Leftists, Progressives and Socialists

Pages: 1 2

You say, “Williams, isn’t it a bit unfair to lump the “One Nation” communists, socialists and their supporters with mass murderers such as Hitler, Stalin and Mao Tse-tung? After all, they expressed no such murderous goal.” When Hitler, Stalin and Mao were campaigning for political power, you can bet they didn’t campaign on the promise to murder millions of their own people, and probably the thought of doing so never crossed their minds. Those horrors were simply the end result of long evolution of ideas leading to consolidation of power in central government in the quest for “social justice.” It was decent but misguided earlier generations of Germans, Russians and Chinese, like many of today’s Americans, who would have cringed at the thought of genocide, who built the Trojan horse for a Hitler, a Stalin or Mao to take over. But as Voltaire said, “Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.”

While America’s leftists, socialists and communists condemn Hitler, they give the world’s most horrible murderers a pass. First, they make a false distinction between fascism, communism and socialism but more importantly, they sympathize with the socioeconomic goals of communism and socialism. The primary goal of communism and socialism is government ownership or control over the means of production. In the U.S., only a few people call for outright government ownership of the means of production. They might have learned that government ownership would mess things up. Instead, they’ve increasingly called for quasi-ownership through various forms of government regulation, oversight, taxation and subsidies. After all, if someone has the power to tell you how you may use your property, it’s tantamount to his owing it.

I believe most Americans find the ideals and principles of socialism, communism and progressivism repugnant, but by our sanctioning greater government centralization and its control over our lives, we become their dupes or, as Lenin said, “useful idiots.”

Pages: 1 2

  • highpressure

    Wow, I have to update my figures on deaths cause by secular religionists and their theocracies.

    • bubba4

      "Secular religionist" would be an oxymoron…your just a plain moron.

      • sflbib

        And you are an illiterate … using a singular possessive pronoun for a contraction.

        • ontheright

          Deflect and project – nice job progressive Komrade!

        • bubba4

          You start a sentence with "And" and misuse the elipise. Questionable at best for a stickler of rooles.

      • USMCSniper

        Comrade bubba4 wants the American Democrat Politburo to nake legislation for reeducation camps for indoctrination of American populace to accept one world international socialist government for greater glory of Chairman Obama.

        • bubba4

          oh god…it speaks.

      • intrcptr

        Kinda like "workers' paradise", right?

        And of course, there is no contradiction between secular and religious, unless you first accept a Christian concept of religion, rather than, say the Roman one.

      • sflbib

        Religion – noun

        1. a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs. – dictionary.com

        Secularism certainly has its beliefs, that is, ideas assumed true without proof. Examples: human nature is changeable; the world is divided into oppressors and the oppressed [IOW, there is no third condition]; economics is a zero sum game – one gains at another’s expense; man is the arbiter of all things. Creation of the universe is the result of natural forces.

        And it has its ritual observances [look at the Nazi ceremonies]. Closer to home, ever been required to attend a “diversity-is-our strength” presentation at work? How about anti-sexual harassment training? The ones I had to attend all had a moral code governing the conduct of employees. Ego, secularism is a religion.

        • bubba4

          You can make "secular" it's own religion, but I think only religious people want to do that so they can fight in a realm they're familiar with…ideology.

          So you're really just abusing the word in order to give something the religious beliefs that are counter to your own. Secular in terms of religion is a "not doing" it's non-religion….non-belief.

          You can't make doubt into a belief. But really, since there is no group calling themselves "secularist" you can say "they" "believe" whatever you want.

          And you just scoop everything you don't like into the same sh*t pile. You had to attend some bs meeting at work and blame for this falls on your imaginary group with beliefs you hate. That's not so much religious as it is cultic. If you find yourself blaming a nameless "them" for the problems in your life, and if someone makes you mad, they are part of this group, you're on a selfish and dangerous road.

          "Ego, secularism is a religion."

          Ego in the broader sense is responsible for religion. Mandatory meetings and codes of conduct are CORPORATE. Sure they are secular but so is my lunch…how is calling things secular helping you understand the world better.

          Without this whipping boy to give attributes to and smack around, you might have to forward your own beliefs. Come on…hit with some crazy.

    • ontheright

      Facts are amazing things, huh?

  • bubba4

    "One of the greatest sources of confusion and deception is the difference between leftists, progressives, socialists, communists and fascists"

    Yes, and Walter Williams is here to make sure everyone that reads FPM continues to get it wrong. If there is confusion, it is deliberate on the part of Williams and FPM…I would venture to say that is in fact, the goal.

    That's why Wiliams makes your local neighborhood union worker responsible for Stalin's murders. They don't deserve this kind of ham-handed smearing. Socialism is not Communism is not a particular totalitarian state.

    "Nazism is a form of socialism."

    No it's not…

    I would say Williams needs to go back to school, but he knows what he's doing.

    • frecklelips

      Bubba4…do you have a job? Since you don't think jobs are necessary, tell us your name so we can tell your boss who you are and then he can grant your greatest wish by firing you. Have you ever heard "Don't bite the hand that feeds you"?

      • bubba4

        How is critiquing FPM's propaganda biting the hand that feeds me?
        I run my own company. It's small, but I do OK.

        • Rob

          Well then, lets make sure it's taxed to death so I can have free health care. I am sure you won't mind.

    • sflbib

      "No it's not… "

      Then what is it? Don't just hurl insults; give us the bubba4 definition/explanation.

      • bubba4

        …Fascism [is] the complete opposite of…Marxian Socialism…The Fascist State organizes the nation, but leaves a sufficient margin of liberty to the individual; the latter is deprived of all useless and possibly harmful freedom, but retains what is essential..

        • str8talk

          The schools you went to failed you Bubba4.

          • bubba4

            That was a quote from Mussolini….

            I see sfibib didn't see fit to come back and address my answer….he doesn't care anymore than you do.

            C U L T

  • iking

    This is also a problem in the Philippines wherein the Left presented itself as the savior of the masses yet they did turn a blind eye on the millions of lives that their ideology has consumed. If you throw this argument to them, they are delusional that those millions that perished didnt happen and it has no proof. really stupid. They condemn the government of being harsh yet they don't acknowledge the fact they they (CPP-NPA) also launched purges on the countryside to rid their domain of those innocents unwilling to share the left's path. tsktsktsk..

  • jacob

    I guess those that can be weaned away of this "socialism" terminal sickness can be counted with the fingers of one hand but I'm affraid there will be too many fingers left….

    As horrible as it may sound, this people deserve to be handled exactly the way the regimes they advocate did or still do to their own people, like their CHE GUEVARA, POL
    POT "heroes" etc,.

    But while an infected abject media, fellow travelers and bleeding hearts call the shots….

  • Brian

    "…they’ve increasingly called for quasi-ownership through various forms of government regulation, oversight, taxation and subsidies. After all, if someone has the power to tell you how you may use your property, it’s tantamount to his owing it." Hitler himself said THIS was the difference between Fascism and Socialism.

    • bubba4

      This is from Mussolini:

      …Fascism [is] the complete opposite of…Marxian Socialism…The Fascist State organizes the nation, but leaves a sufficient margin of liberty to the individual; the latter is deprived of all useless and possibly harmful freedom, but retains what is essential..

      After Socialism, Fascism combats the whole complex system of democratic ideology, and repudiates it, whether in its theoretical premises or in its practical application. Fascism denies that the majority, by the simple fact that it is a majority, can direct human society; it denies that numbers alone can govern by means of a periodical consultation, and it affirms the immutable, beneficial, and fruitful inequality of mankind, which can never be permanently leveled through the mere operation of a mechanical process such as universal suffrage….

      Horowitz has worked hard to turn the political spectrum into a loop of "left" evil which the "right" is outside of. Fascism and Communism are just both extremes of "left"…but alas..if "left" and "right" mean anything then Fascism is the extreme right.

  • sflbib

    "It is surely undeniable that, when a man engages in remunerative labor, the impelling reason and motive of his work is to obtain property, and thereafter to hold it as his very own. If one man hires out to another his strength or skill, he does so for the purpose of receiving in return what is necessary for the satisfaction of his needs; he therefore expressly intends to acquire a right full and real, not only to the remuneration, but also to the disposal of such remuneration, just as he pleases. Thus, if he lives sparingly, saves money, and, for greater security, invests his savings in land, the land, in such case, is only his wages under another form; and, consequently, a working man's little estate thus purchased should be as completely at his full disposal as are the wages he receives for his labor. But it is precisely in such power of disposal that ownership obtains, whether the property consist of land or chattels. Socialists, therefore, by endeavoring to transfer the possessions of individuals to the community at large, strike at the interests of every wage-earner, since they would deprive him of the liberty of disposing of his wages, and thereby of all hope and possibility of increasing his resources and of bettering his condition in life."

    Anyone want to take a guess who wrote that?

    • Wideband

      It's been attributed to Pope Leo.

    • frecklelips

      The Pope. The entire speech is remarkable. Thank you for posting it.

  • ClassicalLiberalism

    Collectivism is a religion where the state becomes the god.

    John T. Flynn, in his penetrating examination of the "creeping revolution" in the U.S.A., The Road Ahead, states ". . . the line between Fascism and Fabian Socialism is very thin. Fabian Socialism is the dream. Fascism is Fabian Socialism plus the inevitable dictator." http://mises.org/books/roadahead.pdf

    Regardless of what they call it today, as Ludwig von Mises stated in his 1922 book "Socialism": "The socialist movement takes great pains to circulate frequently new labels for its ideally constructed state. Each worn-out label is replaced by another which raises hopes of an ultimate solution of the insoluble basic problem of Socialism—until it becomes obvious that nothing has been changed but the name. The most recent slogan is "State Capitalism."[Fascism] It is not commonly realized that this covers nothing more than what used to be called Planned Economy and State Socialism, and that State Capitalism, Planned Economy, and State Socialism diverge only in non-essentials from the "classic" ideal of egalitarian Socialism.”

  • Michael

    Embracing Socialism is the Left's "Mantra of Insanity". History has concrete proof Socialism has failed through out the Planet. The Left are classic examples of Stalin's "Useful Idiots". What is going on in today's world is more dangerous than World War. America is the last strong hold of Democracy and even it is shakey. Should we lose our Nation to political correctness and multiculturism we will have joined Eurabia.
    There is no other country to go to . Wake Up !
    American Christian Infidel
    Michael Canzano

  • tedh754

    The gulag would happen here too. There would be no more right to protest government actions. What's a few million murders when it will be paradise for the remaining automatons? Thank goodness for our military including our Special Ops guys. They take defending the Constitution very seriously.

  • bubba4

    Two years into the term of a President you don't want and we're living under tyranny? You can't love Democracy and not accept elections when they don't go your way.

    • coyote3

      This administration isn't a lone ranger. It just happens to be here now. Everytime the government exceeds its delegated power, liberty is lost and, yes, that "is" tyranny.

      • bubba4

        Why don't you ever let people answer for themselves? The tyranny Penny is talking about is a recent phenomenon…

        You're saying the same thing you always say…we get it coyote….now let Penny answer.

  • truebearing

    A big part of their inevitable failure is that Marxism is a system of thought that from the start had no understanding of human nature. It is completely devoid of insight into what motivates most humans, and instead of being the salvation of the working man, it is the opiate of the would be despot. The only people Marxism gives incentive to are those who have an endless rapacity for political power.

  • truebearing

    Marxism's rigid, deterministic world view can't be implemented in the real world without massive use of Procrustean Method. The populace has to be carved up like a Christmas turkey to make it fit the ideology, instead of the government adapting to the actual needs of the citizens.

    The left imposes their rigid ideological exoskeleton onto the people, and anyone not willing to submit to unnatural mutation of their very being is imprisoned or killed. The operant theory of the left being: kill the "enemies of the people", ie. those who won't willingly conform, and what is left are the people who will march to the tune they play. The problem is that the intelligent, creative, independent, leader types are all dead or escaped, and all that is left are the depressed, the despondent, the starving, and the despots.

  • datamunge

    If each American was required to pass an unbiased, basic History and Economics class before being allowed to vote, this article would not even be needed, and we would be much better off as a nation.
    With that said, the breakdown of the family unit (drugs, sex, entertainment, lack of discipline, divorce, etc. destabilize society), the lack of responsibility for one's actions (abortion and corruption…), and the lack of self-reliance (drop-out rates, greater dependence on govt, not taking opportunity of education…) does not bode well for a free nation, but will usher in a more authoritarian state.

    As an aside, the free enterprise produces the greatest good for the most people because it is based on proper view of the world and the nature of man. Communism and its cousins, although nice in theory, breakdown because of their faulty and bogus views on world and nature of man.

  • freckelips

    Thank you.