Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. If there ever was a fitting face for socialism in America, and for that matter, in any other country, it’s her’s: she’s a young woman from a minority background. What her program is, isn’t important here. Only one fact counts: she’s popular.
Now, socialism has existed in America for a long time, so nothing new there. Also, female politicians aren’t a novel phenomenon. However, what is interesting here, is that the bundle of many factors converging in the person of Ocasio-Cortez. Those factors represent traits, which can easily be recruited for the service of idealistic visions: youth, low status, minority. The young don’t know any better and think they can change the world. They can’t. Those who don’t have much to lose can be enticed to join a movement which promises all kinds of good stuff. Normally, on someone else’s expense.
What does this leave us with? O-C can, as a socialist, can gather strength from a growing base: as the share of minorities and those with less than optimal economic opportunities is growing, the socialists are having a road paved for them. If, that is, they play their hands well.
Of course, the truth is that America is largely an oligarchy and fantasising about little people changing anything of significance is largely naive. However, if the current trends persist, and I think it is not unreasonable to suppose that they do, future America will feature more and more minorities and those less well-off from whom socialist can gain their power (if the democracy still exists). And given the fact, that people, after all, tend to try to bring about their convictions, it is possible that America might have a red future.
Now, what would it mean if America would turn socialist? One thing is for sure: it would mean more expenditure. A lot more. Socialists promise free stuff and somebody’s gonna have to pay for it. So, where’s the money going to come from? The tax revenues haven’t covered the national spending for a long time now, but if you happen to be the primary military power in the world and control the global reserve currency, you can go deep into debt. And that’s exactly what the US has done this far. And it will continue to do so.
But an important point should be made here. The American hegemony is based on military means. Soft power and such is cool but when things get tough, you got to have some weapons to compel the adversary to do your will. And moreover, there sure are a lot of people who would like to have revenge, one way or another, upon America. That means, that in order to get enough raw materials and keep themselves safe, the US needs to have an extensive military, and that is mainly because of the system they have build and animosities they have created. They are riding a tiger.
So, America needs its military. But if it turns socialist, it will most likely divert its funding toward welfare. That means, as the paragraph above states, one thing: the American empire will come to an end. The only thing, in the end, holding any empire together, is a superior military force. This means that if socialist candidates start to gain popularity in America and the established powers don’t have them done in (or disestablish democracy), there is a very real possibility that the proud empire of the US Inc. will face its demise.
In short, if you see the red come in, you’ll also see the ending of American global hegemony. And that is something many are eagerly waiting for. Putin, if you are reading, fund O-C. Same to you Xi. You can thank me later.