The Case Against Socialism

The Case Against Socialism

Book - 2019
Average Rating:
Rate this:
"Rand Paul, U.S. senator for Kentucky and America's most prominent libertarian, makes a case against socialist ideology, showing the impact of its deadly legacy and the threat of its new rise in America"-- Provided by publisher.
Publisher: New York : Broadside Books, an imprint of HarperCollinsPublishers, [2019]
Edition: First edition.
Copyright Date: ©2019
ISBN: 9780062954862
Call Number: 335 PAU
Characteristics: ix, 354 pages ; 24 cm
Additional Contributors: Paul, Kelley - Author


From the critics

Community Activity


Add a Comment
Feb 07, 2020

It's the 21st century and we still have to speak out against the FAILED idea of socialism. Dear College kids its been tried....over and over and over again and only brings economic and social misery. The more the government owns the means and production of the economy the more human rights, economic freedom, liberty/prosperity in general go out the window.

Senator Rand Paul does an excellent and concise job reviewing socialisms failed philosophy and history. What's very telling is how DISHONEST socialist have to be in order to get what they what done possible. Modern American socialist like Bernie Sanders are not any different. He's (and others) just repackaged the ideas for modern consumption. He might as well be selling snake oil.

My favorite part of this book is that refutation of Scandinavian Socialism. The Scandinavian nations are quick to criticize American politicians who point to them as a successful socialistic model. They are capitalistic to their core with a deep welfare state. While American democratic politicians talk about how the RICH will finally pay their fair share, the author points out that the biggest tax burden in those socialistic paradise nations are laid on the middle classes. That's something ol'Bern and others on the American left will not tell you. Free stuff isn't free at all.

I highly recommend this book to those 18 - 35 who for some reason think socialism is a good idea. It's worth your time and worth being open minded enough to change your mind.

Also being against socialism doesn't mean you have to be against public libraries. The public library doesn't own the means and production of books, nor does it control what the authors write, it also purchases these books in the free market. I had the choice to buy the book, rent the book elsewhere, or wait in line and use the public library.

Yay capitalism and God bless America!

Jan 02, 2020

Let me respond to two points in the review by The Most Casual Observer.

First, the Nazis were socialists in fact as well as in name. Rand Paul (and his co-author and wife Kelley Paul) discuss that point and support it with facts. It's hard to imagine how anyone would define socialism in a way that would exclude the Nazi government of Germany.

Second, communists are socialists (though not all socialists are communists).

Jan 01, 2020

A book about socialism that every voter should read. It was objective for the most part, but there did seem to be some cherry picking.

The US is a capitalist economy with some socialist elements. But although things like the public library are owned and operated by the government, there are still plenty of capitalist things in our society such as private property and private businesses. The more tax paid programs we vote for, the more socialist our country becomes. Socialism is the first step to communism.

Hitler was a socialist, and not just in name only (140-141). The Nazis “believed they had a better form of socialism to offer” (144). “The Nazis used the word ‘Jewish’ as a synonym for ‘capitalist’” (152). “Nazism endowed the state with every real prerogative of ownership. What the individual retained was merely a formal deed, a contentless deed, which conferred no rights on its holder. Under communism, there is collective ownership of property de jure. Under Nazism, there is the same collective ownership de facto. . . . ‘The Nazis exerted unlimited, central control of all economic decisions’. . . . The Nazis dictated the wages of workers. By 1935, one’s choice of occupation was often dictated by the government. Employment was guaranteed by the government, but a forced labor camp was not what most workers imagined full employment would be. As Adam Young reports, ‘Every German worker was assigned a position from which he could not be released by the employer, nor could he switch jobs, without permission of the government employment office. Worker absenteeism was met with fines or imprisonment—al in the name of job security’” (151).
Something to keep in mind when a candidate or government promises to bring “jobs.” By the way, Ocasio-Cortez’s program for a “guaranteed job for everyone” would cost $6.8-44.6 trillion (251).
Scandinavia’s “socialism” only works because of starting out wealthy (thanks to capitalism) and highly taxing the middle class (80, 94, 97, 100, 110, 125). But Scandinavia is not truly socialist, just a welfare state (83, 93). “Today’s socialists are simply welfarists who utilize envy to incite the majority to pay the bill” (98).

Nov 27, 2019

Love all the anti-socialist using the PUBLIC LIBRARY!!! Sad thing is they can't figure out why it's funny.

Nov 23, 2019

Outstanding overall. Senator Paul offers a convincing case against socialism (and in favor of capitalism and an open/free economy). He highlights the practical deficiencies of statist economies, the false claims of socialism to be morally superior to capitalism, and the brutal human costs of socialism and communism. The content related to literary theory is less effective or just less interesting, but this is still a constructive book to read. Admirers of socialism (both the historical examples and the "if only the right people were in charge" versions) probably won't enjoy it. I'll add that if you don't think Hitler or Stalin (or similar leaders) didn't really believe in socialism, I'd still encourage you to read this book: you can be the judge.

Notice that Paul says that the Nazis were socialists, because the name of the party was the "National Socialist Party," right? He fails to point out that the party called itself that in an attempt to capitalize on the popularity of socialism, not out of any sincere belief in socialism, or socialist program. He figures that most Americans are too ignorant to realize this, and he's right. And he tars Stalin with the same brush, although Stalin never made any claim to be a socialist, he was a communist. My point is that Paul will alter facts in the most obvious possible way to suit his own preconceived notions, and figure the reader is too dumb to catch on.


Add Age Suitability

There are no ages for this title yet.


Add a Summary

There are no summaries for this title yet.


Add Notices

There are no notices for this title yet.


Add a Quote

There are no quotes for this title yet.

Explore Further

Browse by Call Number


Subject Headings


Find it at IndyPL

To Top