George Will’s fear of socialism is misguided

Re: “What might a socialist American government do?,” and “July 8 commentary

George Will continues the great American tradition of whitewashing the destructive elements of predatory capitalism with a dread and distorted picture of the evils of socialism.

The biggest problem with Will’s dire predictions of a socialist future lies in his carefully constructed narrow definition of socialism that he admits is “diluted.” I, on the other hand, start with a broader definition. Essentially socialism is shared risk. Under this definition all are socialists of one kind or another. Insurance companies, for instance, operate on the socialistic principle that if all accept a small degree of risk, then the few who experience devastating loss can be covered.

The dividing line of a “socialism for the rich” and a democratic socialism derives from the issue of who will profit from the shared risk. Will it be public risk and privatized profit, or public risk and public profit? Being a human being living with many other human beings in a limited environment and with limited resources, I answer in the latter. Keith Ruckhaus, Littleton

George Will’s recent article, “What might a socialist American government do?” poses the highly unlikely scenario of having a classically socialist American government and the ramifications.

In his opening, he mentions the recent primary win of the democratic socialist Alexandria Ocasio-cortez and proceeds to answer his original question by laying out the “horrors” of classical socialism, implying these would be her positions too.

Democratic socialism and classical socialism are different animals. This is a typical example of the intellectual dishonesty that is rampant in public discourse today.

I believe Mr. Will is a Never-trumper who renounced his membership in the Republican Party and urges votes against them. If he is sincere in this, why does he continue with his fear-mongering misrepresentations which will certainly be used as fodder by the right in an attempt to discredit the left? I guess old habits die hard. Chris Leatherwood, Wheat Ridge ●●●

When Will begins to speculate about an American socialist government, he goes off the rails. No one in the democratic socialist movement is suggesting that government should “tell consumers what they can buy,” or that “vigorous government interventions in the allocation of capital” are desirable.

What they do favor is a government like that of the U.S. during the post-war era; a government that works for the people by supporting unions, mass-transit, universal health care, and a clean environment instead of providing corporate welfare for pharmaceutical and fossil fuel companies (talk about vigorous government intervention!). Kathy Mckittrick, Castle Rock