Connect with us

Culture and Religion

Socialism stole my paycheck

Published

on

Socialism: ideas so good, they have to be mandatory.

I can’t help but think of this mantra as we approach the first Monday in September. Labor Day is the worst day of all the days. I hate Labor Day. The only positive aspect of this garbage holiday is that it proves the philosophical failings of Marx.

Some people enjoy taking the day off — I do in general, but not this one. Maybe I would if I actually got paid for it. This was a popular concern in the late 1800s when unions started pushing for the annual march that would eventually evolve into this beloved communist celebration. Many workers were unable to sacrifice their day’s wages, so unions lobbied to obligate certain industries to provide them anyway.

In response, Oregon became the first state to declare Labor Day a public holiday in 1887, and Grover Cleveland declared it a federal holiday in 1894.

Thus, federal employees are entitled to paid time off for Labor Day. Not private employees, though; that depends on the company and the benefits it offers. But I’ve never been a federal employee, and I’ve never been paid for taking Labor Day off nor allowed to spend the day at work regardless.

I haven’t been at my job long enough to qualify for holiday pay, and our building will be locked on Monday, costing me eight hours of precious income. I have a wife and small family; I need every hour I can get. Instead, I’m forced to celebrate workers’ rights by being forbidden from working.

Two seemingly contradictory rates of employment are on the rise in America: the amount of time employees spend in each job and the employees’ desire to start another one. Why do people stay somewhere longer than they would like when they want to leave even more than they used to? According to a 2012 report in Time, 60% of workers stay at their jobs for the benefits, the third most common reason behind enjoying the work and feeling that it fits well with other areas of their life (both 67%). But the top two reasons indicate workers who feel satisfied in their current position, so we might infer that the biggest motivator for those who dislike their jobs yet continue is the benefits. If we leave, we’ll have to start the clock over as we wait for PTO.

Now there are two questions I’m sure some of you will have: 1) Isn’t this an argument for more benefits (to keep workers satisfied) and not less? 2) Why hate Labor Day more than any other federal holiday that forces you to take time off and lose money?

I don’t blame private businesses for not offering holiday pay for every single employee — it would be financial suicide. As such, they have no reasonable choice but to limit benefits to workers putting in a certain amount of hours per week for a certain amount of months. No, I take issue with the Marxist mindset of America that our bosses owe us this time off, forcing even most private companies to close for the day, marginalizing those of us who don’t yet qualify for benefits. I’m fine with 98% of my co-workers taking the day off, but don’t lock me out; some of us actually want to work holidays, but we can’t.

That brings me to point number two: why I only hate Labor Day. I hate this holiday because of its oblivious irony. I gladly take time off from work to celebrate America’s independence, the sacrifice of the military, or the birth of the Savior by doing things related to that day — visiting cemeteries, spending time with family, singing carols, finding ways to serve others, and more. Taking time off in general is extremely beneficial for health, morale, and social interaction.

But I hate Labor Day because I’m forced to take the day off in celebration of the thing I’m forbidden to do: work. Get paid. Feel the satisfaction of a job well done, particularly one I didn’t like doing in the first place but I persevered and succeeded. I don’t actually have any transcendent principle or event to memorialize; it’s essentially just an extra Saturday. In celebrating workers’ rights, this worker has his right to work taken away by the Marxist’s veto.

So thanks a lot, socialist geniuses, for finding yet another way to squander my paycheck. Like the good little capitalist I am, I enjoy working and reaping the reward. And as a constitutional conservative, I value even more my right to associate with whom I please and form the contracts I desire with a consenting partner, no third party. If you have to force yourself in the middle of my interaction with my employer, then maybe your philosophy isn’t very attractive. Unions profess to be about workers’ rights but actually stifle them, which is why we call areas without mandatory union laws “right to work” states.

Marxists who claim to be helping, please don’t. Respect my right to work, my right to get paid for my labor as defined by my employment contract, and my right to ignore your stupid communist holiday and earn an honest living.

Richie Angel is a Co-Editor in Chief of The New Guards. Follow him and The New Guards on Twitter, and check out The New Guards on Facebook.

Advertisement

1 Comment

1 Comment

  1. L.

    September 6, 2017 at 6:35 pm

    lol. you do realize that Labor Day is the reactionary, right-wing version of May Day, yes? labor day has literally nothing to do with Marxism. socialists and communists celebrate “labor day” on May 1st, with the rest of the world.

Leave a Reply

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

Comment moderation is enabled. Your comment may take some time to appear.

Culture and Religion

Here is the definitive timeline for the Covington Catholic run in at the Lincoln Memorial

Published

on

By

Here is the definitive timeline for the Covington Catholic run in at the Lincoln Memorial

Glenn Beck put together the definitive video of what happened before the #MAGAkids incident.

[Language warning]

For those not of the Leftist Media who would like to get the full story of the #MAGAkids incident. Glenn Beck and his staff painstakingly went through all the available video to put together a timeline of what took place in the hours before the short, out of context video was recorded. It puts the controversy in perspective and answers the question of what happened.

Continue Reading

Culture and Religion

Roe vs. Wade 46 years later: Still the greatest liberties violation in US history

Published

on

Roe vs Wade 46 years later Still the greatest liberties violation in US history

Tuesday marked the 46th Anniversary of arguably the worst violation of individual liberties in American history.  It is truly amazing how people can argue that Roe vs. Wade was one of the greatest victories for women’s rights.

Let’s begin by looking at it from that perspective. Look at the number of abortions that occur in the United States today.  According to the statistics from the Center for Disease Control (CDC), there were an average of 1,788 abortions performed each DAY in the United States in 2014. That is an average of one abortion occurring every 48 seconds. Now, if we use the laws of averages and say that on average half of those unborn children (as there are only TWO biological genders), that means on an average day in 2014, 894 unborn women were denied an entire litany of their “Women’s Rights”.

Their future right to vote was taken away.

Their future right to marry whoever they see fit was taken away.

Their future right to pay equality was taken away.

Their future right to worship whatever religion they see fit was taken away.

Their future right of Freedom of Speech was taken away.

But the greatest travesty of all, the single greatest women’s right that they were denied, was the individual liberty that is more important than any of those.  They were denied the right to exist!

Now, let’s widen the scope a little bit more.  Let us look at the other side of the gender coin, the male gender.  As I previously stated, there were an average of 1,788 abortions performed each DAY in the United States in 2014.  That means there were an average 894 unborn men denied the same litany of their individual liberties.

Now, I am sure there are a number of feminist extremists who are perfectly fine with knowing that little tidbit of information.  But, doesn’t that beg the question, “What were those 894 unborn men destined for in the scope of history?”  Could one of them grown up to become the next Chief Justice William O. Douglas (a self-identified Democrat and one of the seven Supreme Court Justices that voted in favor of Roe vs. Wade). But then, you would have many of your militant feminists contend, “Well, many of those ‘men’ will more than likely grow up to be male chauvinist Republicans. Douglas was clearly an exception to the rule!”

My response is, “If they grew up to be Republicans, would that necessarily be a bad thing?  After all, when Roe vs. Wade was decided upon on January 22, 1973 it was a seven to two decision.  Of the seven Supreme Court Justices who found in favor, only two of them were self-identified Democrats.  Yes, that is right, five of the seven Supreme Court Justices that found in favor of Roe (whose real name was Norma McCorvey) were self-identified Republicans. (Just a side note, of the two dissenting Supreme Court Justices, one of them, Justice Byron White was a self-identified Democrat who was nominated by President John F. Kennedy.)

They also want to look into “ending most first-class travel for federal officeholders.” I wonder who will be exempt from being included into that “most.” Will Nancy Pelosi being flying coach with the rest of her voting constituency?

Next, let’s look at the racial aspect of the abortion topic.  Non-Hispanic Black women accounted for approximately 36% of the abortions in 2014; that is 644 unborn non-Hispanic Black children a day.  Which of those children could have grown up to be the next Martin Luther King Jr. or the next Thurgood Marshall (the only other self-identified Democrat to vote in support of Roe and the first African-American Supreme Court Justice).  That’s not to imply that the majority of abortions are by African American women, the majority of American abortions are by White American women with 38%.  It begs the question. Which of these could have grown up to be the next Eleanor Roosevelt?

What other future icons has the world been denied because they were aborted? How can people not ponder which of these unborn women could have grown up to be the next titan of industry like CJ Walker or would bring forward the next great leap in the world of medicine like Marie Curie? How many innovators like Steve Jobs, Emmy Noether or Alexander Fleming has the world been denied? Of Course, some content that abortion is a good thing in cases where modern medical technology has determined that the unborn child has a severe birth defect or will have a limited life-span due to a genetic medical condition.

Well, if Frank and Isobel Hawking had been convinced of this notion in 1942 the world would have never known the ground-breaking genius of Stephen William Hawking (one of the foremost minds in theoretical physics). Another argument used as a suggested acceptable circumstance to allow abortion is in the event of a woman being a victim of rape.  So, they are saying 16 year old Helen Burns should have chosen to have an abortion in 1941 when she was raped by her 33 year old neighbor.  Or Annie Mae Keith (a woman of African American and Cherokee decent) should have had an abortion when she was raped in 1926 by a white man.  If Helen Burns followed this mindset, the world would have never known civil rights figure Jesse Jackson.  As well, Annie May Keith adhering to this train of thought would have deprived the world of the vocal magic of legendary singer Eartha Kitt.

Many pro-choice supporters like to point to the unborn child as nothing more than a “lump of tissue” that is not an actual person because it could not survive outside the woman’s body.  My response is, that means the unborn child is no different than the woman.  If you deprive the woman of basic care, food and water, the woman would not survive either.

The other main argument of abortion is it is a “Woman’s Choice” to do with her body as she sees fit, and no one should be able to force their will on her body.  I just pose one question to those women, if that is the case, how is you imposing your will on the unborn child any different?

Nathan Cotus

Nathan Cotus on Facebook

Continue Reading

Culture and Religion

The complete fraud that is socialism

Published

on

By

The complete fraud that is socialism

Once again we are witness to the age-old scam of socialism with Leftists making promises to attain power that can never be fulfilled.

Long before Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn’s Gulag Archipelago exposed the systematic oppression, torture, incarceration and deliberate mass murder that are the hallmarks of socialistic slavery. James A. Michener documented the 1956 Hungarian uprising against communism in his book ‘The Bridge at Andau’. While both are great literary works, ‘The Bridge at Andau’ laid bare the complete fraud that is the collectivist ideologies in creating a ‘Heaven on Earth’ or ‘worker’s paradise’ that never comes to fruition.

The selling of socialistic slavery to a new generation tends to follow a certain type of ‘progress’. Promises are made for all kinds of largess ranging from Free Healthcare, Free Housing, Free College, Free food to even Free income. All paid for with other people’s money. Never mind that It’s impossible to fulfill all of these wondrous asseverations. Appearances must be made to at least begin the process, so the ever-present task of wealth redistribution begins at the point of a gun.

This is also why the Socialist-Left obsesses over gun confiscation and the suppression of free speech. It is imperative for the Leftists to disarm the people since they generally object to having their property stolen from them. However, we are getting ahead of ourselves, this is to document how this exploitation of the people has ‘progressed’ in other collectivist enclaves to better understand how this crime against the people is perpetrated.

Why do collectivist regimes always require secret police apparatus and the suppression of Liberty?

This question was detailed in The Bridge at Andau in the chapters on the ‘AVO man’. In which he discusses the secret police organisation of the Hungarian Communists, the AVO (Allamvedelmi Osztaly). He bluntly asked and answered the question:

Why must communism depend on such dregs of society?

No matter on what elevated plane communism begins its program of total dictatorship. it sooner or later runs into such economic and social problems that some strong-arm force is required to keep the civil population under control.

As is the case now as it was then, a nation’s Socialist-Left will promise just about anything to attain power over the people:

When communism is wooing the workers in Csepel, all kinds of exaggerated promises are made if they seem likely to awaken men’s aspirations and their cupidity. These promises are couched in such simple terms and such effective symbols that they become immediate goals of the revolution.

Review briefly what communist agitators had once promised the Hungarians who appear in this book: consumer goods such as they had never known before, increased wages. increased social benefits, shorter hours of work, improved education for everyone, a greater social freedom, and a government directly responsible to the working classes. Under communism such promises were never even remotely capable of attainment.

[Our Emphasis]
If all of that sounds eerily familiar, it’s because that’s part of a very old song and dance that has deceived many a generation into enslaving themselves under socialism. Consider this recent story from the Associated Press:

Democrats lurch left on top policies as 2020 primary begins

NEW YORK (AP) — Democratic presidential contender Julian Castro launched his campaign by pledging support for “Medicare for All,” free universal preschool, a large public investment in renewable energy and two years of free college for all Americans.
….

New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker, who is expected to launch his presidential campaign soon, has sponsored legislation to create a federal jobs guarantee program in several communities across America.

The pilot program… could ultimately transform the U.S. labor market by providing well-paid government employment with benefits for anyone who wants it.

[Our Emphasis]

As Margaret Thatcher so aptly surmised, eventually they will run out of other people’s money. In our case in the states, that is already the situation given the enormous debt and unfunded liabilities reaching into the stratosphere of trillions of dollars. Of course, this hasn’t deterred committed collectivists such as Democratic mayor Bill de Blasio who recently stated that ‘There’s plenty of money in the world… It’s just in the wrong hands!’ Never mind that it is morally wrong to steal the property of others or that once a society turns down the dead-end of socialism there will always be more people wanting more money from those who have it.

Wealth redistribution scams will always wreck the economy. A socialist regime that nationalizes the economy can never function better than one of economic Liberty. Soon enough everything breaks down, the people see through the lies and the government has to start breaking heads. Thus it is imperative that they have previously confiscated the people’s guns and made it illegal to defend themselves.

The Takeaway

Socialistic schemes always run contrary to basic human nature. Rewarding someone for not working will always result in less work. Conversely, punishing someone for working will also result in less work.

This basic logic of human nature seems to be lost on Leftists. But perhaps it is not. They have to know their schemes have never and will never work. And yet they still try to impose them on everyone else. Perhaps they know of the epic fraud they are continually perpetrating on society, but they don’t care. That will be the subject of our next installment.


NOQ Report Needs Your Help

Continue Reading

Facebook

Trending

Copyright © 2019 NOQ Report