Conservatives and their misunderstanding of 'socialism': Obvious lack of education and understanding...

American Scene

Obvious lack of education and understanding

Liberty Tree

Rinaldi wrote:

Obvious lack of education and understanding

You have a great lack of education and understanding of the Constitution, especially the Bill of Rights, and the Declaration of Indepedence and how today's Democrat Party wants to destroy them all.

skyrider

Liberty Tree wrote:

You have a great lack of education and understanding of the Constitution, especially the Bill of Rights, and the Declaration of Indepedence and how today's Democrat Party wants to destroy them all.

Liberty, jokers like him do not know what day it is. Their ignorance is way beyond astounding.

JFlorio Loc: Seminole Florida

Liberty Tree wrote:

You have a great lack of education and understanding of the Constitution, especially the Bill of Rights, and the Declaration of Indepedence and how today's Democrat Party wants to destroy them all.

He’s nothing more than a foolish, uneducated troll. Doesn’t need to know much to post. Obviously.

Smedley_buzkill

JFlorio wrote:

He’s nothing more than a foolish, uneducated troll. Doesn’t need to know much to post. Obviously.

I thought we were rid of Rayon.

Blade_Runner Loc: DARK SIDE OF THE MOON

Rinaldi wrote:

Obvious lack of education and understanding

“Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.”
WC

"The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money."
MT

" ….there can be no doubt that Socialism is inseparably interwoven with Totalitarianism and the abject worship of the State. …liberty, in all its forms is challenged by the fundamental conceptions of Socialism. …there is to be one State to which all are to be obedient in every act of their lives. This State is to be the arch-employer, the arch-planner, the arch-administrator and ruler, and the arch-caucus boss.

A Socialist State once thoroughly completed in all its details and aspects… could not afford opposition. Socialism is, in its essence, an attack upon the right of the ordinary man or woman to breathe freely without having a harsh, clumsy tyrannical hand clapped across their mouths and nostrils.

But I will go farther. I declare to you, from the bottom of my heart that no Socialist system can be established without a political police. Many of those who are advocating Socialism or v****g Socialist today will be horrified at this idea. That is because they are shortsighted, that is because they do not see where their theories are leading them.

No Socialist Government conducting the entire life and industry of the country could afford to allow free, sharp, or violently-worded expressions of public discontent. They would have to fall back on some form of Gestapo, no doubt very humanely directed in the first instance.

And this would nip opinion in the bud; it would stop criticism as it reared its head, and it would gather all the power to the supreme party and the party leaders, rising like stately pinnacles above their vast bureaucracies of Civil servants, no longer servants and no longer civil. And where would the ordinary simple folk—the common people, as they like to call them in America—where would they be, once this mighty organism had got them in its grip?
WC, BBC broadcast, June 4, 1945

Socialism: A Clear and Present Danger

A perilous possibility now confronts us—the conversion of America, the leading capitalist nation in the world, into a socialist state. Impossible, you say? Consider the following.

The national polls continue to show that a large majority of millennials have a favorable view of socialism. A near majority favor the “compassion” of socialism over capitalism which, they argue, is indifferent to the needs of the people, especially those on the bottom rung of the economic ladder.

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt)—an avowed socialist—and the equally “progressive” Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) continue to run strong in the p**********l primaries; their combined support is close to 40 percent among Democrats polled. Younger Americans cheer their promises of universal health care and free education, while brushing aside the proposals’ trillion-dollar price tag.

Rep. Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and members of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) support government ownership of industries whose products are viewed as “necessities” (railroads, coal mines, social media, who knows?). They say that, to the greatest extent possible, government should “democratize” private businesses—that is, give control of them to workers. “Socialism,” says a member of DSA’s national steering committee, “is the democratization of all areas of life, including but not limited to the economy.” So much for the Declaration of Independence and life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

We must acknowledge that the Great Recession of 2008 tore a huge hole in the American people’s faith in capitalism as the way to a better life and sent them looking for alternatives. Many of them, especially younger Americans, found it in a “soft socialism” that was part welfare state, part administrative state, part socialist state. Capitalists failed to present a persuasive case for free markets, beginning with Milton Friedman’s famous axiom: “There is no such thing as a free lunch.”

Socialists love to cite Sweden and Denmark as socialist models, but these Scandinavian countries favor the free market over socialism in running their economies and are content with private rather than government ownership of their major industries. Speaking before the National Press Club, the Danish prime minister opened his remarks by emphasizing that Denmark is not a socialist country.

What is to be done?

We must educate the rising generation about the true costs of socialism, and not just in dollars and cents. Would a majority of millennials choose socialism if in exchange for “free” education and “free” health care, they would have to give up their personal property such as their iPhone and their iPad? This is not simply a possibility--the abolition of private property is the first dictum of socialism.

Would seven percent of millennials be willing to accept c*******m with its denial of free speech, a free press, free assembly, the imprisonment and often execution of dissidents, no open e******ns, no independent judiciary or rule of law, the dictatorship of the C*******t Party in all matters and on all occasions? This is the c*******m of China, Cuba, North Korea, Vietnam, Laos and Nicaragua.

Socialists like to say that socialism has never failed because it has never been tried. But in fact socialism has failed in every country where it has been tried, from the Soviet Union and the People’s Republic of China to three non-c*******t countries that tried but ultimately rejected socialism. All three countries of those countries—Israel, India, and the United Kingdom—adhered to socialist principles and practices for more than 20 years, only to change direction and adopt capitalism as the better way to economic prosperity. As a result, India today has the largest middle class in the free world.

The PRC has the second largest economy because in the late 1970s Deng Xiaoping abandoned the rigid excesses of Maoist thought and adopted a form of c*******m that allowed foreign investments and even a stock market while underwriting SOEs (state-owned enterprises). At the same time, Deng ensured strict political control of China through the C*******t Party and the People’s Liberation Army, in accordance with Mao Zedong’s motto, “Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun.”

Socialism’s central philosophical weakness is its dependence upon the errant thought of its founder, Karl Marx. Marx insisted that his version of Hegelian dialectic—thesis, antithesis, synthesis—was scientific and without flaw. He asserted that feudalism had been replaced by capitalism which would be replaced by socialism and then c*******m in an irreversible process. But 200 years after the publication of “The C*******t Manifesto,” capitalism rather than socialism dominates the global economy. According to the Heritage Foundation’s “2018 Index of Economic Freedom,” 102 countries, many with less developed or emerging economies, showed advances in economic growth and individual prosperity. As the esteemed economist Paul Samuelson wrote, “As a prophet Marx was colossally unlucky and his system colossally unuseful.”

Socialism depends upon the decision-making of a central government. The Nobel laureate F. A. Hayek put it succinctly: “Planning leads to dictatorship.” Without exception, every leader from Lenin to Castro promised to initiate basic freedoms such as free e******ns, a free press, free assembly, and religious freedom. None fulfilled these promises. Is a world without freedom, without choice, without basic human rights the world that millennials would choose if they had a choice?

This is our challenge: to tell the t***h, the whole t***h and nothing but the t***h about socialism—a pseudo-religion grounded in pseudo-science and enforced by political might. This is our obligation to this generation and generations to come: to make the case against socialism, a god that failed, a science that never was, a political system headed for the ash heap of history.

skyrider

Blade_Runner wrote:

“Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.”
WC

"The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money."
MT

" ….there can be no doubt that Socialism is inseparably interwoven with Totalitarianism and the abject worship of the State. …liberty, in all its forms is challenged by the fundamental conceptions of Socialism. …there is to be one State to which all are to be obedient in every act of their lives. This State is to be the arch-employer, the arch-planner, the arch-administrator and ruler, and the arch-caucus boss.

A Socialist State once thoroughly completed in all its details and aspects… could not afford opposition. Socialism is, in its essence, an attack upon the right of the ordinary man or woman to breathe freely without having a harsh, clumsy tyrannical hand clapped across their mouths and nostrils.

But I will go farther. I declare to you, from the bottom of my heart that no Socialist system can be established without a political police. Many of those who are advocating Socialism or v****g Socialist today will be horrified at this idea. That is because they are shortsighted, that is because they do not see where their theories are leading them.

No Socialist Government conducting the entire life and industry of the country could afford to allow free, sharp, or violently-worded expressions of public discontent. They would have to fall back on some form of Gestapo, no doubt very humanely directed in the first instance.

And this would nip opinion in the bud; it would stop criticism as it reared its head, and it would gather all the power to the supreme party and the party leaders, rising like stately pinnacles above their vast bureaucracies of Civil servants, no longer servants and no longer civil. And where would the ordinary simple folk—the common people, as they like to call them in America—where would they be, once this mighty organism had got them in its grip?
WC, BBC broadcast, June 4, 1945

Socialism: A Clear and Present Danger

A perilous possibility now confronts us—the conversion of America, the leading capitalist nation in the world, into a socialist state. Impossible, you say? Consider the following.

The national polls continue to show that a large majority of millennials have a favorable view of socialism. A near majority favor the “compassion” of socialism over capitalism which, they argue, is indifferent to the needs of the people, especially those on the bottom rung of the economic ladder.

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt)—an avowed socialist—and the equally “progressive” Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) continue to run strong in the p**********l primaries; their combined support is close to 40 percent among Democrats polled. Younger Americans cheer their promises of universal health care and free education, while brushing aside the proposals’ trillion-dollar price tag.

Rep. Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and members of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) support government ownership of industries whose products are viewed as “necessities” (railroads, coal mines, social media, who knows?). They say that, to the greatest extent possible, government should “democratize” private businesses—that is, give control of them to workers. “Socialism,” says a member of DSA’s national steering committee, “is the democratization of all areas of life, including but not limited to the economy.” So much for the Declaration of Independence and life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

We must acknowledge that the Great Recession of 2008 tore a huge hole in the American people’s faith in capitalism as the way to a better life and sent them looking for alternatives. Many of them, especially younger Americans, found it in a “soft socialism” that was part welfare state, part administrative state, part socialist state. Capitalists failed to present a persuasive case for free markets, beginning with Milton Friedman’s famous axiom: “There is no such thing as a free lunch.”

Socialists love to cite Sweden and Denmark as socialist models, but these Scandinavian countries favor the free market over socialism in running their economies and are content with private rather than government ownership of their major industries. Speaking before the National Press Club, the Danish prime minister opened his remarks by emphasizing that Denmark is not a socialist country.

What is to be done?

We must educate the rising generation about the true costs of socialism, and not just in dollars and cents. Would a majority of millennials choose socialism if in exchange for “free” education and “free” health care, they would have to give up their personal property such as their iPhone and their iPad? This is not simply a possibility--the abolition of private property is the first dictum of socialism.

Would seven percent of millennials be willing to accept c*******m with its denial of free speech, a free press, free assembly, the imprisonment and often execution of dissidents, no open e******ns, no independent judiciary or rule of law, the dictatorship of the C*******t Party in all matters and on all occasions? This is the c*******m of China, Cuba, North Korea, Vietnam, Laos and Nicaragua.

Socialists like to say that socialism has never failed because it has never been tried. But in fact socialism has failed in every country where it has been tried, from the Soviet Union and the People’s Republic of China to three non-c*******t countries that tried but ultimately rejected socialism. All three countries of those countries—Israel, India, and the United Kingdom—adhered to socialist principles and practices for more than 20 years, only to change direction and adopt capitalism as the better way to economic prosperity. As a result, India today has the largest middle class in the free world.

The PRC has the second largest economy because in the late 1970s Deng Xiaoping abandoned the rigid excesses of Maoist thought and adopted a form of c*******m that allowed foreign investments and even a stock market while underwriting SOEs (state-owned enterprises). At the same time, Deng ensured strict political control of China through the C*******t Party and the People’s Liberation Army, in accordance with Mao Zedong’s motto, “Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun.”

Socialism’s central philosophical weakness is its dependence upon the errant thought of its founder, Karl Marx. Marx insisted that his version of Hegelian dialectic—thesis, antithesis, synthesis—was scientific and without flaw. He asserted that feudalism had been replaced by capitalism which would be replaced by socialism and then c*******m in an irreversible process. But 200 years after the publication of “The C*******t Manifesto,” capitalism rather than socialism dominates the global economy. According to the Heritage Foundation’s “2018 Index of Economic Freedom,” 102 countries, many with less developed or emerging economies, showed advances in economic growth and individual prosperity. As the esteemed economist Paul Samuelson wrote, “As a prophet Marx was colossally unlucky and his system colossally unuseful.”

Socialism depends upon the decision-making of a central government. The Nobel laureate F. A. Hayek put it succinctly: “Planning leads to dictatorship.” Without exception, every leader from Lenin to Castro promised to initiate basic freedoms such as free e******ns, a free press, free assembly, and religious freedom. None fulfilled these promises. Is a world without freedom, without choice, without basic human rights the world that millennials would choose if they had a choice?

This is our challenge: to tell the t***h, the whole t***h and nothing but the t***h about socialism—a pseudo-religion grounded in pseudo-science and enforced by political might. This is our obligation to this generation and generations to come: to make the case against socialism, a god that failed, a science that never was, a political system headed for the ash heap of history.

i “Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the cree... (show quote)

Blade Runner, these dopes would have zero comprehension of your post even if they did try to read it.

Milosia2 Loc: Cleveland Ohio

Blade_Runner wrote:

“Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.”
WC

"The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money."
MT

" ….there can be no doubt that Socialism is inseparably interwoven with Totalitarianism and the abject worship of the State. …liberty, in all its forms is challenged by the fundamental conceptions of Socialism. …there is to be one State to which all are to be obedient in every act of their lives. This State is to be the arch-employer, the arch-planner, the arch-administrator and ruler, and the arch-caucus boss.

A Socialist State once thoroughly completed in all its details and aspects… could not afford opposition. Socialism is, in its essence, an attack upon the right of the ordinary man or woman to breathe freely without having a harsh, clumsy tyrannical hand clapped across their mouths and nostrils.

But I will go farther. I declare to you, from the bottom of my heart that no Socialist system can be established without a political police. Many of those who are advocating Socialism or v****g Socialist today will be horrified at this idea. That is because they are shortsighted, that is because they do not see where their theories are leading them.

No Socialist Government conducting the entire life and industry of the country could afford to allow free, sharp, or violently-worded expressions of public discontent. They would have to fall back on some form of Gestapo, no doubt very humanely directed in the first instance.

And this would nip opinion in the bud; it would stop criticism as it reared its head, and it would gather all the power to the supreme party and the party leaders, rising like stately pinnacles above their vast bureaucracies of Civil servants, no longer servants and no longer civil. And where would the ordinary simple folk—the common people, as they like to call them in America—where would they be, once this mighty organism had got them in its grip?
WC, BBC broadcast, June 4, 1945

Socialism: A Clear and Present Danger

A perilous possibility now confronts us—the conversion of America, the leading capitalist nation in the world, into a socialist state. Impossible, you say? Consider the following.

The national polls continue to show that a large majority of millennials have a favorable view of socialism. A near majority favor the “compassion” of socialism over capitalism which, they argue, is indifferent to the needs of the people, especially those on the bottom rung of the economic ladder.

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt)—an avowed socialist—and the equally “progressive” Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) continue to run strong in the p**********l primaries; their combined support is close to 40 percent among Democrats polled. Younger Americans cheer their promises of universal health care and free education, while brushing aside the proposals’ trillion-dollar price tag.

Rep. Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and members of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) support government ownership of industries whose products are viewed as “necessities” (railroads, coal mines, social media, who knows?). They say that, to the greatest extent possible, government should “democratize” private businesses—that is, give control of them to workers. “Socialism,” says a member of DSA’s national steering committee, “is the democratization of all areas of life, including but not limited to the economy.” So much for the Declaration of Independence and life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

We must acknowledge that the Great Recession of 2008 tore a huge hole in the American people’s faith in capitalism as the way to a better life and sent them looking for alternatives. Many of them, especially younger Americans, found it in a “soft socialism” that was part welfare state, part administrative state, part socialist state. Capitalists failed to present a persuasive case for free markets, beginning with Milton Friedman’s famous axiom: “There is no such thing as a free lunch.”

Socialists love to cite Sweden and Denmark as socialist models, but these Scandinavian countries favor the free market over socialism in running their economies and are content with private rather than government ownership of their major industries. Speaking before the National Press Club, the Danish prime minister opened his remarks by emphasizing that Denmark is not a socialist country.

What is to be done?

We must educate the rising generation about the true costs of socialism, and not just in dollars and cents. Would a majority of millennials choose socialism if in exchange for “free” education and “free” health care, they would have to give up their personal property such as their iPhone and their iPad? This is not simply a possibility--the abolition of private property is the first dictum of socialism.

Would seven percent of millennials be willing to accept c*******m with its denial of free speech, a free press, free assembly, the imprisonment and often execution of dissidents, no open e******ns, no independent judiciary or rule of law, the dictatorship of the C*******t Party in all matters and on all occasions? This is the c*******m of China, Cuba, North Korea, Vietnam, Laos and Nicaragua.

Socialists like to say that socialism has never failed because it has never been tried. But in fact socialism has failed in every country where it has been tried, from the Soviet Union and the People’s Republic of China to three non-c*******t countries that tried but ultimately rejected socialism. All three countries of those countries—Israel, India, and the United Kingdom—adhered to socialist principles and practices for more than 20 years, only to change direction and adopt capitalism as the better way to economic prosperity. As a result, India today has the largest middle class in the free world.

The PRC has the second largest economy because in the late 1970s Deng Xiaoping abandoned the rigid excesses of Maoist thought and adopted a form of c*******m that allowed foreign investments and even a stock market while underwriting SOEs (state-owned enterprises). At the same time, Deng ensured strict political control of China through the C*******t Party and the People’s Liberation Army, in accordance with Mao Zedong’s motto, “Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun.”

Socialism’s central philosophical weakness is its dependence upon the errant thought of its founder, Karl Marx. Marx insisted that his version of Hegelian dialectic—thesis, antithesis, synthesis—was scientific and without flaw. He asserted that feudalism had been replaced by capitalism which would be replaced by socialism and then c*******m in an irreversible process. But 200 years after the publication of “The C*******t Manifesto,” capitalism rather than socialism dominates the global economy. According to the Heritage Foundation’s “2018 Index of Economic Freedom,” 102 countries, many with less developed or emerging economies, showed advances in economic growth and individual prosperity. As the esteemed economist Paul Samuelson wrote, “As a prophet Marx was colossally unlucky and his system colossally unuseful.”

Socialism depends upon the decision-making of a central government. The Nobel laureate F. A. Hayek put it succinctly: “Planning leads to dictatorship.” Without exception, every leader from Lenin to Castro promised to initiate basic freedoms such as free e******ns, a free press, free assembly, and religious freedom. None fulfilled these promises. Is a world without freedom, without choice, without basic human rights the world that millennials would choose if they had a choice?

This is our challenge: to tell the t***h, the whole t***h and nothing but the t***h about socialism—a pseudo-religion grounded in pseudo-science and enforced by political might. This is our obligation to this generation and generations to come: to make the case against socialism, a god that failed, a science that never was, a political system headed for the ash heap of history.

i “Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the cree... (show quote)

Why don’t you instead tell us of the gleaming positivities of F*****m and Oligarchy.
Along with where you will fit into it.
Tell us the t***h, the whole t***h and nothing but the t***h.

JFlorio Loc: Seminole Florida

Milosia2 wrote:

Why don’t you instead tell us of the gleaming positivities of F*****m and Oligarchy.
Along with where you will fit into it.
Tell us the t***h, the whole t***h and nothing but the t***h.

See above response.

currahee506

"Socialism" is a polite way of the delusional s**m artist to say, "I am a thief; give me all your money."

son of witless

Rinaldi wrote:

Obvious lack of education and understanding

Obviously you know nothing of the difference between Capital Gains and wages. Read this and try to become less ignorant.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2021/04/bidens-vindictive-capital-gains-tax-hike/

2quick4u Loc: Somewhere in central Tx...

currahee506 wrote:

"Socialism" is a polite way of the delusional s**m artist to say, "I am a thief; give me all your money."

Spot on 506...that's the best and most accurate comment I've seen today...

mike