"In practice, socialism didn't work. But socialism could never have worked because it is based on false premises about human psychology and society, and gross ignorance of human economy"
About this Quote
Horowitz isn’t trying to win a seminar-room argument about Marx; he’s trying to foreclose one. The line is built like a trapdoor: it begins with a seemingly modest concession - “in practice” - then snaps shut with “could never have worked.” That move matters. By shifting from historical performance to psychological inevitability, he reframes socialism as not merely a set of policies that failed under certain conditions, but as an idea that violates permanent features of human nature. If you accept that premise, debate becomes pointless; the only remaining question is why anyone keeps trying.
The phrasing is prosecutorial. “False premises,” “gross ignorance” aren’t analytic terms so much as moral verdicts, meant to strip socialism of good-faith motivations and recast it as a kind of willful delusion. Horowitz’s intent is rhetorical quarantine: portray socialism as inherently anti-reality, then treat its advocates as either naive or dishonest. It’s a classic polemicist’s escalation from “it didn’t work” to “it can’t work,” because the former invites comparisons (mixed economies, social democracy, welfare states), while the latter aims to collapse the whole family of left projects into one doomed species.
Context sharpens the edge. Horowitz’s public trajectory - from New Left activism to a long career as a conservative writer - sits behind the certainty here. The subtext is autobiographical: a renunciation framed as an awakening. And the choice to anchor the argument in “human psychology and society” signals a broader culture-war claim: the Left isn’t just mistaken about incentives; it misunderstands people.
The phrasing is prosecutorial. “False premises,” “gross ignorance” aren’t analytic terms so much as moral verdicts, meant to strip socialism of good-faith motivations and recast it as a kind of willful delusion. Horowitz’s intent is rhetorical quarantine: portray socialism as inherently anti-reality, then treat its advocates as either naive or dishonest. It’s a classic polemicist’s escalation from “it didn’t work” to “it can’t work,” because the former invites comparisons (mixed economies, social democracy, welfare states), while the latter aims to collapse the whole family of left projects into one doomed species.
Context sharpens the edge. Horowitz’s public trajectory - from New Left activism to a long career as a conservative writer - sits behind the certainty here. The subtext is autobiographical: a renunciation framed as an awakening. And the choice to anchor the argument in “human psychology and society” signals a broader culture-war claim: the Left isn’t just mistaken about incentives; it misunderstands people.
Quote Details
| Topic | Reason & Logic |
|---|
More Quotes by David
Add to List
