It’s as if we passed the graveyard of discarded ideas, and we heard murmurs. Ideas that failed to work in the modern world, or sounded great but failed horribly in practice. Thought dead and buried, they seemingly are rising from their graves, or are already at the graveyard’s gate:

Walking haltingly, Marxism, mercantilism, anti-semitism, and Ludism, nevertheless, are rising and walking among us. While some are horrified, many have no comprehension of the harm these zombies of the past did when they were ascendant on Earth and believe they present the way forward.

Most of the fans of these living dead are too young to remember the millions who paid with their lives at the hands of the believers. Even though many are college graduates, few seem aware of the thousands of years of slow human progress under elites controlling from the top down. organization. Everyone below owed the aristocracy, mandarins, or Brahmans, but little obligation moved downward to the bulk of the people.

Yet, what these young people advocate would reinstall systems incompatible with a modern, advancing nation. The Democratic Socialists of America’s (DSA) platform calls for eliminating the Senate and the Electoral College. Congress would appoint the President and control the judiciary. In effect, they would trash our Constitution.

Why dump a system that has made us the longest-surviving and most prosperous Republic ever? A New York State DSA spokesman, when asked this very question, replied, “to be more Democratic.” Sadly, the questioner failed to point out that our founders weren’t fans of direct democracy.

Charismatic leaders could rouse the populace to take momentarily popular actions that are detrimental in the longer term. Much of what the new populists on both the left and the right propose follows what William Graham Sumner saw when he talked about the “Forgotten Man” in 1881. In the present parlance, Politician A perceives that more numerous Bs want more, and conspires with them to take from the fewer but more prosperous Cs. Through B’s votes, A gains control of the Government.

At first, this situation may seem to work. The Cs get some more. Inevitably, as Margaret Thatcher pointed out, “You run out of other people’s money,” or the Cs leave. Then, A has to oppress the Bs to maintain the lifestyle of the ruling regime.

Today’s populists only have to look at countries such as Cuba, Venezuela, and North Korea. The people remaining in them live in the end stage of what began as mob rule, expressed through direct democracy. How many of these “idealists” will pack up and move to these “workers’ paradises?”

Rather than citing these nations, along with Putin’s Russia, as models to emulate, DSA members point to Sweden and other Scandinavian Countries. This view is a misdirection. Socialists, by definition, are anti-capitalist, but the Scandinavian countries have capitalist, free-market economies. Broad-based taxes fund their safety nets, rather than soaking the successful. The US income tax is already much more progressive than that of any Scandinavian nation.

What the Constitution, these populists want to toss, spells out in no uncertain terms is the individual’s right to their person and property. Even if popularly elected, the Government can’t arbitrarily lock you up or grab your property. Nor can it prevent you from loudly opposing government actions. These are individual rights, not group or class rights. This is what protects the Cs from the As and the Bs.

These protections make it possible for a capitalist economy to provide a better life to so many. Historically, when nations move toward free-market capitalism, people’s lives improve. Even when the USSR, China, and Vietnam freed up their economies, things improved, but when the Government reasserts control, the gains evaporate, and you get, well, Cuba.

What is strange is that all of this is known. The data is readily available, yet when the populists are interviewed, questioners rarely call them out for talking up mercantilist tariffs, citing Scandinavian success, or for failing to answer who will pay for their promises, especially when the successful and innovative leave for places that appreciate them.

It seems populist movements always need villains, and throughout much of history, Jews have filled the role. After the all too well-documented Jewish genocide during World War II, the world seemed to say never again. Yet here we are, with Jewish students prevented from going to class at some of the most prestigious universities in the nation. Rather than acknowledging the real genocide suffered by the Jews, we hear endlessly of a non-existent genocide of the Palestinians. Now, anti-Semitic incidents are skyrocketing in the US.

I’ve included the modern-day Luddites, our labor unions, with the other zombies because, at 6% and shrinking, of the private workforce, they obviously have failed in the marketplace. Don’t blame China. Businesses moved away from states mandating unions to right-to-work states long before China entered the fray. Only among government workers do unions have much density.  

To the extent the remaining Unions favor archaic work rules and oppose automation, they contribute to our current inability to build, mine, or smelt much of anything. While even “Abundance Democrats” realize the problem, we see populists on both sises of the aisle looking to expand the role of labor unions.

While unions have long been a main pillar of the Democrats, MAGA Republicans are showing their pro-union side. Sean O’Brien, President of the 1.3-million-member International Brotherhood of Teamsters, gained a prime speaking spot at the 2024 Republican Convention, where he blasted Corporations. V.P. J.D. Vance’s distaste for right-to-work laws is well known.

Adding to the resurgence of Luddism is the populist outcry against Data Centers necessary for the AI revolution. Many of the same people who are demanding the return of the much more obtrusive steel mills and factories oppose the centers. That helps China, which may be backing the movement.

So how does this march of the zombies contribute to the national “Affordability Crisis?” It’s hard to see how our Merchantilist tariffs, coupled with our poorly automated ports due to union opposition, do anything but raise prices. Take copper, a key industrial metal, even more at the forefront, given the wiring of AI. At present, it’s subject to a 50% tariff on semi-finished copper and a 25% tariff on copper-intensive derivatives.

Now look around, wherever you are. How many things do you see that depend on copper? From your phone to everything running in your home, they need copper. Adding to an unnecessarily high price, moving through the entry port is more expensive due to a lack of automation.

It’s not that we don’t have a lot of copper in the US. It’s just that you can’t mine and smelt it. Here in Arizona, a huge deposit is now in its thirtieth year awaiting production. This long wait casts a beacon on how big government regulation and ludism stifle even essential production. It shows how everything that uses copper becomes less affordable; we can’t produce it here, and then we make it more expensive to import.

Too often, populists turn to price controls or subsidies, but both run counter to the law of supply and demand. Price controls discourage the necessary increase in supply, while subsidies increase demand, adding to price pressure. Yet New York City’s socialist mayor has expanded rent control while subsidizing childcare.

Welcome to the “Zombie Apocalypse.” After all, zombie shows are popular, especially among younger people.