SOCIALISM -- PRACTICAL ASPECTS


The foundation of the socialist ideology is that man cannot govern himself.  Since this is the premise, the practitioners of socialism must control individual liberty, and they do so without regards to the means employed. To the socialist, the utopian end is noble - yet it is an end without conscience.
Socialism is not an easy sell. It is not a natural state of man. Many fall victim to its siren song simply because they do not value their liberty. Some individuals willingly accept whatever the socialist provides under the guise of “fairness and justice”. They believe they have a right to live at the expense of others. These individuals are the putty of the socialist.
Socialism must suppress and alter a nation’s identity, culture and traditions. This is done through the co-opting of educational institutions, the news and entertainment media, religious institutions, charities and select interest groups. Ideological tolerance is built slowly so as to minimize alarm, - and then suddenly when a sufficient crisis occurs. Economic devastation combined with political corruption and excess is a perfect trigger for the sudden rise of socialism.
Socialism depends on a charismatic leader who promises hope and change. With a small numbers of committed individuals and other “useful idiots”, such leaders have been able to takeover discontented societies. Socialism needs distractions in the form of some hated class, external threat or even God to distract from socialism’s failures.
Because socialism suppresses the individual, it also suppresses individual creativity and productivity. Essentially, the results of an individual’s efforts are given to others based on some arbitrary and capricious formula of want and need.
Socialism, once established, is difficult to eliminate. To be successful politically, the socialist society must impose itself on virtually every individual action and thought. In socialist democracies, control of the individual takes the form of ever expanding entitlements and regulations. In the worst of socialist societies, individuals are enslaved within a police state structure where criticism is treated harshly.
To the socialist, the Constitution, Bill of Rights, and Declaration of Independence are irrelevant. The rule of law, economic accountability, national borders, and anything or anyone that identifies with the past is not only useless but dangerous. The only wisdom that is valued is that which comes from the socialist playbook.
The bottom line is that a socialist society is mechanistic. Individuals are productive or unproductive biological units to be nurtured, or denied nurture, based on government derived health and welfare criteria.
The socialist likes to portray socialism as the savior of mankind. In truth, it is a great and inherently destructive evil.
Submitted by Dr. Robert Warren, PhD to The Virginia Gazette




Comments

  1. Anonymous24 March, 2012

    fdsdf

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous24 March, 2012

    Good article factual information. However, I think what Bob is describing is a totalitarian form of government, more than a socialism, as viewd by economists. Socialism, in the traditinal economic definition, is government ownership of all means of production. As explained by F.A. Hayek in his book "The Road to Serfdom", the decision making demands of a socialist system will drive the government in to an authoritarian mode or mindset, as well as producing very poor, inefficent economic decisions about what is produced, how much, and by whom.

    Another distinction that can be made is that of a capitalistic economic system, with citizens and business taxed heavily and massive income redistribution. Think Sweden.

    There are many other combinations and degrees to which countries ascribe. The bottom line is socialism, income redistribution, high taxes, totalitarian governments all reduce liberty and freedom. To me, liberty and freedom is not a means to an end; it is the very essence of a quality life on this earth. A basic reason ObamaCare MUST be defeated...

    Chuck Misak

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

AMERICAN AIRLINES -- MORE ABOUT UNIONS AND CH 11

I apologize for the structure of the post below, with no segmentation, but the system refuses to do it my way. To my post yesterday re AMR's chapter 11 filing relating my experiences over many years flying with AA, an AA pilot wrote a thoughtful comment that caused me to think a bit more about the precursors to conditions of their bankruptcy. Frankly, I have what is perhaps too much experience with trade unions and their excesses, but know less about others such as the airlines. After learning more about the negotiations of AA with their unions, I now think it's justifiable to post the comments below. I've seen too many industries destroyed by union excesses coupled with management incompetence in caving to excess demands. Start with coal (dead for many years), steel, textiles, shoes, electronics manufacturing, and more.  The Detroit 3 (once the big 3) deserves special mention. As their costs rose to $72/hour (fully loaded) and costs in the southern industry w
Read more

LEFTIST MIND-SET OF TODAY -- REFLEXIVE, THOUGHTLESS SUPPORT FOR THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION

"Trying to persuade a prejudiced mind is as Sisyphean as trying to open a closed mind is Quixotic." Mann, May 2012 In a blog post herein below on May 1, 2013, I outlined what we who manage people and enterprises know as absolutes about performances of people who are put into management and supervisory positions for which they haven't requisite qualifications. For those who have progressed through several jobs to their level of incompetence, this is known as the Peter Principle as defined by Laurence J. Peter. In all likelihood, all who have managed people for any length of time have seen this principle played out. While Peter's observation applies to progression through multiple job levels, if a person is put into any job for which he is unqualified, the concept is also valid. Elective political positions is where I see this most often played out. The election of Barack Obama as President of the United States is the most significant example of this in my lif
Read more

ETHANOL -- The worst mandate ever gets even worse

When politicians get control of science and the inept or dishonest scientists, nothing good comes of it. There are many examples -- global warming (aka climate change) is the most prominent. The ethanol mandate, although a part of the climate change mania, stands on its own as arguably the most ridiculous mandate of all time. President Jimmy Carter, who was influenced by a misguided college professor, can be charged with the mistake of promulgating the ethanol mandate.  Of course, Al Gore is the politician who played the global warming issue like a drum and has benefited financially from it. Use of ethanol in motor fuel is not a net positive either in costs or in impact on the environment.... enormous hype to the contrary notwithstanding. Ethanol does not have the positive effect on the environment as touted. It has only about 60% of the specific energy of petroleum fuel, which begs use of more fuel to achieve the same energy as petroleum fuel. And, so it does. I have my own experie
Read more