Skip to content

Category: Socialism

Leftists and Conservatives All Agree: Against Freedom!

We’re getting it from both sides, the leftists and the conservatives. And frankly, I’m really fed up and sick and tired of all this.

Both sides want to control the lives of others, throw people in jail who disagree or who dissent, or who do business in a way that’s not in accordance with the control freaks, or who eat or consume chemicals not approved by the gubmint, or who come from outside the territory and are not approved by the immigration commissars.

People on both sides just don’t want to leave others alone.

The “Green New Dealers” say they want to eliminate airplane travel, as well as all fossil fuels and cars. They want just electric cars? How will you juice up the cars? What will power up the electric cars? So they just want to outlaw travel, basically.

I guess they are like the conservatives who want to prevent people from traveling into the U.S., as well as harass Americans who want to travel outside the U.S. and return without harassment. Good luck with that.

The “Green New Dealers” also want to retrofit all buildings in the U.S., including houses, apartment buildings, office buildings, schools, churches.

To make it easier for them to make sure that all the buildings in America are getting rebuilt, what they really want is to eliminate all privately owned property in America. They want the government to seize the property, the homes and businesses. The government and its bureaucrat overlords will be the owners of the property.

In our homes the government overlords will be our landlords and we their obedient tenants. They must also take over all the buildings of churches or any houses of worship to make sure that they, too, will be rebuilt to the satisfaction of the “Green” dictators. And naturally that will give them more power to control religion (i.e. abolish it, like in the Soviet Union).

And their real intention is to nationalize the industries, just like in the Soviet Union, Cuba, Venezuela.The people on the left want to take over all industries and will try to impose bureaus with commissars who will attempt to run the industries, as though they can do better than the actual people who currently own and operate their businesses.

So in the process of their taking over industries, they will be stealing businesses that many people worked long and hard to build, all the labor and effort they put into it, now to be enslaved by those who will take it over.

For example regarding the “Green Wheeling and Dealing” “Green New Deal” “democratic socialists” real intention of government takeovers of private industries, here is Marxine Waters letting the cat out of the bag:

Because of their narcissism and arrogance many of them really believe they have the ability to run industries better than those currently doing so. As Thomas DiLorenzo referenced F.A. Hayek in today’s article, the leftist activists have a “fatal conceit.”

But really it’s a control freak issue that these people have. They just like to have a lot of power and order others around. All these bossy little “green” dictators.

Here is Congressman John Dingell, the one who just died, on how we need ObamaCare (or, later on, single payer, “Medicare for All,” etc.) to “control the people”:

So, how will the “Green New Dealers” or “democratic socialists” administer over the forcible taking of all that property in the United States? Many sheeple will swallow the propaganda in which bureaucrats and their minions will convince them it’s for their own good, and that Mr. and Ms. Government Agent or Enforcer knows what’s best for them. Anyone who resists will be arrested or shot. That is how they did things in past socialist societies.

And here is the late Larry Grathwohl who as an FBI agent had infiltrated the Bill Ayers group Weather Underground in the 1970s, detailing how his interactions with those commie wackjobs and college professors (sorry for the redundancy) went, in this interview excerpt:

But the conservatives are no better. There are millions of them all over America who really believe that a government Wall on the border will solve the immigration problem. Like the leftists, the conservatives are also afflicted with short-sightedness. I think that their motivation is mainly out of hatred of foreigners. They are obsessed with discussing the victims of crimes committed by “illegals,” but do not seem to care about the many more victims of crimes committed by their own fellow Americans.

It’s all about foreigners, and keeping out foreigners. But it isn’t just keeping out foreigners, and this is where there is a connection between these nationalist conservatives and the leftists. With the conservatives, they believe that people who are not “citizens” should have restrictions imposed on their lives if they dare to set foot in America, or the non-citizens should be kept out, and with a Wall if necessary. What matters here is this “citizenship” thing, which really means government authorization.

The conservatives are really just as authoritarian and socialistic as the leftists, in which for an individual to have legitimacy one must have government authorization or approval (“citizenship”).

And regarding this obsession that Donald Trump and his sheeple followers have with a government Wall like that will cure any problems society might have, I have a feeling that Trump is acting on behalf of the people on the left, like helping them to set up the closed-in society for them in advance. But I could be wrong.

Like the commie thugs on the left, the conservatives and ditto-heads just don’t want to leave people alone. The conservatives want to harass, molest, kidnap and throw into a cage any travelers who are not authorized by government bureaucrats in Washington, regardless of whether the travelers are peaceful. The conservative thugs want to arrest businessmen who hire non-government-authorized workers. And again, it has nothing to do with being “concerned” that immigrants are committing crimes against Americans, because if so then they would be expressing equal concern about Americans committing crimes against other Americans. But no, the conservatives are not doing that. It has to do with hating foreigners, quite frankly. It has to do with their brainwashed nationalism and tribalism.

And also, the real causes of the immigration problem have to do with the drug war and U.S. government interventionism and funding in Central and South American countries, such as Honduras. But the conservatives are too short-sighted to see that. Which they don’t WANT to see, by the way, because they support the drug war. The conservatives support government goons harassing and throwing in a cage those who might have ingested or might be in possession of some government-disapproved chemical or plant.

Honestly, between the power-hungry leftists and the conservatives and nationalists, FREEDOM is under attack from all sides!

What we really need is a free society. Just leave people alone, and liberate them, and let them have their freedom, for crying out loud.

A free society in which everyone comes and goes as they please, no showing ID or papers, no being stopped by goons. And America is supposed to be a society of individualism, in which each individual is left alone by gubmint unless one is actually suspected of violating the person or property of others.

And people come and go as they please as long as they don’t use aggression or coercion against others, as long as they don’t steal or defraud, as long as they are peaceful. And don’t trespass on private property, or else they could get hurt by a private property owner exercising one’s right to keep and bear arms (that no one would be interfering with because it’s a free society).

And no, traveling along “public” property (i.e. unowned) is not “trespassing,” because there’s no such thing as some sort of common ownership of “public property” by the “citizens” that conservatives try to promote. That would be very communistic or socialistic. Any common ownership of the territory as a whole would really negate the concept of private property within the territory. But sadly, conservatives have as much a hard time understanding private property as do the leftists.

In a free society all trades, transactions, contracts are voluntary, and would be only the business of those who are parties to such contracts, trades and transactions. The trades of labor and employment and goods and services would not be interfered with by third parties. And no one is allowed to steal anyone’s earnings or wealth away, including the government! And people consume whatever they want, healthy or harmful.

But we have these people on the left and the conservatives who obediently love and worship their government overlords to decide for them what’s best for them, and to protect them from “bad guys.” And both sides want to usurp control over private property and contracts using armed powers of government to do it. Both sides want to control the lives of others, but they shouldn’t be allowed to do these things.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s Boston University Economics Professors “Very Proud” of Her

Robert Wenzel writes that he spoke with several economics professors at Boston University, the alma mater of economics major Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

Yesterday, I spoke over the phone with a number of BU faculty members in the economics department and the consensus was that she was a very bright student who has “very interesting ideas” and that she will have an impact. They seemed to believe that she was getting advice from “top economists,” perhaps Thomas Piketty. Yes, this Thomas Piketty.

Even Prof. Laurence Kotlikoff, who would seem to have the least in common with AOC from a policy perspective (He was President Ronald Reagan’s Council of Economic Advisers), told me that the Boston University economics faculty was “very proud of her.”

He emphasized that AOC was “impressive in many ways” and that what she is advocating “in many ways is closer to where we should be than where we are now.”

He said it was good she was pushing the envelope and that she is causing serious discussion. He particularly likes that she is pushing for a “progressive fiscal system.” He says we now have a regressive fiscal system.

More News and Commentary

Ron Paul on the hysterical warmongers of Congress when Trump wants to remove U.S. troops from Syria.

Veronique de Rugy comments on Donald Trump’s statement, “America was founded on liberty and independence — not government coercion, domination and control.”

Jay Engel says that billionaires already gave their “fair share.”

Ludwig von Mises says that “progressive” attacks on capitalism were key to Hitler’s success.

And Bill Wirtz says that the French government is deliberately increasing the price of food.

“I Am a Socialist”: What Socialists Really Support

With the rise in the advocacy for socialism, such as with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Bernie Sanders, etc., and their rationality-free, knowledge-free emotional appeals to the ignorant and gullible masses, I am reminded of this article I had on LewRockwell.com in 2010, “I Am a Socialist,” with a self-proclaimed socialist explaining what he really supports. And so I will repost that here now. (There may be one or two things in which I wouldn’t put it in exactly the same way as I did in 2010, but I think this makes some important points.)

“I Am a Socialist”

November 24, 2010

Recently, MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell announced that he is a “socialist.” O’Donnell referred to Milton Friedman’s quote, “We’re all Keynesians now,” and President Richard Nixon’s quote, “I am now a Keynesian,” in the context of Keynesian economics being very similar to socialism. O’Donnell went on to assert his pride in being a socialist, and even suggested that Glenn Beck, Rand Paul and others are also socialists in one form or another.

So here is an elaboration of someone, whoever that might be, explaining why he is a socialist:

“First and foremost, I am a socialist because I disagree with the Founding Fathers’ ideas on morality and the Rule of Law. It is important that we have a centralized government that redistributes all the wealth. The State needs to have the power to take some of the wealth away from those the State decides have too much of it. Obviously, no one has a ‘right’ to one’s own wealth or property. And I don’t believe that ‘all men are created equal’ because, if there is a law against theft, then obviously because we need to allow agents of the State to take wealth away, then therefore laws against ‘theft’ must exempt agents of the State. That means that some people should be above the law.

“And I am a socialist in medical care because I think that the centralized government should control everyone’s medical care – it’s as simple as that. It is important that government bureaucrats and their government doctors and medical services have a monopoly in the medical industry so they don’t have to deal with competitive interests, as opposed to a free market in medical care in which the consumers determine which doctors and medical plans would stay in business and which ones would fail. Some people assert that that gives ‘power to the people,’ but we socialists don’t want the people to have that kind of power – it takes control away from government bureaucrats and that’s why I don’t like that. It’s important that government officials control the ultimate decisions in what affects American medical patients (and because the Blue State grandmas are more likely to vote for the “good guys” than the Red State grandmas, if you know what I mean).

“I support socialist immigration central planning because the State has a right, for example, to prevent an employer in Arizona from hiring an applicant from Mexico despite the fact that the employer believes that individual is qualified for the job and the Mexican applicant is willing to accept the job at the wage both agree on. Their prospective contract should not be in their control, it should be in the central planners’ control. When we say that socialism includes public ownership of the means of production, then that includes ownership of the employer’s business, as well as the prospective employee’s direction of employment (as well as the employer and employee themselves – after all, one of the most important of the means of production is the people).

(If I may interject here while Mr. Socialist goes to take a brief powder: Some of what is being described is actually fascism. While socialism can generally be described as public ownership of wealth and the means of production, fascism allows for private ownership of wealth and the means of production but the control is usurped by the State. So, there are elements of socialist programs that are also fascist in nature, and vice versa. In immigration, for instance, the central planning nature of public ownership of wealth and the means of production also includes State control over immigration which is really part of fascism, so our socialist here is also a fascist, but don’t tell him I said that. Actually, there really is little difference between socialism and fascism when you get right down to it. But, for the sake of discussion, we’ll continue with our self-proclaimed “socialist” in his discussion of why he favors socialism.)

“To continue, I am a socialist because I support the central planning of chemical ingestion, otherwise known as the War on Drugs. While the common sense answer to the ‘drug problem’ might be freedom and personal responsibility, it is nevertheless important that the centralized bureaucrats have the power to dictate to people what chemicals they may or may not ingest (even though this causes a black market in banned drugs, dramatically raises the prices of drugs and thus incentivizes the black marketers to form gangs and cartels that causes turf wars and increased violence, and incentivizes them to push the drugs on impressionable youths and adults some of whom turn to robbery to afford the pricey substances, as well as distracts and corrupts the police).

“Speaking of police and protecting the public, I am an enthusiastic supporter of the socialist central planning monopoly in territorial security (as opposed to a free market in security, in which those in the protection business would have to deal with profit-and-loss as determined by competitive agents and consumer control). It is important that 300 million Americans are compelled by law to use the monopoly of centrally planned ‘defense’ in Washington to protect them from harm by foreign elements, while legally forbidding anyone from competing in the business of protection.

“I also believe in that central planning military socialism because I haven’t read Hans-Hermann Hoppe’s books, The Private Production of Defense and The Myth of National Defense, or Morris and Linda Tannehill’s book, The Market for Liberty, and because I really do believe in the myth that the U.S. government’s committing aggression on foreign lands actually protects Americans and doesn’t instead provoke those in the foreign lands to retaliate against that aggression and intrusion. I don’t want to admit that giving central planners a monopoly in defense, without the constant checks on their behavior that the pressures of competition in a free market and the requirement to follow the Rule of Law would bring, actually encourages central planners to use the government apparatus to further expand their power and control (and profits at taxpayers’ expense). Can you imagine a private security firm or insurance agency deliberately provoking the Japanese to bomb Pearl Harbor, or deliberately encouraging Saddam Hussein to invade Kuwait as an excuse to invade Iraq? A private firm with competitive pressures and under the Rule of Law would not only lose business but its agents would end up in jail. But, despite the messes in Iraq and Afghanistan that our central defense planners in Washington have caused, and the fact that Washington’s intrusions abroad have made us less safe, I still want to pretend that this socialism in defense actually works. As Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano noted, “the system worked.”

“Of course, given that I’m a proud supporter of redistribution of wealth schemes, military socialism is effective in taking wealth from American producers and laborers and redistributing it over to those in the defense contractor industry (and Wall Street). While this socialist (and fascist) monopoly of territorial protection may be completely disorganized because there is no incentive among the government bureaucrats to be efficient and productive, such a scheme nevertheless effects in getting contractors’ campaign contributions in the pockets of those politicians who need the jobs they get in Washington as they would otherwise be unemployed in the private sector. It’s important for America.

“After all, the Founding Fathers were also socialists in that their Constitution mandates a centralized government monopoly in defense, in which free, open competition in that area is outlawed. That’s been good for America.

“And finally, I support the socialized commerce that the Federal Reserve provides, with the help of legal tender laws and loose fractional reserve banking permissions, because I believe that it is vital that a centralized government control the money supply and banking. We can’t allow the people to have the freedom to choose a bank based on its record of service to the community, because that would take control away from the centralized authorities who know better as far as what’s best for the people, and we can’t allow the people to have the freedom to choose among competing currencies, because that would take control away from the centralized authorities who know better as far as what’s best for the people.

“Like the central planning micromanagement from ObamaCare, Social Security and government-run education, the Federal Reserve is important to micromanage the economy, despite all the damage it has caused since its founding in 1913. So, as a socialist, I feel it’s important to continue the Fed’s control over and intrusions into our money, banking, savings and investments (and our prosperity, security and Liberty as well).

“We need as many government intrusions into every aspect of human existence as possible, so most of all, I guess I’m a socialist because I like power and oppose freedom.

“Bye.”

Yeah, goodbye, Socialist. Now, get lost – we’re better off without you.

News and Commentary

While there are a lot of critics of the “Green New Deal,” the unrealistic socialist paradise being promoted by leftists, Jacob Hornberger points out that the policies of the actual New Deal of Franklin Roosevelt and his cronies, a combination of socialist and fascist policies, were and are policies that should be criticized. Today’s conservatives are afraid to do so, either out of their own ignorance and irrationality or because they are just gutless wonders.

Fred Reed examines the freak show within the Trump administration, including “Pussy John Bolton.” (That’s not a mustache, he’s actually foaming at the mouth in his warmongering excitement.)

David Henderson on Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez versus Adam Smith.

And William Anderson writes about the green great leap forward.

“Green New Deal”: Rule by Crazed, Brainwashed Fanatics

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Ed Markey have presented their hysterically irrational plan of nearly-total government takeovers of the energy sector or of the entire economy, in the name of “saving the planet.”

But it is really in the name of giving more elitists in Washington more control over the lives of others, in the name of slowing down and reversing society’s growth and progress it has experienced over the past 100 years, and reversing the rise in our standard of living.

It is in the name of punishing those who are successful and wealthy and taking away from them the justly acquired fruits of their successes in order to “equalize the wealth.” In other words, rather than strive to make more people wealthy and prosperous, let’s strive to make the masses poor and impoverished. And we’ll implement our fanatical mythological beliefs as part of the process.

Ed Marxey has a history of this kind of insanity as part of the Massachusetts moonbat tradition. And no, Alexandria Ocasio-Loonytunes, the world is not going to “end in 12 years” if we don’t do the progress-reversing, mass poverty-causing things you think are necessary.

“Climate change” fanatics: the climate has been changing for hundreds of millions of years. There have been ice ages, and there have been warming periods. Nothing you can do about it. The effects of human industrial activity and fossil fuels could only be so infinitesimal as to not have any real effect whatsoever. Climate change is a natural occurrence of the Earth, regardless of human behavior.

The climate change hysteria is mainly based on computer models that don’t pan out, and fraudulent, junk science. But people believe what they want to believe. The hysterical fanatics refer to skeptics of the global warming/climate change fanaticism as “deniers,” explicitly referring to Holocaust deniers to insult and denigrate those who are not a part of the hysterical, irrational chicken littlers. The fanatical climate change crusaders have also called for jailing skeptics. These fanatics are literally crazy, brainwashed people.

I heard Glenn Beck this morning lambasting Boston University, where Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez got her degree in economics. But ALL the colleges are like that. The colleges are turning out brainwashed robots who think thoroughly irrational things. And those young people already begin by being products of the government schools, who make the kids dumber and dumber as they go from K through 12. Sad.

Trump Says America Will Not Go Socialist, Like Venezuela

I wanted to comment on Donald Trump’s state of the union, but I just don’t have time to go over the whole thing. However, I will say that Trump’s reference to Venezuela as gone socialist and then saying that America will never go socialist shows his ignorance and lack of self-awareness.

Trump’s typically nationalist anti-foreigner immigration policies are socialist policies. When business people have to get government’s authorization to employ people, or when government can throw you in jail for hiring a non-government-approved worker, when the government is the ultimate authority on whom you hire or not hire, that’s socialism. It ain’t free market, mister. When workers must get authorization from a bureaucrat to work, yes, that’s socialism, NOT capitalism.

A government wall on the border is a product of socialism, not capitalism. Private property walls are different because that’s private property. We’re talking about a government wall surrounding a supposedly FREE society! (Orwellian much?)

Real free-market capitalists do not build government walls! That’s what socialists do!

I know, a lot of people are brainwashed to have this simple-minded and short-sighted view that a government wall will “keep out the bad people,” which it won’t do. (How is a government wall on the southern border going to keep all those bad people in Washington from harming us as they continue to do? Should we put up a wall completely surrounding Washington?)

Trump is also a drug warrior. He believes very strongly that the government must have the final authority on what chemicals people may put into “their” bodies, or what plants, substances or other materials people may possess. More socialism. When the government claims ownership of property, and of the people’s own bodies, that’s socialism. It’s not adhering to private property principles. It’s not the “private ownership of the means of production.” And it isn’t freedom.

Trump also believes strongly in the government-run retirement scheme, Social Security, as well as Medicare and Medicaid, all thoroughly socialist schemes.

Most telling that Donald Trump is a die-hard socialist is his love of government central planning. He LOVES it!