Connect with us

Culture and Religion

Honest debate proves economic liberty is vastly superior to socialistic slavery

Published

on

Honest debate proves economic liberty is vastly superior to socialistic slavery

The Left has to hide it’s clearly inferior ideology of socialism behind Lies and obfuscation simply because it has no other choice.

Let us present the situation to an objective audience. Who would seem to have the better position, those who can debate out in the open with factual arguments. Or those have to hide behind lies, obfuscation and word mutation?

Consider that most people innately known that something is wrong when a person or group has to hide certain aspects of their ideology. They know that those holding back usually have something to hide. While there are those who take on the pretence of being open and honest, they always seem to dance around the truth. Throwing out a red herring here or obfuscation there or when cornered on a precise point of logic unabashedly prevaricate like seasoned professionals.

Compare that to those who can openly articulate the case for their system without pretext or deception. No system is ever perfect, but the side that is honest about the features outweighing any faults is clearly superior.

Open and Honest beats Deceptive and Dishonest any day of the week.

It’s an almost subliminal message being propagated by the Left, that Economic Liberty has somehow been massively discredited and is on it’s way out, with their base ideology being ‘Inevitable’. Of course, this sounded better back in 1848 when it was first articulated, before Socialism accumulated a staggering butcher’s bill of over 100 Million dead. But such are the proclivities of the Left, with Economic Liberty supposedly on the brink of collapse, while the Pro-Liberty Right shakes in fear of the Left’s 500-year-old-ideas.

At present the debate is over the merits of Economic Liberty versus Socialism. Or more correctly speaking between Economic Liberty (or it’s pejorative label from the Left: Capitalism) and an ersatz version of Socialism as decreed by the nation’s Left. This is typical of their usual word mutation game.

In order to even have a toehold in the debate, they have to pretend that the massive welfare state systems of small, culturally homogenous countries supported by natural resources and minimal defense spending needs are somehow ‘socialist’. Or they make spurious claims that if someone, somewhere made the claim that a government program is or was ‘Socialist’ and it’s still chugging along, then by Jove, it proves that socialism ‘works’…. somehow. Meanwhile, they deny that true socialist or communist nations are really socialist or communist.

The debate between Economic Liberty and Socialistic Slavery.

We on the Pro-Liberty Right are open and honest about our ideology of Economic Liberty. It is a system that has lifted mankind out of the mud to soaring heights of progress. While the Left obsesses over non-issues of income inequality Economic Liberty has elevated the poor from misery simply because they are a vast customer base. It has created vast amounts of wealth out of nothing, advancing mankind to untold reaches.

Can the Left make any claims of what their system of collective misery has done for mankind?

Leftists love to keep up the pretence that they are working for the betterment of everyone. Meanwhile the practical reality of their base ideology has the exact opposite result. They have no qualms over exploiting the words of freedom and advancement, falsely labeling themselves as ‘Liberal’ or ‘Progressive’ while depriving people of Liberty and working overtime to retard the advancement of civilisation.

Compare the practical realities of Economic Liberty and Socialism – which is superior?

One of the Left’s favourite dodges is to compare the theoretical promise of their 500-year-old ideas to the practical reality of modern-day Economic Liberty. This is one of the ways they work desperately to stay in the game. It’s akin to comparing a known political candidate to an unnamed opponent. Comparing theoretical ideals to practical reality avoids those pesky issues as to whether their system works or not as well, keeping it’s necessary evil of the application of force and mass murder off the table.

In practical reality, there is no comparison between the success of Economic Liberty and the %100 Failure rate of Socialism, which is why they avoid them like the plague. When was the last time the Left compared the practical reality of true socialist nations to the overwhelming success of Economic Liberty? The Left is completely outclassed in these comparisons, to use the colloquial term, they aren’t even in the same ballpark.

One last thought: Why isn’t Socialistic Slavery on the chopping block?

The current ‘buzz’ in Leftist circles is their contention to put an end to Economic Liberty (or it’s pejorative label from the Left: Capitalism).  Why isn’t the antithesis of this concept being contemplated?

Wouldn’t it make sense to keep the system that works while discarding that which doesn’t? Consider the question put to the audience at the top of this article. Wouldn’t it make more sense to conserve the system that is superior as well as open and honest about it’s faults and features?

It is plain as day that the Left cannot be honest about it’s base ideology. It should also be manifestly obvious that it’s collectivist system of social slavery does not work. So shouldn’t that be the system to be discarded?

***

Image via Fee

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Culture and Religion

Top 5 ‘Bottomless Pinocchios’ of the national socialist left

Published

on

By

Top 5 Bottomless Pinocchios of the national socialist left

That perfect paragon of journalistic ‘objectivity’, the Washington Post, introduced a new rating for lies. We applied them to the left.

The Washington Post has developed a new rating system – the ‘Bottomless Pinocchio’ – for a false claim repeated over and over. This is somewhat ironic since the leftist media excels in the practice. While we will try to keep this to the more egregious and discrete lies of the left, a few notes on their other types of lies are in order.

The labeling and language lies of the left

Even the labels they apply to themselves aside from being socialist are falsehoods. These are people who work against the cause of liberty on a daily basis while pretending to be liberal. It’s a post-modernism community that has the false front of being ‘progressive’, that would prefer to use the judiciary to impose their socialist national agenda rather than democratic means.

Then there is the game of lying by language the left plays to excess. Time was, global cooling was the existential threat to woman and mankind, until it stopped getting cooler. Then global warming became the existential threat until it stopped getting warmer. Accordingly, they hit on the deception of working against it doing either, so no matter what happens, they can claim they are right because the climate has always changed. This also gave them a nice bonus in tarring any who opposes their control agenda as being a ‘climate change denier’ – even though no one actually denies the climate changes. Better yet, they have been able to shorten it up to the ultimate insult of labeling their opposition as ‘climate deniers’ as if people would actually deny reality itself.

These will be the top 5 ‘Bottomless Pinocchios’ of the left. These are lies that are recycled repeatedly by the left in their effort at distorting reality to the point where gun free zones actually keep people safe, no one is starting a conversation about gun confiscation and societal slavery can really work.

 Bottomless Pinocchio 5: People have a ‘right’ to health care

This is one of the left’s favourites in trying to reshape (or ‘reform’) reality. Like many other variations of the ‘people have a right to’ line, this stems from the concept of Coercive or Collective Rights, whereby people have the ‘right’ to force others to provide them with the vestiges of this ‘right’. These are contrasted with Natural Rights possessed by everyone, the right to self-preservation, the right to property, the right of freedom of expression.

Having a ‘right’ to health care, or ‘right’ to feel safe, or a ‘right’ to not be offended, generally entails that someone else has to provide for this ‘right’. In the case of healthcare, providing this ‘right’ would mean that medical professionals would be required to sacrifice their time and labour in this effort. Citizens would also be forced to contribute their property. There is a word for when people are forced to provide their time and effort to others. It’s called slavery.

In point of fact the phrase should really be people have a ‘right’ to enslave others. But the folks who pretend to support liberty can’t say that directly, hence they use the ‘right to’ lie.

Bottomless Pinocchio 4: Gun free zones work as advertised

This one is slightly different from the others in that even leftists know they will be laughed off the public stage if they said this out loud. Rather, they imply the idea with their policy agenda of incessantly working towards gun confiscation, supposedly rendering the entire world a global ‘gun-free’ zone such as the latest example in France.

Expanding what doesn’t work always seems to be a hallmark of the left. Never mind that something doesn’t function in one area, extend it elsewhere so it’ll work… somehow.

Anyone familiar with logic can easily see why these don’t work, since those bent on evil will tend to go where they will have little opposition. Unfortunately, as with the fact that there are only two genders, leftists don’t seem to be able to comprehend that which is bloody obvious. They seem to have the misguided idea that a rule or a sign will stop a mass murderer.

The facts bear this out given that most mass shootings take place in ‘gun-free’ zones. This has been the situation for almost 30 years.

The problem for the left is that they can’t actually admit to their absolute failure in this area. Were they to do this, it would mean an end to their whole gun confiscation agenda. Thus they perpetuate that it’s a myth that defensive gun uses exist or that a ‘good guy (or gal) with a gun’ will deter these tragedies. It means that they continue to put people at risk for the sake of their disarmament agenda, without the hint of guilt on their part.

Bottomless Pinocchio 3 : No one is talking about gun confiscation

Finding cases where leftists have demanded gun confiscation has become as easy as shooting fish in a barrel (pardon the pun Peta). The past few years have seen an increase in these demands from the left to the point that it’s occurred more than 70 times not counting excerpts, syndication and reprints. Repeating this lie enables leftists to keep the discussion to the next incremental step instead of their final solution to the liberty problem.

Still, the liberty grabber left persists in propagating this enormous lie. It does several things for them. It short circuits the negative effects of gun confiscation such as leaving the innocent defenseless against criminals and the government. It lulls some into a false sense of security as to the left’s long term goal for the cause of liberty.

This perennial lie is also necessary to get some to accept governmental overreach in controlling their personal property. They have used this same technique in getting people to register their guns accompanied by the solemn promise that they won’t use it to confiscate guns, after which their guns are confiscated.

Bottomless Pinocchio 2: Failed socialist experiments weren’t really socialist

It would seem this little ditty began when the socialist-left started trying to claim that a certain National Socialist German Workers’ Party wasn’t actually a National Socialist German Workers’ Party. The Left actually tried to reverse reality, making a party with a collectivist ideology of the left to one of an individualist ideology of the right. The problem for them is that those on the pro-liberty, conservative right, by definition favour lower taxes and limited government. Hardly something the Nazis were known for.

Leftists will often times try to deflect the facts of the matter given the very name of the party: ‘Nationalsozialistische deutsche Arbeiter-Partei’. But consider the words of the translator of Mein Kampf:

Finally, I would point out that the term Social Democracy may be misleading in English, as it has not a democratic connotation in our sense. It was the name given to the Socialist Party in Germany. And that Party was purely Marxist; but it adopted the name Social Democrat in order to appeal to the democratic sections of the German people.
James Murphy. Abbots Langley, February, 1939

Later on, they played this little game with virtually every other socialist regime. Miraculously enough, before these socialist regimes ran out of other people’s money the left labelled them as one of their own. Then in the blink of an eye, they would ping-pong from left to right almost overnight when they inevitably failed.

The problem for the left is that they have nothing on George Orwell. We’re supposed to simply ignore basic facts from history, beginning with the very words that socialists have used to describe themselves. These socialist regimes also followed collectivist precepts. But in an instant these facts are swept away, in favour of a new reality where Red is Blue and Blue is Red.

Bottomless Pinocchio 1: Socialism can actually work

This is a basic survival lie of the left. They cannot accede to the fact of 400 years of the failure of the ideas of their base ideology, so they must pretend it can work… somehow. Just as they can pretend to be liberal while working to tear down liberty, but that’s another subject.

Since their agenda of societal slavery has never worked, they have to deflect the argument with the aforementioned ‘socialism has never been tried before’ and ‘failed socialist experiments weren’t really socialist’ lies. Or pretending that non-socialist nations are really socialist.

The bottom line is that socialism can never work because it runs counter to basic human physiology. One will always see less of a behaviour that is negatively reinforced, while more will be seen with behaviour that is positively reinforced. The fundamental results of reward and punishment cannot be ignored, and yet this is what socialists have as the basis of their ideology.

Consider that the experiment of socialism has been conducted in situations around the world for over 400 years with the same result: failure. It should be obvious by now to most intelligent people that it cannot work, and yet the national socialist-left still persists in trying to turn that which is impossible into something that is possible, no matter who has to suffer and die.

The takeaway

In many ways the left should stay away from pronouncing judgement on falsehoods when they are so rife with them. Leftist lies keep them afloat in the sea of politics. We have shown that not only are they false, but they must be retold in order for the left to survive.

Continue Reading

Culture and Religion

Dr Paul Lim tells how he went from atheist to Christian… at Yale

Published

on

Dr Paul Lim tells how he went from atheist to Christian at Yale

Universities aren’t usually considered likely venues for people to turn to the Christian faith. Ivy League universities rife with atheist professors are even less likely than most to yield a conversions to the faith. If anything, they’re efforts are often directly focused on converting Christians into abandoning their faith.

Dr Paul Lim tells a different tail. His personal journey from South Korea to California, then Pennsylvania on to Yale, is an exception to the rule. His journey is not common, but then again who’s to say what sort of journey to embracing Jesus Christ can be considered common?

It’s not too long, clocking in at just over 48 minutes, and much better than your average network television hour. If you already believe, it may help you open the eyes of others. If you don’t believe, your eyes may be opened.

Continue Reading

Culture and Religion

How likely is it that a single protein can form by chance?

Published

on

How likely is it that a single protein can form by chance

To really answers the question of whether life was created or came about by random chance, we need to take a mathematical look at things. It may be easier to form our opinions based on something we read in a junior high science book, but there really is more to it than the surface questions asked and answered by scientists and theologians alike.

For the faithful, it comes down to faith. For the scientific, it also comes down to faith. Whose faith is more likely to be correct?

Part of the answer can be found in this short video. Those who think there’s no faith associated with scientific theories clearly don’t understand the mathematics behind the science they claim to hold dear.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement Donate to NOQ Report

Facebook

Twitter

Trending

Copyright © 2018 NOQ Report