When a word comes too close to actually identifying an inconvenient reality, secular progressives spring into action. The offending word is either redefined or reduced its first letter, thereby signifying that polite society will no longer accept it. You’ve heard of the N word, the B word (think Hillary) and now comes the S word.
By its abbreviation, the S word, formerly known as socialism, infers a negative connotation. A negative connotation richly deserved due to the incontrovertible fact that socialism has failed every where it has been tried.
In a nutshell, socialism is an economic system where property is held in common, not individually, and its ideal is a centrally directed economy. Socialism entails the substitution of group decision making for individual choice. In this case, the ‘group’ making the decisions are the 32 (and counting) unelected and unaccountable czars Obama is anointing.
The origins of socialist thought come directly from Aristotle. Aristotle believed that since only actions aiming at a perceived benefit to others were, to his mind, morally approved, then actions solely for personal gain (capitalism) must be bad.
This theory of Aristotle’s is the basic premise of the Obama administration. By claiming the ‘moral high ground’ of the ‘greater good’ Obama and his minions have free reign to radically alter both our system of government and the hundreds of years of tradition it represents.
Under the guise of altruism and the greater good, Obama has launched a full scale attack on capitalism. The very capitalism that has fed the world for decades. The capitalism that has produced the highest standard of living in the freest and most productive country in the world. But, according to the ruling elite, capitalism is bad, because it entails, gasp, ‘profit’. And every progressive worth his salt knows profit is only possible on the backs of less fortunate. Right?
Obama and the secular progressives who now determine policy in America pride themselves on being the intellectual representatives of modern thought and thus superior in knowledge, wisdom and moral virtue than those who hold traditional values (conservatives). They believe their duty is to offer new ideas to the public and deride whatever is conventional and/or traditional. Newness, not truth, is their main value.*
The fly in Obama’s ointment is the fact that the system of socialism isn’t very good at creating wealth. Only individuals do that. But hey, socialism is ‘ethically superior’ and that’s what counts. Right?
Obama was voted into office based on his skill at selling abstract ideas like equality and justice. Millions of Americans bought into his spiel. Most likely the very same Americans who buy lottery tickets. Against all reason, they were led to believe that the government can provide them a free lunch. And there will be no cost to them. And best of all, these moochers can also claim the moral high ground. After all, they are victims of rich capitalists. And that’s not fair! And its not their fault that they haven’t won life’s lottery.
The problem with their premise can be reduced to two words. Free will. God gave us free will – the ability to fail or succeed based on the choices we make. Obama proposes to do away with free will and vest those decisions in a central government.
Losers can now breathe a sigh of relief. Whew. Now, instead of losers, they’re much valued victims. And the new socialist society Obama and friends are in the process of implementing has a moral duty to shield them from the consequences of their bad choices. But best of all, socialism allows life’s losers the moral high ground as they systematically plunder the fruits of another man’s labor.
This is socialism. This is what President Obama wants America to be. But students of history insist on asking the question: How long can a society survive that rewards failure and punishes success? Unfortunately, America will get an answer to that question if Obama is allowed to continue transforming our country into his ‘new and improved’ idea of a socialist utopia.
Crossposted from Right Bias
Socialism could probably work in a small community where people not pulling their share of the work load could be banished from the group. But to try it on a national scale would simply create groups who would not do their share and would be happy with situation. What could we do with people who have many babies with no way of providing for them? In a socialist society WE would provide for them for the rest of their lives like we do now. What of innovation and invention? Who would waste their time and money on such things if they would reap no reward for their efforts? It amazes me that rational people can debate this issue and not see the failed attempts in the past. It is very similar to universal health care. It will work for a while and then the bill is presented to the grownups. There is not enough money in the world to make it work.
Its actually a very simple equations… fits handily on bumper-stickers and protest signs alike…
SOCIALISM = SLAVERY
Socialism has Never worked Anywhere as History has proven.
It is not working here under the current merry band of “Progressives” (?)
Call them Communists for what they are and what they are trying to Do to Us.
The final billing is not in yet but You are not going to like it.
This is a sad misinterpretation of Aristotelian philosophy.
Aristotle’s ethics were centered around the happiness and self-fulfillment of the individual. He recognized man as a social animal, but certainly never advised that we live for others. That could more properly be attributed to Plato — in whose philosophy, I suspect, lie the roots of Mr. Obama’s hare-brained ideas.
Sorry Nancy this simply is not true. I’m with Craig on this one, although it would even be a stretch for me to compare Obama with Plato, at least in a “people” kind of way.
Bottom line, Obama is no Aristotle. Even the term “socialism” is a bit mild for him, as he is truly a Marxist, although all lead to communism eventually. If there is any ‘philosophy’ to associate with Obama it’s Black Liberation Theology (as in Rev. Wright), which of course, is “disguised Marxism.”
All said, there is ONE place in the world that socialism actually does work, and that place is a religious monastery. If anyone remembers the movie ‘Into Great Silence’, that would be a perfect example of “socialism working for the greater good.” The thing to remember is that it’s all voluntary, and the group is small. Monastic life of course, is a place “where few men are called”; the epitome of selflessness, as they give up their lives (as in detaching from the world), to pray for the world, i.e., the beating heart of mankind. (That only can mean something to those who understand the power of prayer)
For what it’s worth, I’ve been to a few monasteries, and the joy & peace of the monks is well, “heavenly.” So I’m here to tell ya, in this limited situation, and by free will, socialism DOES work.
I do agree Nancy that capitalism in America is in great peril. The fact that not a penny of ‘stimulus’ money has been given to small business folks is all one needs to know that the goal of Obama is NOT to stimulate the economy or promote capitalism. I’ve always agruged that Obama’s goal is to DESTROY the economy.
I guess Hayek must have been wrong – in his book The Errors of Socialism’, he traced socialism back to Aristotle.
Looking around I haven’t seen a single true socialist government that can also be called “ethical”. Most are oppressive, totalitarian, taking freedoms as the elite will and abusive of it’s power. Theoretical socialism only works if ALL the citizens are treated treated equal. So long as they have a wealthy elite hierarchical class, it might as well be called feudalism.