Back in college, in anthropology class to be exact, we spent quite a long period of time discussing the validity (or lack of validity) of Abraham Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs theory. In essence, Maslow argued that human needs fall into a series of rising levels of importance, and that one will not address a higher level, until such a time as the lower level’s needs are satisfied.
Here is a fairly concise explanation of the theory (from Wikipedia):
Maslow’s hierarchy of needs is predetermined in order of importance. It is often depicted as a pyramid consisting of five levels: the first lower level is being associated with Physiological needs, while the top levels are termed growth needs associated with psychological needs. Deficiency needs must be met first. Once these are met, seeking to satisfy growth needs drives personal growth. The higher needs in this hierarchy only come into focus when the lower needs in the pyramid are met. Once an individual has moved upwards to the next level, needs in the lower level will no longer be prioritized. If a lower set of needs is no longer being met, the individual will temporarily re-prioritize those needs by focusing attention on the unfulfilled needs, but will not permanently regress to the lower level. For instance, a businessman at the esteem level who is diagnosed with cancer will spend a great deal of time concentrating on his health (physiological needs), but will continue to value his work performance (esteem needs) and will likely return to work during periods of remission.
Maslow’s pyramid:
According to Maslow, an individual who lacks air to breathe, is starving from lack of food, is incapable of functioning because of lack of sleep, or lacks in any of the other physiological needs connected with survival, will think of nothing other than resolving those deficiencies before moving along to other needs; these physiological deficiencies also include shelter, warmth, drink, etc.
It is not until an individual has satisfied one level of deficiencies, that the next level of needs become clear, and so on.
The last level, self-actualization, is addressed by those in society who have risen to a level where other (deficiency) needs no longer require their undivided attention.
In a free market society, the last two levels of Maslow’s Hierarchy are achievable to nearly all its members, as the members of that society are able to work (within the law) to amass wealth without limits by any number of methods, including (but not limited to) business acumen, artistic or athletic talent, and last but not least, sheer luck, or accident of birth.
So then, what does all this have to do with Socialism, and more importantly, Socialism and America?
Americans are losing their homes, jobs by the millions have been lost, health care is expensive, and unaffordable to many. There are more Americans trying to resolve the deficiencies of the lower levels of Maslow’s pyramid today, than at any time since the Great Depression. The government, behind the leadership of the most leftist members of the Democratic Party is positioning itself as the sole solution to those needs.
That’s the classic Socialist/Communist model…if the people are kept busy standing in lines outside government-run grocery stores, waiting for their food rations, they will have very little time to dissent from the government policies that got them to those lines to begin with. What dissent will manifest itself, will be in the form of civil disturbances, quickly brought under control by the forces available only to government, and all in the name of the common good and tranquility.
That “belonging needs” level in Maslow’s pyramid, will be utilized by government to control the masses. They will first ask, then later require, for people to become part of the effort to “build” a better society, to join the government in working for the common good, to “volunteer.”
The next level will be the government’s tool, not so much to reward effort, but to illustrate the government’s benevolence, and “reward” with accolades those who best march in step with its agenda.
Under Socialism, the last rung in Maslow’s pyramid will never be achievable for anyone outside the ruling class; in that system, there is only communal growth, never personal, as personal growth and personal achievements will be tagged with labels like “greed”, and an enemy to society.
We are headed that way…led by an openly Socialist administration, and fueled by an economic crisis created in great part by the very government that now wants to position itself as our savior. If Maslow is correct, faced with the real possibility of finding ourslves, and our families homeless, even the most Conservative among us will discard political ideology, and take that government housing, those food stamps before watching our kids go hungry, and socialized medicine when they become ill.
From that moment on, it will be the government maintaining us preoccupied with filling our deficiency needs, by controlling the flow of goods and services, and never allowing the people to strive for the higher rungs in Maslow’s pyramid, other than within the government itself.
Once we’ve taken from the government’s extended hand, there will be no returning back to the America of our fathers.
June 23, 2010 at 2:12 pm
Good Morning!
I’m smiling – am amazed at how I use some of the same modeling and metaphorical thinking as do you – yet end “over there” in a different camp! (I’m not completely baffled by this – much criticism of status quo or cautionary word toward the future shares ‘like mindedness’ of wanting “the best we can be”. )
You posted in 2009, and the article I posted that led to my arriving here is also from archived posts. Someone today hit on a post I wrote on Kennedy family and possible “trans-generational” demonstration of Maslow’s hierarchy. I re-visited my own article and found a few auto-links based on “Maslow”. Chose one, and arrived here!
I would ask you to re-visit any sense of link between “social democracy” (in countries often viewed as ‘socialist’) and “communism”. They are not the same thing in their respective societies. European social democracies have multi-party voting, and citizens have voted to provide themselves with some “safety nets”, such as health care. They agree to pool their resources (money, collected through government agency) and they agree this money should be spent for these nets.
We see their systems have ‘warts’ but so does ours! Plenty!!
I find no contradiction in myself that I probably could be considered a “social democrat” yet also consider myself “ultra-conservative” … but NOT as ‘conservative’ is known presently! I come from farm background, with a full exposure to ‘RESOURCE CONSERVATION’ – resource management that aims to “protect and maintain” resources ranging from human and other life to earth’s natural dynamic forces as found in soil, air, water, etc.
I guess I am a “conservationist” more than a “conservative”. But I know, by experience, a kind of prairie conservatism, both in the US and Canada, that once valued “conservation” more along the lines that fit for me (conservationism).
I appreciate your well written piece on Maslow and socialism/communism. Don’t agree with it at all, but appreciate it.
I think we humans are confused about how we can fit “individual talent, interest” in with “common weal interests”. I believe it’s a legitimate quandary, not yet successfully understood or balanced.
I think part of the solution will come when we manage to also understand “modesty” without its loaded “denial of self” present meaning.
Behind all my thinking, pondering, is hunch we’ll have to “move through” some very long enduring human, innate, psychologically based, behaviors – we’ve neglected to notice other equally innate, psychologically based, behaviors. We’re not in ‘balance’ with ourselves yet.
Hope we can find our way! I very MUCH appreciate your article here is not one of “bashing” contrary thinking.
Best Regards, MaggieAnn
June 24, 2010 at 12:37 am
Thanks for the response MaryAnn.
Growing up in Castro’s Cuba gave me insight into the application of Maslov’s hierarchy.
Socialism leads to Communism because it destroys the desire to get ahead and succeed, after all, wealth created by producers is “voted upon” by the majority (non-producers/users) to be disbursed for services they cannot on their own pay for. Once Socialism destroys producers, and gives labor preeminence over industry, government is in charge of resources, industry, and distribution.
That is the classic Socialism-to-Communism model.
Insofar as citizens voting to provide themselves with things like health care…no one has a right to the fruit of the labor of others. Democracy empowers the many to violate the rights of the few.
Funny thing about Socialism…
In Castro’s Socialist Cuba goods were distributed equally among people, but there were shortages. However, those in charge of distributing the goods were never shorted.
Every equal distribution of every item always begins the same way:
“One for me…”
June 29, 2010 at 3:22 am
I appreciate your taking time to reply!
Alas, as we can realize watching corruption here in the USA, the practice is not restricted to communist countries.
I am not sure where you are leading in your “Democracy empowers the many to violate rights of the few” — perhaps an Ayn Rand view? I’ve read her. Something ‘cold’ about her.
Complex societies, so far as I’ve been able to sort out, simply cannot function without creating a way to govern themselves. That does not mean they do it well or honorably, but ‘chaos’ of no government doesn’t seem like a good plan.
(I’ve considered advantages of anarchy and have decided we’re not “grown up enough” to make it work; we have to get past “selfishness” first. Theoretically, with at least 80% or more of a population enlightened so that compassion is practiced, I think anarchy would be our crowning achievement!)
For me, “getting ahead, succeeding” is not best measured by monetary gain and wealth accumulation. “Getting ahead” (of what, of whom?) has never had strong appeal to me; and “succeeding” has for me been more about coming to know what it means to be a human, among other humans, trekking about on this earth.
I have a farm-kid background – lots of work by everyone toward overall success of harvest, of meeting day to day needs – shared contributions, shared benefits. Cooperation to benefit everyone is comfortable for me.
(Everyone putting money into a pot for whomever needs medical care, for instance – doesn’t bother me a bit if I never need it myself. As to production, I’ve long realized nothing is accomplished without huge participation at all levels by many – so I’ve made it a point to pay well for services, often more than the going rate. Which means I’ve not piled up as much for myself as I might otherwise could have, and that, also, does not bother – children in other homes have bread and shoes.
In fact, during these rough times, I live on less than minimum wage and what money I do spend is for my own basics plus contracted work that is literally keeping a couple of families from bankruptcy, with food on tables!
Government, and economic policy, should work to support creativity, which is in turn supported by general basic well-being. Therefore, support of basic well-being is “fundamental”, foundational, to all else in a “prosperous” society. I’m thinking education, protection by police and fire departments, transportation, and health. (We can raise gardens, but can’t easily remove our own appendix.) Taxes should be used for nothing different from this general “common weal” effort.
IF our taxes were used in such a clean and appropriate manner, I think we’d have little to complain about. “Common weal” was emphasized by our founders as recognition that none of us can truly “make it” all by ourselves.
All societies, including European “social democracies” have “warts”. But some are more generally supportive of all citizens than are others. By global statistics, the US is pretty stunning in its lack of response to fundamental human need.
We lose a lot of potential because of this – our citizens are among our most priceless ‘resources’! Every bankruptcy (over half due to health care issues) is a loss, and actually increases burden to service need as people lose function, families lose homes, breadwinners, and general family support capacity.
… that farm I grew up on .. we needed creativity and contribution from everyone!
For me, it was a ‘micro’ version of what a ‘society’ can do for itself. For me, that is what Maslow meant by his ‘top’ level – not to ‘subserve’ individual talent, but to be in position to bring individual talent to the table.
I was a classroom teacher. We used Maslow’s concepts among our guiding understandings. There’s a lot involved about “felt” security, which in turn releases capacity to express talent, to contribute, and eventually to focus on “universal awareness of humanity.”
I find your take on Maslow interesting and am pleased to have come across it! It’s great to hear a point of view based on your experience, which is so different from mine.
(BTW! I apologize, although I ‘had nothing to do with it’ for the rigid refusal of the US to offer any support to Cuba even of humanitarian aide. I find the Cuban capacity for innovation, as I understand it in extreme conditions, remarkable, and a testament to human ingenuity. They have managed to out-rank the US recently in both education and health achievement (based of course on starting with much greater challenge – ratings based on “most improved”.)
Best Regards!
June 29, 2010 at 9:44 am
The “Cuban capacity for innovation”?
Are you serious?
“Outrank the US in education and health achievement”?
Let’s carry out an experiment, shall we?
You talk about “the Cuban capacity for innovation” and their achievements in health care and education, and on how they started with much greater challenge. You mention the “corruption here in the US” (aware of course of that corruption by way of news of the trials of corrupt individuals, such trials sorely lacking in an equally corrupt Cuba), while I speak of the shared experiences of literally two million people like myself (a significant percentage of the population of the island) who “voted with our feet”, and chose to live elsewhere.
Let’s take into consideration that there are only two places that I can think of where they shoot you if you try to leave: prisons, and Cuba (see 13 de Marzo.
Let’s also consider that while under a different regime (Batista), Cubans enjoyed the freedom to travel, to engage in business, to own property, and to exercise their rights to migrate from the island freely. Surely Batista was a despot, yet, during Batista Cuba’s place in the economic echelon of the America’s was second only to the US.
Let’s then (I am paraphrasing here) agree that it took a tremendous amount of courage borne of desperation, to attempt doing what those poor souls in the 13 de Marzo tugboat tried to do…imagine what it would take for you to give up your home, your friends, your family, take your small children, your elderly parents, and set yourselves adrift on a raft made up of inner tubes and aging wooden planks, risking capture, or worse, an anonymous death in the treacherous straits, all on the slim hope that someone will see you before you drown.
So here we are, you and I, having our morning coffee, discussing the American “Empire building” traits (when we’re done with this conversation, I think we should address that point…I am having a difficult time locating the American “empire” on the map. Other than a few swatches of land in Normandy, Flanders Margraten, etc, those nations “conquered” by the American Imperialist troops buried there fail to properly display our “Imperialistic” banner), so how do we decide what is right, and what is wrong.
How about this?
Come on down to Florida, we’ll have wine and dinner, discuss the benefits of Cuba’s higher-ranked education and health care, versus the corrupt Imperialist rulers to the North, and raise a toast in the memory of those who risked it all in the Florida Straits in search of a better future. Once we’re done with our repast, let’s grab some binoculars and drive South, to Key West, to that point in the Continental US that is the target of so many hundreds of thousands of my people, the unrealized dream of the nearly one hundred thousand lost forever to the sharks and the dark waters of the treacherous straits. We’ll find the highest point available to us, and standing side-by-side, binoculars steadily aimed at that that land of Socialist marvels and equality to the South, we can lay one question to rest…
Which way are the rafts headed?
No…you do not understand Cuba at all.
Your needs do not translate into my duty, that is he most basic difference of opinion between the two of us, between Socialist economic and free-market, this notion that “need” and “right” are one and the same. The second lies with your belief that your belief in what constitutes success (getting ahead and wealth accumulation) is the belief that I must live by. I don’t have a problem with your choosing to live as a monk, devoid of all material possessions, and if that is in fact, your chosen standard of life, I fully support it. But what Socialists do not allow, is for those who do NOT believe in the primacy of communal society over the individual, to live their lives as THEY see fit.
Finally…
“Democracy empowers the many to violate the rights of the few…”
It empowers an omnipotent majority to vote themselves a share of my wealth. Government-enforced, majority-voted wealth redistribution is sanctioned theft…simple and to the point.
Your farm, that farm you grew up in, was run by YOU, not the government. My farm, the farm that my family came from (I am a city boy, long away from the soil), was likewise run by us, and we prospered. Then, government-enforced wealth redistribution came, and we lost that farm, and that farm lost all productivity, as did everyone who owned that soil, or worked it, lost their livelihood.
You say that you were a classroom teacher…think about the effects of the following experiment in wealth redistribution, and the concept of equity amongst all.
Tell your class that you will be engaging in an experiment in wealth redistribution. Then take grades from the students who scored “A” in their test, and disburse those grades amongst the students who scored “C” and below, until such a point where everyone in the class ends up with an identical grade.
I guarantee you that by mid-term, all but a few will be failing your class.
The ones who worked hard to earn “A” grades will come to the realization that hard work will not make them any more successful than no work, and those who earned “C” grades will realize that they won’t need to work at all to get a passing grade.
Do that and watch the grading curve drop.
That, my friend, is Socialism in practice.
June 29, 2010 at 11:45 am
You are absolutely correct and right, justified fully, in citing reminders of actual human deep suffering related to Castro’s Cuba.
And believe me, I recognize capacity for humans to create (or rather to insist and brutally create) such conditions. Communism is one of our strongest global examples of this, wherever it has come into being.
As a child, I never lost track of how the land we farmed was acquired in a historical sense. Those peoples dispossessed, killed and/or isolated into ‘reservation compounds’ were, for me, “still on the prairie” in spirit. I knew I was “not responsible” for their painful loss and misery, but also knew “something was off” historically. I understood there had been brutality from all sides. I wished it were not so.
In my world view, history is far too well-supplied with forms of aggressive, even brutal, domination.
Oh dear – you may not like this, but where I was teaching, we did not give letter grades to the students I taught. Up to grade 4, there were none; K through 12 there were strong efforts to coach and train students to support one another in studies. Students were encouraged to discover strengths of one another – including above grade 3). If one made ‘A’s, and another ‘C’s it was not considered “life” success or not, but greater academic success or not.
Strong emphasis was also given to supporting unique strengths and talents demonstrated by any one student. (Understandings offered by “multiple intelligences” played a good role in this – in recognition and support of ‘gifts’ each may bring to the table – some brought capacity in math, some brought capacity to arts, some brought capacity to conflict-resolution, …).
Your boat descriptions reminded me graphically of, and sparked deep empathy for, those who so traveled; and shifted my thoughts also to the Vietnamese ‘boat people’.
I view history across at least several thousand years as “too full of” brutality. Friends have told me throughout my life that my ‘efforts’ are rooted in ‘idealism’ that cannot be fulfilled.
But I continue. I deeply ‘feel’ and believe we humans carry ‘something within’ that we can bring “up” to guide us toward a different kind of world. I know it may never happen. But my classroom teaching was one of my strongest experiences to support my belief.
Consistently, I witnessed children spontaneously pour out compassion while also spontaneously wanting justice. But always, “justice” as wanted by the children was to be “without malice, without vengeance.”
These children were not “angels”; children are, , after all, human! But their displays of justice and compassion were remarkable when compared to overall adult society “doings”.
Sometimes I think of the concept “a little child shall lead” and think I was blessed to witness what was meant. I think some of the “deep within” capacities I believe not as active in adult social structures are the compassion and attitude toward justice shown me by the children.
So I continue chasing, promoting, my views! “Reality” can perhaps be something very different. I don’t know how to “get us there”.
I very much believe no “real change” can develop except by individuals freely choosing to do their part to “make it so”.
I have no interest in any one group dominating and forcing the rest to “behave.” Representative democracy, in its various forms, has the flaw, as you say, of meaning 51% can dominate 49%. In a large and diverse population, where separation by geographical distance and/or lifestyles are great, contact for dialogue is not easy to come by, yet I suspect this is important for my “idealism” to have any hope.
Thank goodness for internet! I shall toast you with my evening wine!
No – that too, but I toast you also this morning with my coffee!
Best Regards, Maggie
June 29, 2010 at 12:47 pm
Afterthoughts: I appreciate writing has drawbacks. Response does not include seeing looks on someone’s face, does not allow for stopping mid-sentence and “straightening out” possible offense or mis-understanding. I DO ‘celebrate’ our exchanges. Thank you! But also, by shifting to the idea of a ‘toast’, I may have seemed to be “sweeping out” the depth of your passion for the suffering in your history. I am sorry if that seemed the case. I know something of suffering – both through my personal experiences and through a life long capacity to “go there” and “be with” via imagination. I do not in the least mean to deny or trivialize what you describe. Nor do I mean to suggest anything like “that’s in the past”, which is one of the most unhelpful comments sometimes made! I am sorry for what has happened to your people. Sadly, sadly, sadly there is too much similar in too many stories across our human time! The experiences you describe of Cubans are every bit as real, as deeply valid and painful, as any other. For “all” and also for each individual, uniquely desperate, while also driven by courage. Best Regards, M.
January 15, 2013 at 6:35 pm
I found your blog by typing in “Maslow” and “socialism” in the search engine. I am a business owner and of course all managers know about Maslow, unfortunately I have been realizing the same things that your article reveals and that’s why I was doing the search. I have been making my own associations with the pyramid and this fall towards socialism or communism, what the Hell, let’s just call it oppression. I am with you 100%. Your observations are eloquent, if only Michael Moore could answer the question as to why the rafts are only headed in one direction. You’re a smart man, please continue you’re writing. We need more folks like you. I am 59 years old and I guess I won”t have to deal with what’s coming to any great degree, but I do dread if for my kids and their kids. Keep it up, who knows, maybe it can be turned around.
January 19, 2013 at 12:27 am
Thanks for taking the time to reply Glen, I’m glad you enjoyed the post.
I look back over last year’s election, and I am amazed at what I saw.
Romney certainly lost the race due to may things, but his “47%” comment hurt him, the worst.
Yet…he wasn’t wrong.
Socialism was voted into the W/H, and this time, we can’t say that we didn’t know Obama’s political leanings.