Socialism failed in all forms decades ago

Dear Editor,
In last week’s edition of the NLJ, Professor emeritus Baird provided us with an interesting lesson in how Socialists plan to convince the American people that Socialism is the way of the future. (“The right is easily misled by billionaires,” February 28, 2019, page three.)
Basically, his argument was founded on the premise that if you don’t believe in Socialism, then you are either stupid or an unwitting pawn of the billionaire class. There was no discussion of the relative merits or failings of Socialism and western Capitalism. There were no relevant facts provided to allow local citizens to make an informed judgement — only accusatory invective.
And why are we provided with such an empty argument? My guess is that for anyone who lived through a good part of the 20th Century, there just aren’t a lot of positive arguments and facts that could make Socialism seem preferable to western Capitalism.  
Collectivism, which includes communism and socialism, was a 19th Century economic idea that was widely experimented with in the 20th Century — and it was an abject failure.
Unfortunately, the word failure cannot adequately capture the actual horrors of the Collectivist misadventures beginning with the Communist Revolution in Russia. If one totals up the political killings and purges, along with the starvation caused by associated economic disruptions, the Soviet Union killed 60 million of its own citizens. Communist China upped the ante by killing another 70 million of their citizens.  The killings continued in North Korea, Cuba, Cambodia, Indonesia, Ethiopia, and many other nations entranced by the false promises of Collectivism.
Why the killings? 
Unfortunately, to achieve complete State control of the means of production, distribution, and exchange within a nation, which Collectivism requires, individual desires for freedom and self-improvement must be eliminated.  To achieve the equality of outcomes desired by socialists and communists, the concept of individual rights must be destroyed.
Do nations profit from this forced system of egalitarianism?  
Not that I have seen.  The richest people in North Korea are the Kim Family and their associates.  Likewise, the richest people in Cuba are the Castro’s. Everyone else in these People’s Paradises live lives of poverty and misery.  
It will not be any different here.
I should admit that I have never been a big fan of the rich.  I grew up in a working-class family that scraped by on farms and factories for generations; but at least we were afforded the possibility or rising above that economic station. That opportunity is not afforded in Collectivist systems.  
There are no individual rights of freedom of speech and worship. Only the State holds the power of armed force and due process. Collectivism breeds only misery and mediocrity.
As a serving Army officer, I personally watched the result of the failure of Collectivism in West Germany in 1989. 
As the Iron Curtain surrounding Eastern Europe collapsed, West Germany was flooded with desperate refugees from the Communist world imposed by the Soviet Union. Their broken Trabants (E German cars) littered the autobahns for miles. They had cast a decisive vote for individual freedom and western capitalism.  
The next year while in the United Arab Emirates I witnessed Russian sailors selling hats, belt buckles and other uniform accessories because their bankrupt Communist government could not pay them. They didn’t seem too exited with Collectivism either.
There is no doubt that Capitalism in the United States has, in many ways, not lived up to its potential.  The rise of big government, cheered on by Liberals and Progressives, has contributed to an unfair and skewed version of Capitalism that is often referred to as Crony Capitalism. This incestual relationship between government and business must be broken; not enhanced by bigger and more intrusive government.
Come on Professor. Let’s talk facts.  Let’s solve problems with honest debate about policy options and ideas.  Smearing our intelligence and beliefs is not how that debate begins.  
—Doug Jorrey