The collectivist ideologies have left a trail of death and destruction for centuries, isn’t it time to be rid of them as a viable form of government?
“A society based on the freedom to choose is better than a society based on the principles of socialism, communism and coercion.” – Milton Friedman
Why the economic slavery of Socialism, etc. need to be eliminated
Since the Socialist-Left insists on recycling the absurd idea of abolishing the economic liberty of the Free-Market [Or their pejorative terminology ‘capitalism’] why not consider the reverse position of abolishing the economic slavery of Socialism? The means scraping it’s dizzying array of alternate labels which all can be included ‘collectively’ as: Socialism, etc.
We will make the case for the abolition of theses ideologies and the keeping of economic liberty. This will be built upon three main parts. The first will be an examination of the age of experimentation of governance and why the best forms should be kept and the worst rejected. The second will be a brief overview of the history of the collectivist ideologies and why its variations of failure make the case for their abolition. Finally we will examine the sins of socialism, etc., as a basis for humanity rejecting collectivism.
The age of experimentation of governance
It could be argued that the past few centuries since the dawn of the industrial revolution have been a crucible for the refinement of how people can govern themselves. Agriculture had originally made it more advantageous for people to live in groups and governments were instituted to protect property and bring order out of chaos. The industrial age saw the creation of new forms of governance with some being far more successful than others. Now is the time to consider which of these should be utilized and which should be relegated to the ash heap of history.
The origin of collectivist ideologies could be traced back to ancient times exemplified with the expression of the ideas in the works of Plato. These were followed centuries later with Thomas More’s seminal work ‘Utopia’ published more than 500 years ago in 1516. Even the Marxists have acknowledged that this 500 year old tome was the first ‘genuinely socialist position’.
The collectivist fantasy world envisioned in the book didn’t have to accede to the flaws and foibles of the reality of imperfect human beings, thus it could be a perfect society. This tendency to assume that fanciful theoretical constructs can work the real world is a common denominator with the Socialist-Left. This is partially how they can explain away the repeated failures of their base ideology down through the centuries. Since there can never be a melding of the real world and the theoretical, they always have a ready made excuse for why it’s never worked.
These Utopian fantasies are postulated on the idea that human beings can be made perfect and thus can be the basis of a perfect society. History should teach us that this is an impossible task because people will always have flaws and imperfections. Collectivists of the past have tried to reform people into perfect beings through various means and have always failed. Governmental systems that take into account that people are imperfect are far more successful.
While the Socialist-Left would like people to think that it’s tired old concepts are ‘fresh’, ‘scientific’ and the wave of the future, the plain fact is that they are centuries old with a consistent history of incessant failure. This contention is rather ironic given that experimentation in the collectivist forms of governance were some of the first new forms and prevalent within the historic record of the past few centuries.
It is also supremely ironic that the first trial runs of the failed collectivist ideologies took place in the Americas, given that these ideas are now thought of as new and originating in Europe. The first colonies in the new world of Jamestown and Plymouth practised a disastrous form of collectivism that saw the first vestiges of death that has plagued that ideology since it’s inception. The fruits of everyone’s labour were placed in a common store, and since there was no advantage to work the results were pitiful and the people starved. It was only after the protection of private property whereby people were able to keep their earnings that the colonies flourished.
Of course, the rest of the story was that the colonies formed a nation and won their independence. Thankfully, the founding fathers were learned men and they studied what works and what does not and brought forth the best form of government ever created. Their study of the works of John Locke and Charles de Montesquieu taught them to restrain the government and ‘provide new guards for their future security’.
The representative republic they created is the best form of governance by far, and it’s track record speaks for itself. The Socialist-left is constantly disavowing it’s string of past failures with repetition of the lie ‘that wasn’t real socialism’ or that ‘Socialism has never really been tried’. No one has ever said that about a representative republics, that alone should point to that form of government being the best and that the collectivist ideologies being the worst.
The true genius of the founding fathers was that they understood the basic forms of government and selected the best for the new nation. Thomas Jefferson wrote the following encapsulation of the three types of government in a letter to James Madison, in 1787:
“Societies exist under three forms sufficiently distinguishable. 1. Without government, as among our Indians. 2. Under governments wherein the will of every one has a just influence, as is the case in England in a slight degree, and in our states in a great one. 3. Under governments of force: as is the case in all other monarchies and in most of the other republics.
History has taught us that the second type is the best form. It should also be clear that the collectivist forms fall into the third category given that they depend on force to impose collective instead of individual rights.
The collectivist ideologies depend on force to redistribute property.
Force and coercion are the only way to control people and properly redistribute their wealth. At some point the guns have to come out to pay for all the free-stuff promised by the Socialist-Left, that is the ugly truth of Socialism, etc. and the collectivist ideal. It is also the reason the Socialist-Left has to couch it’s ideology in terms of ‘freedom’ and ‘equality’. But just like it’s pretence of creating a perfect society, those two concepts are incompatible.
“Human beings are born with different capacities. If they are free, they are not equal. And if they are equal, they are not free.” ― Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
We need to recognize the true genius of the founding fathers in what they created. The government they formulated has served us well for over 240 years. No government or society can ever be perfect, because they are based on imperfect beings. The collectivist forms are based on the arrogant but impossible idea that people and societies can somehow be perfected. History teaches us that these beliefs will lead to simple failure in the best case scenario, and concentration camps and mass murder in the worst. This is why these ideologies need to be eliminated as viable forms of government.
PragerU: As the Rich Get Richer, the Poor Get Richer
The rich are getting richer, and the poor are… also getting richer. What’s driving this wealth creation process? In this video, Daniel Hannan explains why it is capitalism — and capitalism alone — that has led to the unprecedented enrichment that is the central fact of Western life.
Published: Apr 9, 2018
The Republican Party showed its true stripes and proved David Leach right all along
Over the recent years, the Republican Party told us that they needed control of the House. We gave them the House. Then they said we can’t do enough, we need the Senate. We gave them the Senate. Then they said we can’t do enough, we need the White House. We gave them the White House, even if it’s not the guy they really want. But now I turn on the cable news shows and they now say they just have a thin majority.
Can’t the Republican Party make some kind of stand for little “r” republicanism? Can’t it make a stand for conservatism? Can’t it make a statement for liberty and freedom? Can’t it make a statement for private property rights? Now it needs a greater majority that is basically mission impossible, especially in the Senate.
The Republicans overwhelmingly have decided to pass the omnibus bill which was put together by mostly progressive thinking lobbyists. Granted military spending will be increased but so will the Democrats beloved welfare programs which they have used to buy votes and gain more and more power. It will also fund Planned Parenthood which in spite of shining a light on shady dealings of fetal parts, getting abortions for underage girls under the table, or not really investing in pap smears or mammograms as it will continue to keep its bread and butter of pre-born baby murder going strong. I really believe that many politicians in both parties benefit from abortion due to the fact they seek constant sexual flings with just about any women who work under them as these young ladies try to move ahead in their careers.
The Democrat leaders Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer (his pet projects will be funded) are so happy with this bill cause they know it’s only going to benefit Washington and the Democrat Party.
For all the faults Rand Paul has, including his support of Mitch McConnell’s last election campaign, I have to give him credit for speaking out against this current omnibus spending bill. It seems that if the Democrats want to spend more of the taxpayers’ money it is wrong. If the Republicans want to spend more money, than its OK…but it should not be OK.
Sadly conservatives who have not read Pastor Cary Gordon’s book A Storm A Message A Bottle http://cornerstoneworld.org/a_storm_a_message_a_bottle or watched his series of animated videos Five Steps to Political Epiphany. http://stepstopoliticalepiphany.com/ They will protest the election by sitting out the election, instead of using their write-in blank or third-party options since Duverger’s law forbids this. Meanwhile, President Trump might go down in history as the bigger spender than Barack Obama.
We can’t any longer tolerate any more excuses. Regardless if the Democratic left is in the majority or the minority they seem to have the power in the elected branches of government. They have the power in other areas of government no matter what. We can learn one thing from Bible Believing Christians when they start a new denomination when breaking away from a bigger one. They break away because the establishment in the old denomination they are breaking away from does not repent of their apostasy (while claiming new truths). They try and they try, but like the American Gladiator event Pyramid they just knock you down to the bottom time and again. The only thing you can do is to let them go their way and let the denomination implode as they try to prevent themselves from being corrupted. It proves Jesus that you can’t put new wine into old sheepskins. We must do the same thing and try to build a new political party that can replace the Republican Party. The Grand Old Party is not what it used to be.
Mr. President, you made a choice and that choice was to sign the bill and take what you can get. Conservatives like myself, Steve Deace and Mark Levin, would call this a betrayal of conservatism. Either you are naive and/or a fool about politics, or a true charlatan, or something in between. All I can say to you is only “proved” that Benjamin Wilhelm and David Leach correct, and it will show in this midterm election. You screwed the pooch just as the Republican Party elite has done many times before, and the Democrats wildest dreams are coming true. Your likely impeachment, single-party rule, making America a new Soviet Union or some kind of socialist experiment, and the Democrats desire to become Demi-Gods.
Your own words you said on TV so many times are coming back right at you like a boomerang…”You’re Fired.”
The Money Pit: California’s not-so-high-speed rail
Have you heard this story, a couple finds a million dollar distress sale mansion on the market for a mere $200,000? Some upgrades are needed, but overall it’s a bargain. What ensues is comedic brilliance as the owners find out the house is barely standing. They pour more and more money into the house in the classic Tom Hank’s comedy “The Money Pit.”
Just like this movie, the California High-Speed Rail has become our Money Pit, but unlike the movie, this is no laughing matter.
In 2008, California voters approved Proposition 1A, a $9.95 billion bond to partially fund an 800-mile high-speed electric train traveling up to 220 mph. The goal would be that the state would fund a third, one-third by the federal government, and the last third via private investment. Total cost was estimated at $35 billion.
What has transpired since 2008? No more federal funding and no private funding. From 800-miles we went to 520 miles, as a cost savings measure. From 220 mph we are at 110 mph in large sections of the rail, to save money of course, and a possible completion date of 2020, is now estimated to be completed by 2033.
With all these cost-saving measures you would assume the cost would come down. Unfortunately, for California taxpayers, this money pit keeps getting worse.
The price tag for all these cost-saving measures brought to you by the California High-Speed Rail Authority and the California Legislature is currently estimated at $77.3 billion. But wait you want more savings and fiscal responsibility, too bad, because this $77.3 billion estimate may ultimately cost California taxpayers $98.1 billion. My prediction is it will be even higher.
At this point, it might be cheaper and faster to build a Death Star instead. Not to mention more useful.
This is not what the voters were promised. We did not approve a not-so-high-speed train with a price tag most likely ten times the initial projected cost to California taxpayers.
This boondoggle of a money pit must be stopped. Those billions can be used to help repair our roads, highways, bridges, dams, water reservoirs, and critical infrastructure.
If elected to be California’s next State Controller and Chief Financial Officer, I will look at all legal means to cut funding to this project. In my opinion, if we bought one thing and are getting something else, then the authorization to fund this project has not been authorized by the people, and thus the Controller may have the legal authority to stop payment until the project complies with Proposition 1A.
I hope, I won’t have to do this, and the Legislature does its job and kills this project. This shouldn’t be a partisan issue. We made a promise to taxpayers to be good stewards of their trust and money. Let’s restore that trust and do the right thing, and let’s put an end to this money pit.