Connect with us

Culture and Religion

The Top 5 Reasons Socialism Isn’t Cool

Published

on

Back on Martin Luther King day the ever so ‘Objective’ CNN put out a piece of propaganda that is sadly typical of the Socialist-left these days containing the spurious assertion that MLK “was a socialist before it was cool” http://www.cnn.com/2018/01/12/us/mlk-relevance-today/index.html?

The first part of that assertion is quite dubious considering these quotations from his writings:

“In communism the individual ends up in subjection to the state.” Martin Luther King, Jr.

“This deprecation of individual freedom was objectionable to me. I am convinced now, as I was then, that man is an end because he is a child of God. Man is not made for the state; the state is made for man. To deprive man of freedom is to relegate him to the status of a thing, rather than elevate him to the status of a person. Man must never be treated as a means to the end of the state, but always as an end within himself.”  – Martin Luther King, Jr.

However, we shall address the second part of that assertion, similarly to the “5 Reasons Why Che’s Not Cool”  posted on the Dissident.

First of all, we see the typical self serving arrogance of the national Socialist Left in presuming that their base ideology is somehow ‘cool’. Being that it was established on ancient ideas and the ‘first socialist position’ of the book Utopia published in 1516, these tired old collectivist ideas could hardly be considered ‘cool’ by any stretch of the imagination. Except perhaps by those attempting to sell it to a new generation who neglect to mention its back story of oppression and mass murder.

1. The collectivist ideology’s are generally fostered by a system of lies and falsehoods.

Socialists tend to unfairly equate it’s lofty (and never realised) theoretical ideals with the practical reality of the free-market. However, that deception only scratches the surface in how they try to sell their base ideology. The free-market system of economic liberty is founded upon voluntary interactions, while the collectivist ideologies are set on strict control of the economy and the compulsory property redistribution. This collectivist reality hides behind flowery language of ‘equality’ and ‘fairness’ and has to be concealed whenever possible along with the darker aspects of Leftist ideology.

2. 500 year old ideas are hardly considered to be ‘cool’

As previously mentioned, the collectivist ideology’s are based upon ideas that harken back over 500 years. While the Socialist-Left loves to perpetrate the falsehood that it’s ideas are fresh and new and therefore ‘cool’, this is hardly the case. While many historians postulate that these ideas can be sourced in ancient times, they were most certainly expressed over 500 years ago in the book ‘Utopia’ [a word coined for the title of the book that literally means ‘no place’] This was a time centuries before the modern era when slavery was still in acceptance, would CNN also consider that to be ‘cool’ as well?

3. Collectivist ideologies are immoral.

Ben Shapiro has made this point many times over in his trenchant evisceration’s of these ideologies. In essence, the socialist’s ‘moral’ position is that ‘I exist, therefore you owe me a living’. In the addled mindset of the collectivist this type of ‘logic’ falls right in line with their absurd notions of ‘fairness’ and ‘equality’. The fact is that living beings since the dawn of time have had to provide for themselves. Every living thing from bacteria to brontosaurs have had to ‘work’ to survive and yet the collectivists want to turn this basic fact of life on it’s head and absurdly blame it on the free-market.

They try to use this to justify the morally bankrupt practice of stealing from those who provide for themselves and buy votes from those who do not. As is typical of the moral inversions of the Socialist-Left, wealth redistribution is considered to be acceptable while keeping one’s hard earned property is somehow ‘theft’. Witness the hyperbolic statements used by the Socialist-Left to describe tax-cuts

4. The parasitic nature of the Collectivist ideologies eviscerates any pretence of their being ‘state of the art’ or new.

Socialism is far from being ‘cool’ in that it parasitically takes from the free-market. Those parts of popular culture that are ‘cool’ are taken to be cutting edge, state of the art and new. Being over 500 years old destroys part of this contention. Socialism’s inherently parasitic nature is also at odds with those qualities in that it has to use that which was produced by the free-market. To paraphrase Margaret Thatcher, the problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people’s money.

Most, if not all technologies developed by these collectivist systems are copies of that which was created under the auspices of the economic liberty of the free-market. During the ‘Great Patriotic war’ [WWII] The ‘Soyuz Sovetskikh Sotsialisticheskikh Respublik’ couldn’t manage to build a decent 4 engine bomber, so they copied the genius of many a Boeing engineer in the B-29 Superfortress down to minuscule repairs.

5. Mass murder and oppression on an Industrial scale.

It should go without saying that the force that has to be utilised in the implementation of the collectivist ideologies could hardly be consider to be ‘cool’. Have these approbation’s ever been applied to the ‘final solution’ or the Gulag Archipelago?

Collectivist ideologies are based upon a theoretical world of perfect beings. The ‘first socialist position’ had a Utopia where everyone worked as they were supposed to do while they only took that which they needed from the storehouses. The real world doesn’t work that way, but the Socialist-Left has the misguided idea that their theoretical model of a perfect collectivist society is possible – and just around the next corner. The problem with an ideology based on perfect human behaviour is that one has to quickly penalise those who don’t get with the program to the point of getting rid of them permanently, to the tune of over 100 Million dead. But that doesn’t quite fit into the glossy brochures handed out to potential supporters, and once again we harken back to reason number one and the ‘that wasn’t real socialism’ excuse.

The Takeaway

It’s not surprising that those of the nation’s Socialist-Left tend to self-servingly label their base ideology as ‘cool’ since it’s reality is much darker. It can only survive by deception and distraction from it’s true nature, that should be the first criteria for it’s rejection. If one has to incessantly lie about the true nature of their ideology, they are doing it wrong – this includes the tiresome ‘that wasn’t really collectivism excuse’ so often heard. Any ideology that is based on mass murder on an industrial scale should be roundly rejected as a viable governmental model, no matter how many times it’s proponents label it as ‘cool’.

Differential equations teaches us that one can use the initial conditions of the present to extrapolate events in the near term balanced with the knowledge of the past. The interaction of technological advances and the march of history is fascinating. History can inform those willing to listen as to what will happen in the future because the laws of human natural are as immutable as the elegant equations of Newtonian physics.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Culture and Religion

Media: Please stop bringing Fame to mass murderers with the Gratuitous use of their Names and Imagery.

Published

on

By

It is time that we stop glamorising killers with unnecessary media fanfare    #NoFame4Killers

Saying that the Socialist-Left wants a certain level of violence to push gun control will always result in a lot of wailing and gnashing of teeth. Still, it’s hard to shake that conclusion when it comes to the idea of refusing to bring fame to mass murderers. Studies have shown that these killers inspire others to copy their horrid acts, so it’s only logical that cutting down their media exposure would help alleviate the problem.

Proving the point is the report in the Miami Herald that: There have been threats of violence at 12 U.S. schools, at least, since Fla. Shooting, Including an arrest of a high school student who threatened ‘Round 2’ of Florida Shooting as reported at Tme.com

Consider a 2015 study from researchers at Arizona State University and Northeastern Illinois University reported in the PLOS journal, concluding that:

We find significant evidence that mass killings involving firearms are incented by similar events in the immediate past. On average, this temporary increase in probability lasts 13 days, and each incident incites at least 0.30 new incidents (p = 0.0015). We also find significant evidence of contagion in school shootings, for which an incident is contagious for an average of 13 days, and incites an average of at least 0.22 new incidents (p = 0.0001).

To make it perfectly clear, we are not talking about keeping this information secret or censoring the media. The data should be available in certain places in the media – a dispassionate recitation of the facts of the crime, to keep conspiracy theories and other such nonsense at bay. But there is no logical reason to make a mass murderer famous for the sake of clicks or ratings.

Nor is this a call for government intervention, this is more like a “gentlemen’s agreement” (or gentlewoman’s as the case may be) to stop gratuitously promoting these killers. It’s about denying fame to cowardly murderers who are the worst of the worst, nothing more, nothing less.

Consider that the experts in the field have detailed the extensive planning and preparation these mass murderers that proceeding through five distinct phases. This article published in PoliceOne.com detailed these stages: 5 phases of the active shooter: A tactical reload

1. Fantasy Phase
2. Planning Phase
3. Preparation Phase
4. Approach Phase
5. Implementation Phase

Are we to believe that the “Columbine effect” doesn’t factor in these stages?
In addition, are we to believe that in the Left’s magical “Gun-Free” Utopian fantasy land, that criminals of this type wouldn’t find alternative methods of mass murder?

Both sides of the political aisle have championed this have idea. It was extensively discussed on the Glenn Beck Radio program: Logic and Reason Needed, As well as the publication ‘Mother Jones’.  While we loathe to link to them, they did offer some useful tips to alleviate this deadly problem:

Report on the perpetrator forensically and with dispassionate language. Avoid terms like “lone wolf” and “school shooter,” which may carry cachet with young men aspiring to attack. Instead use “perpetrator,” “act of lone terrorism,” and “act of mass murder.”

Minimise use of the perpetrator’s name. When it isn’t necessary to repeat it, don’t. And don’t include middle names gratuitously, a common practice for distinguishing criminal suspects from others of the same name, but which can otherwise lend a false sense of their importance.

Keep the perpetrator’s name out of headlines. Rarely, if ever, will a generic reference to him in a headline be any less practical.

Minimize use of images of the perpetrator. This is especially important both in terms of aspiring copycats’ desire for fame, and the psychology of vulnerable individuals who identify with mass shooters.

When both ends of the political spectrum agree on something that is so basic and eminently obvious, everyone should take notice. But then again, maybe there are those who really want a certain level of violence, who would prefer to tilt at the windmill of gun control and never really solve anything.

 

 

 

 

 

Continue Reading

Culture and Religion

Don’t Ever Let Anyone Mock You For Praying

Published

on

Yesterday’s shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, in Parkland, Florida, was a tragedy beyond words. As a parent myself, I can’t even begin to imagine what it would be like to lose a child. It almost sounds trite and overused to express our sympathy and express that the victims and their families remain in our thoughts.

And yes. They remain in our prayers.

One may ask, what can prayers do? Many on the Left question the benefits of prayer and even stoop to mocking it. After all, prayer is just a bunch of words, and represent a fig leaf for us creating real solutions to overcome gun violence.

But condemning prayer and assuming it means nothing misses its value entirely. The concept of prayer, particularly in Jewish philosophy, is recognition of our impotence and lack of control of the world. And that control or power rests, as I and others believe, with God.

Only He can regulate evil.

The great Jewish sage and philosopher Maimonides (Rabbi Moshe ben Maimon) states it this way:

“We are told to offer up prayers to G‑d, in order to establish firmly the true principle that G‑d takes notice of our ways, that He can make them successful if we serve Him, or disastrous if we disobey Him; that success and failure are not the result of chance or accident.”

In more banal terms, God does not need our prayers. Prayer is for our own benefit, to acknowledge that we depend on God for everything, from wealth to the food we eat every day.

How much more so for our lives as a whole.

However, it is also true that we do have free will. And the age-old question arrives, how can we exact free will if God controls the world and all its outcomes?

Countless commentaries tackle this question, but I believe that the answer is that we merely possess free will to control ourselves and our own actions. We cannot control the actions of others, because that would impede on their free will. It ultimately lies with each of us to be the most righteous or most evil people we can, or want to, be.

And sadly, but understandably, this is why we cannot control evil, and only God can.

But our power rests in connecting with our Father in Heaven, and beseeching Him for guidance in dealing with life situations and the pervasive evil that exists in our world. And that is through prayer.

Prayer is the closest thing we can do to regulate evil. And by reaching out to God, evil may be eradicated one day. We don’t know, precisely because we cannot control this. But at least, in our darkest hours like those our nation faced yesterday, we can depend on prayer to be the way we shape our outlook on the world. And that is indeed something worth praying for.


Follow Jeremy Frankel on Twitter @frankeljeremy.

Continue Reading

Culture and Religion

The Progressives and the Race Card

Published

on

The “race card” has been the left’s longtime weapon against conservatives. It must stop now, or America will be lost forever. Just as with other fallen nations and empires of ancient past.

For many years the left has accused the Republican party, conservatives and moreover, Bible-believing Christians of being racist and wanting to keep America purely Anglo white. Just recently Univision’s equivalent to Walter Cronkite, Jorge Ramos; just made a reviling statement during his appearance on CNN only proving the conservative right about the news media bias in favor of the Democratic Party and their agenda of supporting chain migration.

“They are not proposing immigration reform, they are proposing immigration revenge,” Ramos said. “Because they not only want to help the DACA students but also they want to have a wall, they want more border security, they want to end the so-called chain migration which is family reunification and then the visa lottery.”

However, as the truth gets out about the real history of the American progressives especially those involved in the Democrat party, the true racists proved to be the Democrats themselves. Before Hillary’s America: The Secret History of the Democratic Party which won Dinesh D’Souza four Golden Razzies (which he accepted with honors), the respected Steven Spielberg stayed true to history and showed the open display of racism and the advocacy of slavery that the Democrat party was supporting back in the days of Abraham Lincoln in his namesake 2012 film that Spielberg produced and directed.

In spite of these two films, the race card has been the best weapon that the Democrat progressive leftist to use against people who want to see a cap put on this chain immigration crisis in America. Those who want that cap are so afraid to be seen as bigots and people that hate blacks, Asians, Latinos, etc, etc. If we are going to preserve America and its founding principles we can no longer play defense on this issue. We must play offense, and the above movies I mentioned are a good start to use against the Democrat pravda machine.

I am convinced more than ever that the white progressives are not suffering from “white liberal guilt” nor do they really want to pay penance for own past sins nor the sins of what their movement and political party (the Democrats) has done in the past.

No, they show their true colors when they accuse us of doing what they have done and/or what the Democrats and other progressives of the past have done. History has shown to all of us that they are the racists, xenophobes or what other names they can throw at us hoping that it sticks. The biggest of this bunch at least in the 20th century are Woodrow Wilson and Lyndon Baines Johnson.

Wilson abandoned Biblical truth in favor of Darwinism and ushered that into Princeton University when he became president of that respected educational institution. LBJ was always a racist but like smoking the honeybees he knew to give the African-Americans enough money from the taxpayers to keep them quiet and have them vote Democrat for the next 200 years or so when he lost the civil rights fight in the 1960’s. Both were big-time racists and hated the negro citizen with a passion. Lest we forget that Wilson screened the pro-Ku Klux Klan movie “The Birth of a Nation” at the White House when he was POTUS.

As Christians we need to continue to preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ to the one and true single race…that being the “Human Race.”

God wants all humans to be saved by his son Jesus regardless of skin color or heritage (Mark 16:15). Yeshua did not just die for the Jews (his own people) and the white gentiles. He died for the black, the yellow, the red, the brown etc. etc. The Gospel is the one and only true melting pot while America’s version is a secondary one but based on the principles of the first one. The progressive’s gospel of diversity celebration and co-existence only creates a ‘salad bowl’ which only leads to more division among the citizenry and power-hungry tyrants ready to take control. That control is why they are currying favor among the minorities, and that will not end well for them or any of us who is not a politician or bureaucrat.


This piece was originally published in The Christian Post

Continue Reading

NOQ Report Daily

Advertisement

Facebook

Twitter

Advertisement

Trending

Copyright © 2017 NOQ Report.