Shining some light on the true nature of Socialism

Posted: February 20, 2020 by Jon Fournier in Uncategorized
Tags: , , ,

The fact that Bernie Sanders, the self avowed socialist, appears to be currently the front runner for the Democratic Presidential nomination is proof our educational system has failed to properly educate far too many about the true nature of Socialism.  It is up to us on the political right to set the record straight on social media. To make this easier I’ve assembled a selection of quotes from a couple of articles.

The first collection of quotes are from this American Thinker article Bernie Bros and the Catastrophe of Socialism. 

This first quote is not to flattering, yet it is accurate.

The love affair of young Americans with Bernie Sanders is the result of their disturbingly disastrous belief that they are entitled to what other people worked for. Pied Piper Bernie seduces young followers with his seductive lie: “You deserve and I will give you everything for free.” Ponder that, folks. In Bernie’s America, no one has to work for anything.

This next quote perfectly sums up one aspect of socialism the youth of this country fail to appreciate, it primarily benefits the least productive workers at the expense of the most productive.

You and Larry have summer jobs as waiters. You work your butt off, remembering patrons’ food orders correctly and swiftly filling their empty glasses; doing everything in your power to make their dining experience enjoyable. For your excellence, patrons tip you generously.

But rather than your well-deserved hard-earned money going into your pocket, it goes into a tip jar to be distributed equally between you and Larry. Meanwhile, Larry routinely arrives late, reeks of alcohol, takes long smoke breaks, routinely gets food orders wrong and does not give a rat’s derriere about the patrons. Management (government) forces you to share the fruits of your labor with lazy Larry. That is the major flaw of socialism.

Most students are not informed that socialism was attempted in several of the earliest colonies of this nation, and it failed each time.  One attempt was made in Plymouth Plantation.

William Bradford was the first governor of the Pilgrims’ Plymouth Colony. Bradford tried socialism, which meant that everything belonged to the community and everyone supposedly did their fair share of the work. Because of lazy Larrys, it failed. Therefore, Bradford wisely decided to give everyone their own land, which was extremely successful. Due to an abundance, families began trading goods and services. Capitalism.

I don’t think too many millennials would be thrilled to learn that socialism would put an end to innovation in the United States.

Duped Bernie Bros are thrilled over his promise to confiscate all earnings over a million dollars. Cell phones, the internet, medical breakthroughs, and other blessings are the result of individuals being allowed to be the best they can be; striving to reap great rewards for themselves and their families. Folks, there is nothing evil about that. If the government takes everything over a million dollars, why would anyone take risks or pursue new breakthroughs?

This next article, from the Mises institute, is rather technical, however, it contains a treasure trove of information Socialism: A Brief Taxonomy

As you can see from this quote, the most often cited definition of Socialism is incomplete:

The contemporary meaning of socialism often runs along the lines that it is a politico-economic theory in which the means of production, wealth distribution, and exchange are supposed to be owned and regulated by the community as a whole. This characterization of socialism emphasizes its important economic features; however, it cannot be considered a comprehensive definition. The wording implies a narrow understanding of socialism from the point of view of materialist and positivist currents of socialism but does not fully encompass the features exhibited in antimaterialist, anti-Cartesian, and Kantian members of the socialist family.

Here is a much more complete definition:

Socialism is a set of artificial socioeconomic systems that are characterized by varying degrees of collectivization of property, or consciousness, or the redistribution of wealth… socialization of property, collectivization of consciousness, and wealth redistribution are necessary and sufficient causative factors that taken separately or in combination unambiguously define an ideology as socialistic and designate preferred paths to socialism

The Mises article contains definitions of many different types of Socialism that have cropped up over the centuries, the one for Democratic Socialism is the most crucial to understand considering the popularity of Bernie Sanders.

Democratic Socialism in the USA, is a significant revision to Marxism, which practically does not leave even the foundation of genuine Marxist principles. Reformism has been a mainstream form of socialist ideology and practice since the end of the nineteenth century. Redistribution of wealth and partial socialization of consciousness are the main paths being utilized by the doctrine. Socialism is supposed to be gradually built within a capitalistic society by methodically changing the socioeconomic laws of the land using parliamentary procedures. Great importance is also attached to the mental transformation of members of the society through the indoctrination of the population in educational institutions and the propaganda of the socialistic ideals in the mass media, social networks, and materials of pop culture.

My Astros Suggestion: The Scarlet Negative Uniform Number

Posted: February 20, 2020 by datechguy in baseball, Sports
Tags:

Before I begin let me point out that I’m already on the record as saying that sign stealing should not be illegal and that given technology it’s not worth trying to ban it. The best solution is to make it completely legal and raise the mound to give pitchers the edge.

That being said I’m in the distinct minority as the outrage over the lack of punishment for the players on the Houston Astros vs their manager, and GM and even former bench coach Alex Cora has reached the point where silent Mike Trout, arguably the best player in the game over the last five years has spoken out.

“It’s sad for baseball,” Trout said. “It’s tough. They cheated. I don’t agree with the punishments, the players not getting anything. It was a player-driven thing. It sucks, too, because guys’ careers have been affected, a lot of people lost jobs. It was tough. Me going up to the plate knowing what was coming — it would be pretty fun up there.”

“I lost some respect for some guys,” Trout said. “… All the stuff coming out, it’s tough to see.”

I must admit all I can think of when I read this is what people used to say about facing legendary fastball pitcher Walter Johnson: “You knew what was coming but so what?” but I digress.

People think that the World Series should be taken away but I disagree. The seven games were played (four of them in LA) and the results were the results. I don’t believe in rewriting history.

But I do see the point that the players who actually cheated are getting away Scott free so I have a simple suggestion.

Negative numbers.

As a punishment for their cheating I would require any player on the Houston Astros 2017 season who was on the roster prior to the September call-ups to wear a negative number on their uniform.

This has several advantages

  1. It punishes specifically the players actually involved in the scandal, not others who have joined the team later on and might get tarred.
  2. It’s a punishment that can follow a player to whatever team he is on.
  3. It provides a strong negative incentive for future players to avoid cheating in the future.
  4. It doesn’t punish the scouts or the fans or the lower levels of the organisation that had nothing to do with said scandal.
  5. It is a sanction that while embarrassing doesn’t impede a players ability to make a living. He can still be signed by anyone, play for anyone.
  6. It is an incentive for a sanctioned player to work harder. If I was made to do such a thing I’d bust my butt to put up numbers to prove that I didn’t need that edge to produce.
  7. It would actually create interest in the production of said players and thus interest in the game
  8. Finally it’s a sanction that can be lifted from individual players based on the judgement of the Commissioner’s office.

Frankly I think this is a punishment that would be a great standard punishment for those who cheat in any sport across the board.

If MLB and the players union want to get beyond this scandal I submit and suggest my solution is the best one out there.

I still think they should raise the mound anyway.

“At Least I’m not a Communist” (Who I will totally vote for if Nominated)

Posted: February 19, 2020 by datechguy in elections, politics, primaries
Tags: ,

People are having a lot of fun with James Carville’s back and forth with Bernie Sanders particularly this bit

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

but while folks are enjoying it they seem to be missing the most significant part of it.

It’s no secret that Bernie Sanders is at best a socialist, and at worst a communist. Sanders honeymooned in the USSR while it was still the USSR (think Having a honeymoon in Berlin 1938). Has defended every single socialist dictator that has arisen over the last 50 years and even has a crew of supporters who, as Project Veritas has pointed out, not only downplay the evils of Communism but long to put the Gulags in play here in the US.

Meanwhile his agenda thanks to a lot of money that has been thrown around the University System over the last few decades (after all for the price of one Big missile you can by a ton of academics and unlike bombs they can be used over and over for a multiplying effect) has become the agenda of the Democrat party. If you look at Elizabeth Warren, Pete Buttigieg and Amy Klobuchar positions you will see almost no sunlight between them and Bernie.

Enter James Carville.

Carville is a member of a species that used to inhabit the Jim Crow south but has now migrated to the large cities, a “yellow dog” democrat. The term meaning that such a person would vote for a yellow dog rather than any republican.

For Mr. Carville his party affiliation is his public religion. To him the election of Democrats on the local, state and national level supersedes everything outside of his household and thanks to his age, cultural background and marriage he is that rare modern Democrat who exists outside of the bubble so many in the media/hollywood/academic left do.

He understands that socialism and communism do not play outside of the enclaves of academia or the rich elites who uses it as a way to signal virtue and that to embrace this path can doom the party not only on the presidential level but all the way down to the state and local races.

To quote:

We have candidates on the debate stage talking about open borders and decriminalizing illegal immigration. They’re talking about doing away with nuclear energy and fracking. You’ve got Bernie Sanders talking about letting criminals and terrorists vote from jail cells. It doesn’t matter what you think about any of that, or if there are good arguments — talking about that is not how you win a national election. It’s not how you become a majoritarian party.

Note the argument here, the crime isn’t doing any of these things, it’s TALKING ABOUT THEM, but it’s the next answer that’s key here.

I’ve been clear about this: If Bernie is the nominee, I’ll vote for him. No question. I’ll take an ideological fanatic over a career criminal any day. But he’s not a Democrat.

Now think about that for a second, James Carville openly and publicly calls Bernie Sanders a Communist with all the historical connotations that involves but also says publicly on the record that he will vote for him over Donald Trump who he dubs a “career criminal” (although I’m wondering if he had that same opinion before 2012?).

Now you might ask yourself “DaTechGuy, why would he publicly state that he’ll vote for a communist if nominated by the Democrats in 2020? Why isn’t he ‘Never Bernie’?”

Well he gave the answer to that question later in that same interview:

The purpose of a political party is to acquire power. All right? Without power, nothing matters.

And that dear friends is utilitarian Marxism boiled down, period.

Carville cares about power, he sees Bernie as an obstacle to power so he must be stopped before he is the nominee, but once nominated is the only path to power so he must be supported, no matter what.

That is what the Democrat party has become, we might debate when it became this (I realized it back in the 1990’s when I left) but that’s where it is.

Update: Fun tweet via Instapundit:

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

The truth is to the Democart/Media/Left a candidate who is a socialist or a communist leading the ticket like Harvey Weinstein, Matt Lauer et/al is not a crisis unless the voting public find out about it.

The Case for Getting Rid of the CIA and the FBI

Posted: February 18, 2020 by julietteochieng in Always look at the bright side of Trump, Uncategorized, Uncomfortable Truths
Tags: , , , , ,

by baldilocks

This morning, I shared this very long piece by Angelo Codevilla, who outlines what close observers have figured out for themselves.

What, then, is CIA good for?

Its founding myth combines a historical falsehood with reference to technical circumstances that have not existed for at least a generation. (…)

The truth that analysis of Intelligence must include a multiplicity of sources, and that a central repository of information is needed for that, was always the strongest argument for the existence of some sort of central facility where “all source analysis” could be done. But, since at least the 1980s, computers have made it possible and imperative for all analysts, regardless of their location, to access everything securely. Nowadays, ironically, CIA’s insistence on managing the access and distribution of information is the biggest barrier to universal, all-source Intelligence analysis.

Today, CIA is good for confidential meetings with the New York Times, the Washington Post, NBC News, etc., through which it joins—if it does not lead—campaigns to shape domestic American opinion.

What is the FBI good for?

Once upon a time, FBI foreign counterintelligence officers were cops first. Like all good cops, they knew the difference between the people on whose behalf they worked, and those who threaten them. They had graduated from places like Fordham, a Catholic, blue-collar university in the Bronx. Like T.V.’s Sergeant Joe Friday, they wore white shirts and said yes, sir, yes, ma’am. Unlike CIA case officers, FBI officers mixed with the kinds of people they investigated, and often went undercover themselves. The FBI jailed Capone and dismantled the Mafia. Because it used to take counterintelligence seriously, it was able to neutralize Soviet subversion in the USA. The old joke was that, in any meeting of the U.S. Communist Party or of its front groups, a majority of attendees were FBI agents. The only U.S. Intelligence penetration of the Kremlin was the FBI’s recruitment of a U.S. labor activist whom high-level Soviets trusted.

In the late 1970s, that began to change. Director William Webster (1978-87) refused to back up the officers who had infiltrated and surveilled the New Left’s collaboration with the Soviets against America in the Vietnam War. Webster also introduced contemporary political correctness into the FBI. Asked by the Senate Intelligence Committee why his FBI had neither infiltrated nor disrupted the Jim Jones cult that resulted in the deaths of 900 Americans in Jonestown, Guyana, he answered that he would no more have interfered with that religion than with the Catholic Church. Not incidentally, the Jim Jones cult was associated with the Democratic party.

Thus FBI officers became standard bureaucrats who learned to operate on the assumption that all Americans were equally likely as not to be proper targets of investigation. They replaced the distinctions by which they had previously operated with the classic bureaucratic imperative: look out for yourselves by making sure to please the powerful.

Take a cup of coffee or tea and read the whole thing. And I should point out that I’m old enough to remember when it was considered paranoid and crazy to believe that the intelligence agencies were domestic enemies of the American people.

Their concerted efforts against Donald Trump, however, have turned out to be a vast miscalculation.

Do I think that these agencies could be scrapped? Yes, but one might liken it to surgical removal of an aggressive cancer: expensive and painful, the body will need time to recover, and the surgeons will have to monitor the patient for new growth.

It can be fixed but it will never be over.

Juliette Akinyi Ochieng has been blogging since 2003 as baldilocks. Her older blog is here.  She published her first novel, Tale of the Tigers: Love is Not a Game in 2012.

Follow Juliette on Facebook, Twitter, MeWe, Patreon and Social Quodverum.

Hit Da Tech Guy Blog’s Tip Jar !

Or hit Juliette’s!

Older Entries
Newer Entries