. Bush to lead a MasterClass video about landscape painting — despite bearing responsibility for over a million Iraqi deaths. Seriously, this country that has roughly 40 million of its citizens below the poverty line; does it actually care about “victims”?
Critiquing capitalism doesn’t mean that I’m asking for a revival of Stalinism. We can address the problems of this country without backsliding into an authoritarian hell. Although in Marxist theory, socialism serves as the necessary precursor to a communist state, it’s not like we’ll turn into a communist state over the weekend. However, equating dictatorship with socialism and communism is a powerful tactic that suppresses any serious discussion about how to address the United States’ economic inequality.
Earlier this month, U.S. Rep. Maria Elvira Salazar, R-Fla., passed a resolution “denouncing the horrors of socialism.” This bill blatantly conflates past authoritarian regimes with socialism. The bill opens with, “Whereas socialist ideology necessitates a concentration of power that has time and time again collapsed into communist regimes, totalitarian rule and brutal dictatorships.” Is that true though? Look at Cuba, which operates under a communist government. Does it have a “brutal dictatorship”? I don’t think so. In fact, despite the United States maintaining a blockade on its economy, Cuba has had a staggeringly low rate of homelessness.
Another flagrant misrepresentation of socialism in the bill is the following: “Whereas the implementation of socialism in Venezuela has turned a once-prosperous nation into a failed State with the world’s highest rate of inflation.” Well, that totally ignores the role that the United States has played in Venezuela’s economic travesty. The United States ensured that socialism failed in Venezuela by sanctioning Venezuelan imports, freezing the bank accounts of large private companies and deadlocking the socialist democracy.
Moreover, Western capitalist countries have stolen and thrived off of the resources from other countries. Imperialism and neo-colonialism exist today, and the West actively creates victims while cherry-picking which victims to commemorate. How are these ideologies connected to capitalism? Well, imperialism works to expand the profits of the capitalists by helping them manipulate and exploit international markets and their people in order to attain natural resources. An instance of this is Israel, which is heavily supported by the United States and has served as a pivotal pawn in the West’s dominance over the Middle East.
Pointing this out and criticizing these imperialist tentacles stemming from Western capitalism can land you in some hot water. Recently, the GOP ousted U.S. Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., from the Foreign Affairs Panel after her criticism of U.S. support for Israel — which, according to Human Rights Watch and several other humanitarian organizations, has been essentially ethnically cleansing the land. Are we commemorating those victims of imperialism and, ultimately, capitalism?
This cultural war against socialism is a powerful and anti-intellectual defense mechanism that doesn’t allow for any productive discussion. But I’m not ready to call it McCarthyism, an ideology named after former Sen. Joseph McCarthy, R-Wis. (Coined in the 1950s, McCarthyism accused any left-leaning organization or individual of being a communist infiltrator seeking to undermine the American way.)
Let’s define what’s happening today with a new term: neo-McCarthyism.
It’s “neo” because it professes fundamentalist, nationalist values in a world that has socialists integrated into it. In that way, neo-McCarthyism is a more nuanced ideology. For starters, there isn’t a comprehensive blacklist of communists (to my knowledge); people aren’t afraid that their next-door neighbor is a communist; celebrities who do identify as communists aren’t thrown in prison.
In fact, left-leaning thinkers are in positions of political influence and socialists have a voice in Congress. On Feb. 10, President Joe Biden openly welcomed Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, an avid critic of capitalism. That’s why it can’t be simply called “McCarthyism.” Socialists are among us! We need a new term that defines the conservative demonization of leftism while also acknowledging the growing influence that leftism has in our society. Thus, neo-McCarthyism captures the desperate, reactionary alarmism found in the 21st century seeking to congressionally shut down leftist ideologies.
On the international frontlines, there seems to be this sinister consensus amongst politicians when it comes to the question of socialism. For American politicians, the vilification of socialism serves as a demagogic geopolitical barb with which to objurgate countries like Russia and China. It’s a nationalist congruency in Congress that manufactures neoliberal power structures on a global scale.
On the domestic end, however, the topic of socialism is a bit more blurred. When Republicans accuse some progressive policy of being socialist, right-leaning and centrist American voters will carefully listen because the legacy of McCarthyism is embedded in the American cultural fiber, and even hearing the word “socialist” triggers a fear that threatens the foundations of their freedom.
Thus, neo-McCarthyism is hard-wired into any international question, but for the domestic policies that have more immediacy, local support and general Western coverage, the rupture between the Republican and Democratic parties becomes readily apparent.
In an interview with The Daily, LSA sophomore Oliver Kozler, a member of Young Democratic Socialists of America said, “I genuinely believe that in the heart of every democracy-loving worker lives a socialist, and it’s exceedingly unfortunate that the political Right has successfully weaponized the fear of socialism, deliberately planted into American culture by the rich and powerful, against the working class.”
By making clumsy and delusional associations between basic welfare programs and America’s most hated foreign dictators, Congress actively undermines the interests of the working class. And as polarization continues to haunt the political spectrum, fear and hatred of socialist ideas will only rise. That’s why it’s integral that leftist thinkers fight the intellectual regression behind neo-McCarthyism and push for the development of leftist ideas.
Ammar Ahmad is an Opinion Columnist and can be reached at ammarz@umich.edu.