Connect with us

Democrats

Venezuela IS socialism

Published

on

John Stossel destroys the ‘that wasn’t really socialism’ lie from the Left on the socialist nation of Venezuela.

Once again the national Socialist-Left is at it again with their ‘That wasn’t really socialism’ or ‘that wasn’t socialist because it wasn’t done correctly’ game this time with the socialist nation of Venezuela.

Their little game of lies began 70 odd years ago with their blatantly trying to deny the reality that a National Socialist German Workers’ Party [Nationalsozialistische deutsche Arbeiter-Partei ] was actually National Socialist German Workers’ Party. This continues to the present with a good example being a USA Today story on Alabama Rep. Mo Brooks reads from Hilter’s ‘Mein Kampf’ while bashing Democrats, media stating that:

Brooks’ emphasis on socialism in Germany appeared to be an attempt to link socialism with the Democratic Partyeven though Nazis were not, in fact, socialists. They, along with Hitler, were fascists, essentially the opposite of socialists. Hitler was the leader of the Nazi Party that initiated World War II and was central in the death of millions during the Holocaust.

[Our emphasis]

Sadly, the author failed to explain exactly how fascists were ‘essentially the opposite of socialists’. So we’ll have to rely on an expert opinion:

“In certain basic respects – a totalitarian state structure, a single party, a leader, a secret police, a hatred of political, cultural and intellectual freedom – fascism and communism are clearly more like each other than they are like anything in between.”
Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr., Associate Professor of History at Harvard, New York Times Magazine, Sunday, April 4, 1948

Never the less, John Stossel takes on this issue with regards to the socialist nation of Venezuela while also eviscerating the Scandinavian socialism mythology in the process in the video and a column in Reason magazine entitled: The Socialist Fantasy

In America, progressives claim that socialism is succeeding in much of Europe. John Oliver claims, “There are plenty of socialist countries that look nothing like Venezuela.”

Presidential candidate Bernie Sanders agrees, saying: “When I talk about democratic socialism, I am not looking at Venezuela. I’m not looking at Cuba. I’m looking at countries like Denmark, like Sweden.”

But those countries are not socialist!

Yes, they have big welfare programs, but their economies are more capitalist than America’s.

They set no national minimum wage. They impose fewer regulations on businesses. Their leaders even go out of their way to point out that they are not socialist. Denmark’s prime minister went on TV to respond Sanders’ comments by saying: “Denmark is far from a socialist planned economy. Denmark is a market economy.”

The Takeaway.

At this point in time with a 400 year old track record of failure, the nation’s Socialist-Left has been reduced to arguing that socialist nations weren’t really socialist. While at the same time fostering the myth that non-socialist nations are really socialist.

It takes a certain amount of arrogance to try to rely on that kind of duplicity to prop up a failed ideology that is long past its prime as a practical governmental system. It should be clearly evident to even the Leftists that it find its rightful place on the ash heap of history.

Will you help revive the American Conservative Movement?

 


NOQ Report Needs Your Help

Advertisement
Click to comment

Culture and Religion

The far-left hates liberty. Isn’t it time to stop praising them as being liberal? Part II

Published

on

By

The far-left hates liberty Isnt it time to stop praising them as being liberal Part II

If we want to defeat socialism and Conserve Liberty, we have to stop using the reality defying language of the Left.

Bernie Sanders recently gave a speech inverting reality to redefine socialism. It was replete with some modernized versions of the tired old tropes of the Communist Manifesto. But the key part included some absurd assertions on Liberty that would have made a younger version of George Orwell proud.

Apparently no one can be ‘free’ unless they have a claim on the time, labor and property of others in society. In the Orwellian mindset of Bernie Sanders and others of the national socialist Left, Liberty means that you should be ‘free’.. to enslave others. No word on whether the people forced to provide their time, labor and property to Bernie voters that are ‘free’.

It is a fact that every living being from bacteria to Brontosauri has had to exert effort in order to survive. However, the Leftist mindset sees an opportunity to control every aspect of everyone’s life in trying to alter this essential fact of life. For if they can assert that every individual has a collective obligation to society at large, they get to enforce that obligation, since they consider themselves to the moral superiors of everyone else. They know this because they are the moral superiors of everyone else.

In this inversion of Liberty from the Left, freedom means that you should be provided with free healthcare, free housing, free college, free food, free childcare and just about any free benefit they can conjure up. Never mind that there isn’t enough money to provide all of these ‘freedoms’ or that the people forced to provide them could hardly be considered to be ‘free’. We’re also to forget about the fact that these ancient ideas run contrary to human nature and that they have never worked in the 400 years that this ‘social’ experiment has been run.

Part I of this series proved that the Far-Left has become the enemy of Liberty while they use labels that falsely imply the polar opposite. Even though Leftists have become increasingly hostile to freedom and basic reality, they still falsely claim to be ‘Liberal’. Part II will present the case for a two-step approach in rhetorically cutting them off at the kneecaps in depriving them of this deception.

The Orwellian language of the enemies of Liberty on the Left.

Ideas are conveyed and considered through the shorthand of language. A positive word connotes a positive thought or feeling on a particular issue, while a negative word has the opposite effect. If Leftists are good at anything, it’s in word selection and exploitation. It’s the reason they put so much effort in trying to control free speech and dictating the terms of debate.

This is why it is imperative that we of the Pro-Liberty Right avoid being trapped into using the language of the Socialist-Left, debating the issues on their terms. This unnecessarily places us in an immediate disadvantage when it’s just a question of choosing the proper words and having the discipline to use them properly.

Eleutheros to Libertas.

There is a reason the Left loves to exploit the derivatives certain ancient words. The first has its origins in Greek: free (liberated), unbound (unshackled); (figuratively) free to realize one’s destiny in Christ.

The second is a derivative of the first, howbeit the etymology is somewhat murky. The second is the Roman personification of Liberty and freedom. The ancient term Libertas has a number of positive and similar sounding derivatives with the two-syllable ‘liber’ common to the words Liberation, Liberty and Liberal.

Each of these three derivatives convey the positive idea of being unbound and free from restraint. When used by the Far-Left this runs contrary to their true meaning because their socialist ideology has the opposite effect, the assertions of Bernie ‘we must be free to enslave others’ Sanders notwithstanding.

Leftists love thinking of themselves a ‘Liberators’ or the vaunted protectors of Liberty, but it is their incessant use of the term Liberal that needs to be corrected. Far too many people wrongly associate socialistic slavery with this contrary term. While many falsely apply some sort of post-modernism ideas to the term, it cannot be denied that Liberal connotes the same positive ideas of freedom as the words Liberty and Liberator. Many associate the real enslavement of society with being Liberal and by extension Liberty and Liberation to the point that the media contradictorily uses the term to refer to socialism.

Defeating the Socialist-Left by depriving them of their false labeling.

Defeating the Leftists on this subject is just a two-step process of taking back the word and having the discipline to use Leftist instead of Liberal. Then it’s just a question of rhetorically pounding Leftists as being hypocrites in trying to sell socialistic slavery as ‘Liberation’ or ‘Liberty’.

We have already made the point that true Liberals belong on the right side of the political spectrum here, here, and here. The fact is, the Conservative-Right side is represented in the Liberal party in Australia. Consider the through the looking-glass mindset of the Left characterizing a win of the Australian Liberal party entitled as ‘How Liberalism Loses’ taking note that they scrupulously avoid using the actual name of the Liberal party in Australia.

Why it is extremely important to use the term Leftist instead of Liberal.

It should be an easy fix to the situation, given that both words start with the same letter and have the same length. It’s just a matter of understanding the vast difference in the meaning of the two words and why we all need to have the discipline to just use Leftist in referring to those people.

Those using the term Liberal when referring to the Left are complicit in perpetrating their deception on who they are. Leftists don’t consider Liberal to be a pejorative. They smile when we use the odd phrases such as ‘Owning the Libs’ because that reinforces their supposed ‘Liberal’ street cred. The same holds true for any variation of terms that have a ‘Lib’ portion.

The Word Salad approach to labeling the Left.

While many understood the logic in this effort, there are still some on the Conservative-Right that still use a ‘Word Salad’ approach when referring to the Left. They will begin using Leftist and switch to Liberal at some point, followed by the term Progressive in another instance, then perhaps switching back to Leftist in another.

No one is really impressed by the undisciplined use of these terms, there really is no point in continuing the practice. One word is sufficient, the Far-Left has no qualms about using the term ‘Far-right’ in referring to the Pro-Liberty side of the aisle. This refers back to one of the Left’s biggest lies: that the Nazis weren’t socialists. But that doesn’t stop them from trying to reinforce that lie at every opportunity where up is down and Left is Right – meaning a socialist workers’ party of the Left is somehow of the ‘Far-Right’.

It is time to fight back on this front instead of conceding the language of the Left, it is how they lie about who they are and what we are. It is how they deceive people who are unaware of their true nature.

The Takeaway.

The Socialist-Left revels in being ‘Liberators’, the defenders of Liberty and of course as being Liberal.
Those positive sounding attributes belong to the Conservative-Right, that why it is important to use the correct word.

Using Leftist instead of Liberal takes away one of the Left’s biggest deceptions, why wouldn’t anyone follow that advice?

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Democrats

Trey Gowdy, Jason Chaffetz highlight idiocy of Democrats, media

Published

on

Trey Gowdy rips House Dems hearings Pathetic sad dont benefit anyone

This week, Democrats in the House Judiciary Committee brought in John Dean of Watergate fame to testify about the Russian collusion story. It had many, even in progressive mainstream media, scratching their heads wondering what Dean could possibly contribute to the conversation or investigation.

But that’s not how Democrats think, at least in the House of Representatives. They aren’t looking for facts. They’re looking for anything they can do to perpetuate their narrative and keep the Russia collusion hoax in the news cycle so they don’t have to answer tough questions about real issues facing Americans like illegal immigration.

Two former Congressmen, Trey Gowdy and Jason Chaffetz, spoke at length about the debacle of this hearing.

Chaffetz was amused. “When you bring up two convicted felons, Michael Cohen and John Dean, as the way you’re going to propel this, I don’t know how Democrats with a straight face look in the camera say, ‘Oh ya, we’re trying to get to the bottom to do the work of the American people.'”

Gowdy, on the other hand, was infuriated by the display of clear partisan brinkmanship. After praising Chaffetz for his ability when on Capitol Hill to talk to the press, Gowdy pointed at an inconvenient fact about the way the media in America works.

“I hope even you have realized, now, the duplicity and the relativism with which Republicans are covered versus Democrats,” Gowdy said. “If you, as the Chairman of Oversight, had called someone like John Dean who’s not a fact witness, we’s not a legal expert… about the best he can give you is a day in the life in federal prison, that’s the best he’s going to be able to give you, you would have been excoriated.”

Putting John Dean in front of a camera had one goal for the Democrats: associate the Russia hoax with Watergate. They’re grasping at straws now, but it should be expected since Mueller is all they have left.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Democrats

Elizabeth Warren draws short stick in debates. Or is it the long stick?

Published

on

Elizabeth Warren draws short stick in debates Or is it the long stick

Of the five top-tier Democratic candidates for President, four of them are debating on the second night. Senator Elizabeth Warren will be the only one in double digits in recent polls to be in the spotlight for the first Democratic debate.

Vice President Joe Biden, Senators Bernie Sanders and Kamala Harris, and South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg will all be drawing the crowd the second night.

There are two ways to look at it. The two who have been leading the polls throughout – Sanders and Biden – are both on the second night. The two who many Democrats want to see in action first before considering supporting them – Harris and Buttigieg – are also on the second night. That could mean many will wait until then before tuning in.

Of course, this is the first debate, so the sheer excitement over the unofficial launch of primary season may be enough to draw a nice viewership crowd for Warren nonetheless.

She also has some personalities of interest who are not frontrunners with her. Former Congressman Beto O’Rourke, who has been trying to rejuvenate his floundering campaign, will be on with Warren, as will Senator Cory Booker, who hasn’t been as much of a factor so far as some expected last year.

Fox News host Jesse Waters pointed out a problem those on the second night might have.

“I don’t know how they will put them next to each other. It’s going to get ugly. There are not a lot of lower-tier candidates for them to attack. Do you all go after Biden, or do you go after Bernie?” he asked.

By being in a better group, those on the second night will likely get a better audience. But Warren has an opportunity to stand alone as the only one on stage with a chance. This field needs to shrink quickly.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Facebook

Trending