Tag: communism

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

Well, the pre-midterm election results didn’t turn out so well for the Republicans, with Democrats making strides in several contests. One area of note is in the Big Apple, where voters overwhelmingly elected Zohran Mamdani to be the next Mayor. He ran as a democratic socialist, which is just a fancy term for a regular socialist who wants Democrat donations.

Anyway, this has sparked a discussion about socialism in general. The Left is crowing about how Mamdani represents a new way forward while simultaneously telling us we don’t know enough about socialism to appreciate it.

Challenge accepted.

socialism

What the Left thinks it means – a viable socioeconomic/political model that works time and time again

What it really means – an non-viable socioeconomic/political model that doesn’t work more often than it works

The most important place to start in this discussion is what socialism actually means. You know, aside from the definition I posed above. Our good friends at Dictionary.com define socialism thus:

1. a theory or system of social organization that advocates the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, capital, land, etc., by the community as a whole, usually through a centralized government.

2. procedure or practice in accordance with this theory.

3. (in Marxist theory) the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism, characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles.

More on this third definition later.

What Leftists say is a key feature of socialism is fairness. Everything is fair, everyone contributes to the overall good, and everything is rainbows, unicorns, and unlimited trips to the salad bar with any meal purchase. Socialism’s PR has gotten so good these days, around two-thirds of Democrats see it in a positive light.

And I can understand the appeal, especially with younger voters. The current capitalist system doesn’t seem to work for anyone but the wealthy, leaving many people out in the cold. People having to take on multiple jobs just to keep their heads above water. Everything’s getting more expensive. Surely there has to be a better way forward.

There is, but socialism ain’t it, kids.

Let’s take a trip in the Wayback Machine to 1620 when the Pilgrims were making their way to what would be called America. Because there were squabbles among the Pilgrims, leaders created a little thing the kids like to call the Mayflower Compact. Although it sounded good on paper and advocated for such things as self-governance and no religious oppression, it was by and large a socialist approach.

And, surprise surprise, it didn’t work! Who could have seen this coming? (I mean aside from anyone who stayed awake in junior high American history from back in my day.)

If you think that was the only time we dabbled in socialism, there’s also Social Security. What started out with good intentions became a socialist nightmare that is running out of money, partially because of demographics, and partially because Congress has been taking money out of it for decades and not returning it.

Then, there’s public education, care through the VA, SNAP, public defenders, and other not-so-goods and service that fall under the socialist umbrella. Even when you have moderately successful concepts like public roads and fire departments, they still aren’t quite socialist because they serve a common good, while socialism just claims to serve. You can count on the remaining hand of the world’s worst shop teacher the number of socialist programs and ideas that have worked to everyone’s satisfaction.

That may be one of the underlying reasons younger voters are okay with socialism: they haven’t been taught shit about the failures of socialism, even on our shores. Sure, they learned all about how the Pilgrims were evil white colonizers who slaughtered Native Americans, but they just didn’t get to the part where they tried their hand at an early version of socialism and got their asses handed to them. But in the defense of public education, they just don’t have time to cover how fucked up socialism is because they have to make room for a deep dive into how Taylor Swift is such a cultural icon.

And I only wish I were half-kidding.

Educational standards going down like a starlet trying to get a movie deal from Harvey Weinstein aside, I don’t think capitalism has made a good enough argument to the past couple of generations, mainly because capitalists know it’s the best thing going today. Even so, it might not hurt to advertise a bit more. I mean, it’s easy to be a socialist when you have the latest iPhone, drink Starbucks on the regular, and make money posting TikTok videos. When the rubber meets the road, though, it’s a lot harder to live in a socialist society.

That’s because one of the dirty little secrets of socialism is it only works as long as they have OPM: Other People’s Money. It’s a pretty simple concept, really. If you’re spending your own money, you tend to be more frugal. If you’re spending someone else’s money, the sky’s the limit, baby!

Socialism works on the same principle. As long as they can take money from the wealthy, things can work. But then it runs into a brick wall called human nature. Even if you’re the most progressive guy or gal (gender count: still 2) out there, at some point you’re going to be confronted with the real possibility you’re putting in more than you’re getting back. Then, you have to make a value judgment: stay within the current system, or high-tail it out of there.

Then, socialism runs into the potential for income erosion. As the wealthier members of a socialist society die off or move on, that not only eliminates their protection money…I mean contributions, it puts more pressure on the next lowest wealth base. Then, if/when they’re off the books, it goes down to the next lowest wealth base.

Blather. Rinse. Repeat.

What most people who subscribe to socialism don’t understand is as long as their is wealth erosion, there will come a time when they’re the wealthiest because everyone else will be poorer than they are. Funny how that works out, isn’t it?

Even if you attempt to dress up socialism by giving it a cool name like Logan or democratic socialism, you’re still going to run into the same problems. And the reason is the same: socialism fucking sucks, man! Although if it were named Logan, it would be cool while it sucked.

Now, remember earlier when I mentioned the third definition of socialism? If not, read up a bit and you’ll see it.

Anyway, it’s interesting to note Marxists used socialism as a lead-in to communism. The way I describe it is this: socialism is communism on pot, and communism is socialism on PCP. By nature, I’ve found socialists by and large aren’t that into violence. You’ll get the occasional socialist with a bike lock and a bad attitude and tries to start something, but most of them are pretty calm. Their hearts are in the right place, as are their facial features because they’re not getting knocked the fuck out.

Communists, on the other hand…well, they’re not exactly the “live and let live” type. Violence is a part of their political brand. I can’t say for certain how many socialists would be okay with communism, but I have to think the number is higher than 1, especially when you consider the Left’s hunger for control. That’s pretty much right out of the communist playbook (or manifesto if you will). It’s almost as if communists knew socialism would fail and further steps would need to be taken.

You know, like cracking skulls and oppression?

I know I’ve shit on socialism worse than if I’d had a Triple Bean Burrito with a side order of salmonella from Taco Bell that’s been sitting in a van in the Mojave Desert since the last time Bon Jovi made a good album (which is never), but I don’t shit on socialists themselves very much. To me, they’re misguided, but have hearts of gold. Or at least would have hearts of gold until their socialist buddies found out and accused them of hoarding wealth.

Having said that, I can’t bring myself to join their ideology because I know too much. I’ve seen the fall of the Soviet Union, the crumbling of the Warsaw Pact countries, and the rise of a more egocentric approach to life in general, none of which bode well for socialism working in this country. Yet, I still wish Zohran Mamdani the best of luck in his attempt to create a socialistic utopia in a city weirder than I am. If he succeeds, I’ll admit freely. If he fails, I’ll mock him endlessly.

Let’s just say I’m betting the under on his success rate.



Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

While Kamala Harris and Tim Walz continue their Happy Happy Joy Joy Tour, there is a term that has resurfaced unironically that I haven’t heard in a while: communism. And here I thought communism went the way of the Berlin Wall!

Anyway, Tim “Mirror Universe Dick Cheney” Walz described communism as it’s being forced…I mean practiced in China as, “It means that everyone is the same and everyone shares.” Granted, this was way back in 1991 when Walz hadn’t yet become Governor and was just a social studies teacher…wait, that makes it worse. Never mind.

Anyway, I figured it would be a good time to talk about communism since we have a VP candidate who thinks it’s neato.

communism

What the Left thinks it means – a socioeconomic system where everyone is treated equally, but one that has never been truly tried yet

What it really means – a socioeconomic system that only works on paper, as has been proven the times it’s been tried

At this point, I have to bring up communism’s stoner cousin, socialism. They share a similar lineage in that they both believe the government is the ultimate provider of all that is good and right in the world. Hmmm…I would say that sounds like the Harris/Walz platform except for the fact they really don’t have one.

Where they part company is in the use of violence and threats to maintain power. Socialism isn’t necessarily violent by nature. They just want everyone to voluntarily share with others. It’s a lot more peaceful than people think it is.

Then, there’s communism. Violence and threats are the coin of the realm in communist countries (mainly because their actual currency is worth less than a plot in a Michael Bay movie). Any concept of thought outside of the party dogma is dangerous and must be considered the communist version of a heretic.

The best way I’ve come up with to describe the fundamental differences between communism and socialism is thus. Socialism is communism on pot. Communism is socialism on PCP. And if you know anything about what happens to people on PCP, you know the shit hits the fan in ways you would never think possible.

As we speak, there are Leftists starting to type, “But both of them are about sharing and equality! Why are you against that, you bigot?” The fact is neither socialism nor communism will get you to your desired utopia, thanks to a little thing the kids like to call reality. And, yes, I understand Leftists tend to have a restraining order requiring reality to stay at least 500 feet away from them at all times, but Leftists need to listen to this next part.

All people are created equal in the sense most of the time Dad had to park his pork submarine in Mom’s tuna cove, but beyond that we aren’t. We are born with traits and hindrances from the jump. In order for us be equal, we would have to deny these things exist. And we all know we can’t deny science, right Leftists? I mean aside from there being two genders and such…

Since God, Nature, C’thulu, or whomever you want to blame didn’t make us equal, some dipshits thought it would be a great idea for Man to force equality. And those dipshits created socialism, which begat communism. And it didn’t work.

We Americans need only to go back to the time of the Pilgrims to see how the ideas behind communism and socialism fail in a spectacular way. Yet, Leftists keep thinking if they just try it again, it will work or else it wasn’t “real” communism/socialism. But, the thing is…it doesn’t work on a wide scale because human beings are more complex than what the aforementioned dipshits understand.

Here’s an example to illustrate this point. Let’s say you have two employees, Bob and Doug. Bob is diligent, goes above and beyond with every task put in front of him, and is a high performer. Doug…is none of these. He’s lazy, not very productive, and does the bare minimum at best to take care of things. Under most circumstances (unless Doug is related to the owner or has compromising photos of the owner), Doug would be out on his ass before he could say “Take off, hoser!”

Oh, I forgot to mention, Bob and Doug are Canadian.

Anyway, under communism, Bob would get punished for excelling and Doug would get rewarded for his sloth because the government would take from Bob to make sure Doug is taken care of. At some point, Bob is going to stop working so hard because there’s no upside to it. So, instead of having one superb employee and one subpar former employee having to give hand-jobs in a Tim Horton’s bathroom, you have two equally mediocre employees.

And somehow that’s supposed to work better than capitalism.

By the way, the Underpants Gnomes have better business sense than people who think communism could still work.

And if you think the Bob and Doug example was bad, just consider what kinds of products such mediocrity cranks out. Like Vice Presidential candidates.

And speaking of which, here’s what Tim Walz wrote about Chinese communism:

The doctor and the construction worker make the same. The Chinese government and the place they work for provide housing and 14 kg or about 30 pounds of rice per month. They get food and housing.

Of course, Walz wrote this from a decorated and air conditioned apartment on a salary double that of his Chinese teacher counterparts. I’m gonna go out on a limb here and say Walz had it way better than the average Chinese person. Unless he’s going with the George Orwell version of equality, that is.

By the way, Timmy, I think Orwell was kidding.

But I’m not sure Timmy is. It seems he has a penchant for communism and socialism, which explains the warm fuzzies he got from hanging out in China. It might also explain his recent statement, “One person’s socialism is another person’s neighborliness.” But there is a simpler explanation.

Tim Walz is dumber than Kamala Harris when it comes to economics, and Harris makes President Brick Tamland look like Milton Friedman. And all of them are smarter than Paul Krugman. No great feat, I grant you, but credit where credit is due.

Regardless of how you feel about Tim Walz and his socioeconomic hard-on for communism, the truth is communism is not a system that should be taken seriously. If anything, it should be dragged out of the flaming dumpster of history every once in a while to be mocked as a teachable moment for the children.

And for the dumbass politicians who think communism isn’t bullshit.

In the Meme Time

Well I’m trying to make a come back to my own blog here. So I’m going to do one of my favorite subjects to write about. Leftist Memes.

The internet and social media are full of these. And they are a great source of material that needs to be addressed. So that’s what I’m going to do with this one.

First of all this meme says that some segment of the population of the United States has been propagandized into believing something that isn’t true. So we will first look at that:

(from Wikipedia)
Propaganda is communication that is primarily used to influence an audience and further an agenda, which may not be objective and may be selectively presenting facts in order to encourage a particular synthesis or perception, or using loaded language in order to produce an emotional rather than a rational response to the information that is being presented. Propaganda is often associated with material which is prepared by governments, but activist groups, companies, religious organizations, the media, and individuals also produce propaganda.

In the 20th century, the term propaganda was often associated with a manipulative approach, but historically, propaganda has been a neutral descriptive term.

A wide range of materials and media are used for conveying propaganda messages, which changed as new technologies were invented, including paintings, cartoons, posters, pamphlets, films, radio shows, TV shows, and websites. More recently, the digital age has given rise to new ways of disseminating propaganda, for example, bots and algorithms are currently being used to create computational propaganda and fake or biased news and spread it on social media.

Given that definition the Meme is incorrect. Because the whole rest of it’s message is based on it. And it also has some nonsense stuff in it as well.

Not a single person who is against universal (government ran) healthcare or free (government paid) college is against it because they don’t think that the United States can have it. On the contrary we know that it’s just a vote away in Congress.

We are against it for rational reasons. The government has no money to pay for these things that cost money. And is currently paid for by the consumer who gets to choose where they go for healthcare and what college they attend.

If the government starts paying for them, it’s through higher taxes. And per our Constitution. Well this isn’t the job of government so they have no business raising taxes to pay for these services.

Then there is paid vacations and paid maternity leave. In those “other countries”. These too are paid for by the government through oppressive taxes and legislation that is socialist and communist in nature. Again we know this is but a vote away. But Here again. The government shouldn’t be in this aspect of business either. Per the Constitution.

The US Constitution is very specific on what the government is supposed to be doing. And anything that isn’t mentioned is left to the States or the people. Period. No compromise or wiggle room here.

If you don’t like what your employer offers for these two items. Get another employer or become one and offer them yourself to your employees.

Multiple political parties is a funny one. There are multiple political parties in the Unites States right now. So what’s the point? The other of the Meme is referring to additional parties that actually are electable. That takes two factors. Grass Roots and money. You want a 3rd party with clout. Make it so. Only your wallet size and energy are stopping you.