How Clear Does It Have To Be?

The father of Kamala Harris was a Stanford University economics professor who was known as someone from the "Marxist school of economics".

He joined the Stanford faculty in 1972 and taught there until he retired in 1998.

This was the headline from The Stanford Daily when Dr. Don Harris was offered his Stanford post.

Source: https://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2020/08/what-father-of-kamala-harris-thinks.html

The headline left little doubt about who Harris was and what he believed.

This is from the body of that article.

Don Harris, a prominent Marxist Professor, has been offered a full professorship in the Economics Department here, Department Chairman James Rosse confirmed yesterday. Rosse said Harris has not yet accepted the offer, but he "expects to hear from him this week."

Harris who still holds a tenured position at the University of Wisconsin, has served as a visiting Professor here, and is currently teaching at the University of the West Indies in Kingston, Jamaica.

The appointment is the direct result of student pressure in recent years to hire more faculty who favor an "alternative approach" to economics, said Economics Prof. John Gurley, who now teaches the only undergraduate course in Marxist economics. 

Gurley said the appointment of Harris was the culmination of the six-month "round-the-world" search for the most qualified Marxist professor available.

Economist and Nobel Prize winner Milton Friedman from the University of Chicago could be said to be the polar opposite of Harris in economic thinking.

Friedman was considered a giant among economists for his support of free markets and free enterprise. He strongly argued that there was no alternative for bettering the lives of the masses than a free market system.

Friedman also believed that economic freedom was a necessary pre-condition for political freedom in any society

Consider what Milton Friedman said on The Phil Donahue show in 1979.

"The record of history is absolutely crystal clear, that there is no alternative so far discovered of improving the lot of the ordinary people that can hold a candle to the productive activities that are unleashed by a free enterprise system."

Donahue, who passed away on Sunday at age 88, was a noted liberal who asked Friedman if he was wrong about his unfailing support for free market economics.

Friedman's comments seem particularly relevant today when considering the far left views of Kamala Harris. It seems that the apple does not far from the tree.

You can see a two minute clip below that includes Friedman's quote that I cited above.

Link: https://x.com/GoodAMLiberty/status/1825531718633226721

Almost 50 years later there this is still nothing in the record of history that contradicts the statement of Friedman.

There is also nothing we have seen in the course of history that suggests that Marxist economics benefits anyone but the despotic leaders who suggest it is the answer to the problems of any society.

In fact, the last 50 years have made the truth of what Friedman stated even more crystal clear when you see the economic advances that have been made for the masses in China and Russia once central planning and communist economic principles were abandoned.

For example, compare China with Taiwan. We are essentially talking about the same people and cultures. Chinese nationalists fled to Taiwan after their defeat by the communists in 1949. They established an economic system in Taiwan based on free market principles, private property rights and foreign trade.

The Chinese communists seized private property, imposed centralized government controls and adhered to redistributionist principles.

Compare the economic results between Taiwan and China beginning in the 1950's when the two China's went their separate ways.

This economic success became known as the Taiwan Miracle. Taiwan lacked the advantages of the natural resources, land mass and population that were available on the mainland but they had a free enterprise system. It is all they needed.

As you can see, Communist China only began to close the gap when it liberalized its economy and embraced some of the free market economic ideas of Friedman beginning in the early 2000's.

Some additional charts that support the statement by Friedman.

North Korea vs. South Korea.

Same people. Same language. Same historical culture. Different economic and political systems,

The flat green line at the bottom of the chart is North Korea.

Venezuela generally operated under capitalist principles until Hugo Chavez took power and started applying socialist/communist ideals in the country in 1999. Within ten years he had taken over all of the oil companies in the country. 

On the other hand, Poland, Estonia and other Eastern European countries moved towards free market principles beginning in the late 1990's after coming out from under the grips of the Soviets.

 

You see the facts and evidence and have to wonder whether someone promoting Marxist economics would have any credibility at all today other than on a college campus sheltered from the real world.

Then again, we seem to have a couple of candidates running for President and Vice President of the United States that apparently are living in an alternative universe.

If price controls, government mandates, trillions of dollars in spending spending are not enough, here is Kamala Harris when she was running for President in 2020 stating that she is willing to have the federal government confiscate the patents of private companies if they do not comply with government demands.

Link to video

For context, Harris was talking about doing this to pharmaceutical companies who were not willing to lower the prices of their drugs to the levels the government deemed to be "fair".

However, Kamala has also talked about setting price controls for grocery products and has also referenced rent and housing price controls. If she is willing to do it to the drug companies why would she not be willing to do it to everybody else?

What if you refuse to replace the gas stove in your house with an electric model per a government mandate? Can they confiscate your house?

There is supposed to be nothing more sacrosanct in our constitutional system than private property rights.

Yet Kamala Harris believes the government should have the power to confiscate private property if someone does not do what the government wants?

I don't think I have ever seen a scarier view of a politician's core values and true beliefs than in that clip

Isn't this what the communists did in the Soviet Union, China, Cuba and Venezuela once they took power?

How clear does all of this have to be to understand what is at stake in this election?