<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Why Socialism Is on the Rise</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/ben-shapiro/why-socialism-is-on-the-rise/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/ben-shapiro/why-socialism-is-on-the-rise/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=why-socialism-is-on-the-rise</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 30 Dec 2014 07:01:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark_Melrose</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/ben-shapiro/why-socialism-is-on-the-rise/comment-page-2/#comment-5447559</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Mark_Melrose]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 12 Jul 2014 04:16:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=214838#comment-5447559</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The world is like 1930&#039;s. But events happen at faster pace. So, if you&#039;re reading, please turn to page December 6, 1941.

Il Duce is here with pen and phone.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The world is like 1930&#8242;s. But events happen at faster pace. So, if you&#8217;re reading, please turn to page December 6, 1941.</p>
<p>Il Duce is here with pen and phone.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Charles Canard</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/ben-shapiro/why-socialism-is-on-the-rise/comment-page-1/#comment-5429944</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Charles Canard]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Jun 2014 14:23:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=214838#comment-5429944</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[BAM. Fucking brilliant, man :)]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>BAM. Fucking brilliant, man <img src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif" alt=":)" class="wp-smiley" /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Charles Canard</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/ben-shapiro/why-socialism-is-on-the-rise/comment-page-2/#comment-5429943</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Charles Canard]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Jun 2014 14:21:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=214838#comment-5429943</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Glad to see a reasonable voice on this site! Capitalism represents a false ideal that will never be actualized because it inherently is a Ponzi scheme.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Glad to see a reasonable voice on this site! Capitalism represents a false ideal that will never be actualized because it inherently is a Ponzi scheme.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Charles Canard</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/ben-shapiro/why-socialism-is-on-the-rise/comment-page-1/#comment-5429942</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Charles Canard]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Jun 2014 14:20:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=214838#comment-5429942</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[False. The Republicans, and especially the Tea Party, have successfully convinced the poor that their money belongs to the Koch brothers and the NRA, who own our congress and control literally every aspect of everything. These are the real Statists and dictators. Warren Buffett is the real hero among the superwealthy.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>False. The Republicans, and especially the Tea Party, have successfully convinced the poor that their money belongs to the Koch brothers and the NRA, who own our congress and control literally every aspect of everything. These are the real Statists and dictators. Warren Buffett is the real hero among the superwealthy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Charles Canard</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/ben-shapiro/why-socialism-is-on-the-rise/comment-page-1/#comment-5429940</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Charles Canard]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Jun 2014 14:16:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=214838#comment-5429940</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Communism isn&#039;t socialism, rtard.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Communism isn&#8217;t socialism, rtard.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Charles Canard</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/ben-shapiro/why-socialism-is-on-the-rise/comment-page-1/#comment-5429939</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Charles Canard]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Jun 2014 14:14:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=214838#comment-5429939</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Socialism is on the rise in colleges because educated people understand that in order to thrive, the benefit to society as a whole must take precedence over individual wants. As long as we have this &quot;fuck you, I&#039;ma do what I want cuz &#039;Murica&quot; attitude, society will never truly flourish. As said in Star Trek, &quot;The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.&quot;


Let&#039;s take ol&#039; J. here who commented above me. He literally says &quot;any other ism&quot; in his post, failing to recognize that Capitalism also ends in ism.


Albert Einstein understood that we need socialism in order to survive. R. Buckminster Fuller understood that we need a basic income in order for society to be composed of caring, happy people, rather than droning, desperate automatons, interspersed with a few hyperwealthy folks who control literally everything. Do you claim to be smarter than these men?


Capitalism breeds monopoly and is inherently unfair. There is more to socialism than Marxist &quot;redistribution&quot;. Socialism merely means that when making decisions, you honestly ask yourself these questions and choose the former: is the macro benefit to society my main impetus for this choice, is or my personal greed and accumulation of capital my main impetus?


Capitalism will destroy humanity, if it hasn&#039;t already. But I&#039;ll guess that you&#039;re all climate deniers on this site anyway, so you probably won&#039;t be convinced of that.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Socialism is on the rise in colleges because educated people understand that in order to thrive, the benefit to society as a whole must take precedence over individual wants. As long as we have this &#8220;fuck you, I&#8217;ma do what I want cuz &#8216;Murica&#8221; attitude, society will never truly flourish. As said in Star Trek, &#8220;The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.&#8221;</p>
<p>Let&#8217;s take ol&#8217; J. here who commented above me. He literally says &#8220;any other ism&#8221; in his post, failing to recognize that Capitalism also ends in ism.</p>
<p>Albert Einstein understood that we need socialism in order to survive. R. Buckminster Fuller understood that we need a basic income in order for society to be composed of caring, happy people, rather than droning, desperate automatons, interspersed with a few hyperwealthy folks who control literally everything. Do you claim to be smarter than these men?</p>
<p>Capitalism breeds monopoly and is inherently unfair. There is more to socialism than Marxist &#8220;redistribution&#8221;. Socialism merely means that when making decisions, you honestly ask yourself these questions and choose the former: is the macro benefit to society my main impetus for this choice, is or my personal greed and accumulation of capital my main impetus?</p>
<p>Capitalism will destroy humanity, if it hasn&#8217;t already. But I&#8217;ll guess that you&#8217;re all climate deniers on this site anyway, so you probably won&#8217;t be convinced of that.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: objectivefactsmatter</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/ben-shapiro/why-socialism-is-on-the-rise/comment-page-1/#comment-5398210</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[objectivefactsmatter]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Apr 2014 23:52:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=214838#comment-5398210</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[To quote Abraham Lincoln: &quot;The Democracy of to-day hold the liberty of one man to be absolutely 
nothing, when in conflict with another man&#039;s right of property&quot;





What you possibly infer from that quote is not something easy for others to discern. You evidently have your own creative idea about what property rights are.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>To quote Abraham Lincoln: &#8220;The Democracy of to-day hold the liberty of one man to be absolutely<br />
nothing, when in conflict with another man&#8217;s right of property&#8221;</p>
<p>What you possibly infer from that quote is not something easy for others to discern. You evidently have your own creative idea about what property rights are.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: objectivefactsmatter</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/ben-shapiro/why-socialism-is-on-the-rise/comment-page-1/#comment-5398208</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[objectivefactsmatter]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Apr 2014 23:50:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=214838#comment-5398208</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&quot;I accept socialist ideals because I accept democracy. I believe in giving people a say.&quot;



So we agree that a pure socialist economy is not really possible, and absolutely not possible without massive coercion. But you believe in socialist ideals. And what are those to you?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;I accept socialist ideals because I accept democracy. I believe in giving people a say.&#8221;</p>
<p>So we agree that a pure socialist economy is not really possible, and absolutely not possible without massive coercion. But you believe in socialist ideals. And what are those to you?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: objectivefactsmatter</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/ben-shapiro/why-socialism-is-on-the-rise/comment-page-1/#comment-5398204</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[objectivefactsmatter]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Apr 2014 23:42:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=214838#comment-5398204</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&quot;Capitalism took around 400 years to establish itself.&quot; 

 

Sure. And when did capitalism start? Unpack that for me.

&quot;Do the failures in that time mean that capitalism has been a failure?&quot;


In exactly the same way that car crashes indicate the failure of personal transportation.


&quot;When the monarchies damaged capitalist interests in favor of the nobility, did that mean that capitalism should have just been relegated to the history books?&quot;


Maybe monarchies and rigid social classes should have been. Like we already did in the USA. Stupid leading question.
 
&quot;That&#039;s nonsense. I&#039;ve covered the Soviets here umpteen times, so i won&#039;t address this one again.&quot;


You cover nonsense with more nonsense.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Capitalism took around 400 years to establish itself.&#8221; </p>
<p>Sure. And when did capitalism start? Unpack that for me.</p>
<p>&#8220;Do the failures in that time mean that capitalism has been a failure?&#8221;</p>
<p>In exactly the same way that car crashes indicate the failure of personal transportation.</p>
<p>&#8220;When the monarchies damaged capitalist interests in favor of the nobility, did that mean that capitalism should have just been relegated to the history books?&#8221;</p>
<p>Maybe monarchies and rigid social classes should have been. Like we already did in the USA. Stupid leading question.</p>
<p>&#8220;That&#8217;s nonsense. I&#8217;ve covered the Soviets here umpteen times, so i won&#8217;t address this one again.&#8221;</p>
<p>You cover nonsense with more nonsense.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: objectivefactsmatter</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/ben-shapiro/why-socialism-is-on-the-rise/comment-page-1/#comment-5398205</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[objectivefactsmatter]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Apr 2014 23:42:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=214838#comment-5398205</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&quot;Nice personal attack, buddy. I&#039;m automatically wrong because you don&#039;t know anything about me? Good one. But knowing anything about me doesn&#039;t change the message.&quot;



No, but it might inspire you to strive a little harder to come up with a message that makes sense in the real world. You&#039;re just repeating believer tracts.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Nice personal attack, buddy. I&#8217;m automatically wrong because you don&#8217;t know anything about me? Good one. But knowing anything about me doesn&#8217;t change the message.&#8221;</p>
<p>No, but it might inspire you to strive a little harder to come up with a message that makes sense in the real world. You&#8217;re just repeating believer tracts.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: objectivefactsmatter</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/ben-shapiro/why-socialism-is-on-the-rise/comment-page-1/#comment-5398203</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[objectivefactsmatter]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Apr 2014 23:37:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=214838#comment-5398203</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&quot;Russia was so not communist that Lenin, leader of the revolution, claimed it wasn&#039;t communist. He referred to it as &quot;state capitalist&quot; because he didn&#039;t think Russia was ready for communism. Having a communist party doesn&#039;t make you communist anymore than having a Democratic party means fights with Republicans about whether or not the country gets to be a republic or a democracy.&quot;



Was Lenin a communist that believed in or accepted socialism as an alternative?


What is your definition of communist? What is your definition of socialist?


We live in a constitutional democratic republic. The names indicate orientation. The DP is about the demos and the RP is about the constitution and republican aspects, not necessarily putting as much emphasis on populism. Names some times mean things.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Russia was so not communist that Lenin, leader of the revolution, claimed it wasn&#8217;t communist. He referred to it as &#8220;state capitalist&#8221; because he didn&#8217;t think Russia was ready for communism. Having a communist party doesn&#8217;t make you communist anymore than having a Democratic party means fights with Republicans about whether or not the country gets to be a republic or a democracy.&#8221;</p>
<p>Was Lenin a communist that believed in or accepted socialism as an alternative?</p>
<p>What is your definition of communist? What is your definition of socialist?</p>
<p>We live in a constitutional democratic republic. The names indicate orientation. The DP is about the demos and the RP is about the constitution and republican aspects, not necessarily putting as much emphasis on populism. Names some times mean things.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: objectivefactsmatter</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/ben-shapiro/why-socialism-is-on-the-rise/comment-page-1/#comment-5398201</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[objectivefactsmatter]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Apr 2014 23:33:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=214838#comment-5398201</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&quot;And no, there have been no socialist countries ever. Communism is a stateless, classless society. That is the definition from the left because that is what the definition has always been.&quot;



So you agree that it&#039;s delusional Utopian thinking to try to &quot;transform&quot; a successful &quot;capitalist&quot; (free market) economy in to a socialist economy?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;And no, there have been no socialist countries ever. Communism is a stateless, classless society. That is the definition from the left because that is what the definition has always been.&#8221;</p>
<p>So you agree that it&#8217;s delusional Utopian thinking to try to &#8220;transform&#8221; a successful &#8220;capitalist&#8221; (free market) economy in to a socialist economy?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: objectivefactsmatter</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/ben-shapiro/why-socialism-is-on-the-rise/comment-page-1/#comment-5397931</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[objectivefactsmatter]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Apr 2014 13:09:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=214838#comment-5397931</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&quot;I believe in liberty.&quot;



I&#039;m sure you do. I&#039;m equally sure you don&#039;t understand the requirements.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;I believe in liberty.&#8221;</p>
<p>I&#8217;m sure you do. I&#8217;m equally sure you don&#8217;t understand the requirements.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: objectivefactsmatter</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/ben-shapiro/why-socialism-is-on-the-rise/comment-page-1/#comment-5397930</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[objectivefactsmatter]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Apr 2014 13:08:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=214838#comment-5397930</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&quot;Yes. Socialism is meant to replace capitalism.&quot;

Hold that thought.

&quot;In fact, if it doesn&#039;t entirely replace it, capitalists attempt to put it down.&quot;

You&#039;re saying that a mixed economy is unsafe because private capital must be completely outlawed? OK. Sounds like a communist speaking but we&#039;ll carry on.

&quot;Examples would include the Paris Commune and Anarchist Catalonia.&quot;

OK. I guess bigotry against anyone industrious is not quite like racism or sexism but it still seems pretty stupid and paranoid. Let&#039;s continue...

&quot;And no crony capitalism is socialist, it is capitalist. Because that&#039;s how capitalism works and has always worked.&quot;

Dummy, socialism is a set of idea and ideals. Today in the West where most of the world&#039;s capital exists, most manifestations of government &quot;socialism&quot; take the form of crony capitalism. That means the state favors some private &quot;capital sovereigns&quot; over others.

The idea of socialism in its essence is that workers should have sovereignty over their product because (according to the theory) they have no social power or not enough social power to negotiate &quot;fair&quot; wages. Furthermore the theory goes that not only do they get &quot;unfair&quot; wages but they get only enough wages to live. Thus they can&#039;t ever move up and leverage their skills as sovereigns over the means of production.

Socialism is the idea that something should be done to ensure the sovereigns don&#039;t exploit the workers that have no sovereignty over capital and thus are exploited and become virtual slaves.

When did these ideas come up? In Europe around the beginning of the Industrial Revolution. In certain times and places, this &quot;wage slave&quot; concern was valid if not literally true. And while there are people being exploited throughout the world, few legal residents of Western nations make only enough to live unless they are making student wages or they simply make bad choices. But ultimately the point is that they do have choices. To deny this is a big fat lie. We&#039;ll continue this theme later.

&quot;Socialism does not have to be government control.&quot;


That&#039;s true. But guess what? You don&#039;t&#039; need permission for non-coercive socialism so the politics are limited to the group that elects to organize that way.


For coercive socialism, who is going to do the coercing? Who is going to decide private property rights? Who is going to decide all of the things normally negotiated by the parties involved in free market capitalism?


Of course you need the government or you&#039;d be merrily enjoying your life in a socialist commune as we speak.


&quot;In fact, many socialists advocate as close to no government at all as they can get, preferring democratic workplaces (every worker gets a vote about what the workplace does) instead.&quot;


I advocate free admission to Heaven each night with breakfast served before returning to Earth. And returning is optional. Let&#039;s see what&#039;s actually possible.




&quot;Like I said, Russia and China are not, were not, socialist. They were totalitarian.&quot;



They were both. What you mean is authoritarian. And that is precisely what coercive socialism (basically any example of socialism that doesn&#039;t already exist) requires. Who is going to take away capital from the owners?


I have limited time right now but we can always return and expand on any of this. Let me just finish by saying that coercive socialism in the USA is insane and destructive. It&#039;s delusional and built on lies. Virtually every theory that the advocates proposed over the years has been proved wrong. Not only that, most of the issues that drove the desire for coerced socialism never really existed in the USA unless you count people stuck temporarily in some situation. And that is just part of life.


Socialism can&#039;t improve one man&#039;s life for very long without wrecking the lives of many others. It can play games with finance using the government, but in the end someone has to pay and the costs are always hidden because the expected magic doesn&#039;t actually exist.


Non-coercive &quot;socialism&quot; is something people have pursued for a long time and you don&#039;t need to whine about it because everyone that wants to participate already is.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Yes. Socialism is meant to replace capitalism.&#8221;</p>
<p>Hold that thought.</p>
<p>&#8220;In fact, if it doesn&#8217;t entirely replace it, capitalists attempt to put it down.&#8221;</p>
<p>You&#8217;re saying that a mixed economy is unsafe because private capital must be completely outlawed? OK. Sounds like a communist speaking but we&#8217;ll carry on.</p>
<p>&#8220;Examples would include the Paris Commune and Anarchist Catalonia.&#8221;</p>
<p>OK. I guess bigotry against anyone industrious is not quite like racism or sexism but it still seems pretty stupid and paranoid. Let&#8217;s continue&#8230;</p>
<p>&#8220;And no crony capitalism is socialist, it is capitalist. Because that&#8217;s how capitalism works and has always worked.&#8221;</p>
<p>Dummy, socialism is a set of idea and ideals. Today in the West where most of the world&#8217;s capital exists, most manifestations of government &#8220;socialism&#8221; take the form of crony capitalism. That means the state favors some private &#8220;capital sovereigns&#8221; over others.</p>
<p>The idea of socialism in its essence is that workers should have sovereignty over their product because (according to the theory) they have no social power or not enough social power to negotiate &#8220;fair&#8221; wages. Furthermore the theory goes that not only do they get &#8220;unfair&#8221; wages but they get only enough wages to live. Thus they can&#8217;t ever move up and leverage their skills as sovereigns over the means of production.</p>
<p>Socialism is the idea that something should be done to ensure the sovereigns don&#8217;t exploit the workers that have no sovereignty over capital and thus are exploited and become virtual slaves.</p>
<p>When did these ideas come up? In Europe around the beginning of the Industrial Revolution. In certain times and places, this &#8220;wage slave&#8221; concern was valid if not literally true. And while there are people being exploited throughout the world, few legal residents of Western nations make only enough to live unless they are making student wages or they simply make bad choices. But ultimately the point is that they do have choices. To deny this is a big fat lie. We&#8217;ll continue this theme later.</p>
<p>&#8220;Socialism does not have to be government control.&#8221;</p>
<p>That&#8217;s true. But guess what? You don&#8217;t&#8217; need permission for non-coercive socialism so the politics are limited to the group that elects to organize that way.</p>
<p>For coercive socialism, who is going to do the coercing? Who is going to decide private property rights? Who is going to decide all of the things normally negotiated by the parties involved in free market capitalism?</p>
<p>Of course you need the government or you&#8217;d be merrily enjoying your life in a socialist commune as we speak.</p>
<p>&#8220;In fact, many socialists advocate as close to no government at all as they can get, preferring democratic workplaces (every worker gets a vote about what the workplace does) instead.&#8221;</p>
<p>I advocate free admission to Heaven each night with breakfast served before returning to Earth. And returning is optional. Let&#8217;s see what&#8217;s actually possible.</p>
<p>&#8220;Like I said, Russia and China are not, were not, socialist. They were totalitarian.&#8221;</p>
<p>They were both. What you mean is authoritarian. And that is precisely what coercive socialism (basically any example of socialism that doesn&#8217;t already exist) requires. Who is going to take away capital from the owners?</p>
<p>I have limited time right now but we can always return and expand on any of this. Let me just finish by saying that coercive socialism in the USA is insane and destructive. It&#8217;s delusional and built on lies. Virtually every theory that the advocates proposed over the years has been proved wrong. Not only that, most of the issues that drove the desire for coerced socialism never really existed in the USA unless you count people stuck temporarily in some situation. And that is just part of life.</p>
<p>Socialism can&#8217;t improve one man&#8217;s life for very long without wrecking the lives of many others. It can play games with finance using the government, but in the end someone has to pay and the costs are always hidden because the expected magic doesn&#8217;t actually exist.</p>
<p>Non-coercive &#8220;socialism&#8221; is something people have pursued for a long time and you don&#8217;t need to whine about it because everyone that wants to participate already is.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: InfoStorm</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/ben-shapiro/why-socialism-is-on-the-rise/comment-page-1/#comment-5397895</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[InfoStorm]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Apr 2014 09:04:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=214838#comment-5397895</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Yes. Socialism is meant to replace capitalism.
In fact, if it doesn&#039;t entirely replace it, capitalists attempt to put it down. Examples would include the Paris Commune and Anarchist Catalonia. And no crony capitalism is socialist, it is capitalist. Because that&#039;s how capitalism works and has always worked.

&quot;Power corrupts. Capital is power. Capitalists are corrupt. Let&#039;s make the government sovereign over capital?&quot;

---
Socialism does not have to be government control. In fact, many socialists advocate as close to no government at all as they can get, preferring democratic workplaces (every worker gets a vote about what the workplace does) instead. Like I said, Russia and China are not, were not, socialist. They were totalitarian.

&quot;Fascists must be evil liars in contrast with saintly socialist 
elites. Whew! Good thing that socialism is popular and the communists 
demonized fascism.
---
Nobody has every used the rhetoric and ideals 
of socialism to abuse their political power and soak taxpayers. 
Bureaucrats are the saints. It&#039;s the capitalists that are evil so make 
the bureaucrats sovereign over the capital! According to you socialism 
has never existed other than as an idea. OK.&quot;

I didn&#039;t say anyone lied about anything. I said that Fascists used nationality to control people. It&#039;s no different than using religion to control people. Furthermore, socialism does not have to have bureaucrats, there doesn&#039;t even need to be a government. In fact, bureaucrats are so evil that socialism advocates removing the middleman. You&#039;re still trying to push Cold War era lies about Russia being &quot;Communist&quot;. No actual socialist believes what you&#039;re pushing.

And no, there have been no socialist countries ever. Communism is a stateless, classless society. That is the definition from the left because that is what the definition has always been. Russia was so not communist that Lenin, leader of the revolution, claimed it wasn&#039;t communist. He referred to it as &quot;state capitalist&quot; because he didn&#039;t think Russia was ready for communism. Having a communist party doesn&#039;t make you communist anymore than having a Democratic party means fights with Republicans about whether or not the country gets to be a republic or a democracy.

&quot;I see. Some of them might like the ideas of socialism but don&#039;t blame 
socialism when the Ponzi schemes fail. Don&#039;t blame communism when the 
Soviet Union fails. Got it.&quot;
---

Capitalism took around 400 years to establish itself. Do the failures in that time mean that capitalism has been a failure? When the monarchies damaged capitalist interests in favor of the nobility, did that mean that capitalism should have just been relegated to the history books? That&#039;s nonsense. I&#039;ve covered the Soviets here umpteen times, so i won&#039;t address this one again.

&quot;Uh huh. And your experience running businesses and paying taxes is 
what? Nothing? You accept the Marxist bullshit because it&#039;s easier to 
feel like a victim than taking responsibility for your own success or 
failure.

So basically private ownership of capital is theft. Just 
like the queen of the United Kingdom kind of stole that power through 
inheritance, that is how capitalists gained power and sovereignty over 
the proletariat.

I&#039;m familiar with Marxist narratives dummy. I&#039;m telling people how it plays out in the real world.&quot;

---

Nice personal attack, buddy. I&#039;m automatically wrong because you don&#039;t know anything about me? Good one. But knowing anything about me doesn&#039;t change the message.

I accept socialist ideals because I accept democracy. I believe in giving people a say. And I believe in freedom. 

To quote Abraham Lincoln: &quot;The Democracy of to-day hold the liberty of one man to be absolutely 
nothing, when in conflict with another man&#039;s right of property&quot;


I believe in liberty.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes. Socialism is meant to replace capitalism.<br />
In fact, if it doesn&#8217;t entirely replace it, capitalists attempt to put it down. Examples would include the Paris Commune and Anarchist Catalonia. And no crony capitalism is socialist, it is capitalist. Because that&#8217;s how capitalism works and has always worked.</p>
<p>&#8220;Power corrupts. Capital is power. Capitalists are corrupt. Let&#8217;s make the government sovereign over capital?&#8221;</p>
<p>&#8212;<br />
Socialism does not have to be government control. In fact, many socialists advocate as close to no government at all as they can get, preferring democratic workplaces (every worker gets a vote about what the workplace does) instead. Like I said, Russia and China are not, were not, socialist. They were totalitarian.</p>
<p>&#8220;Fascists must be evil liars in contrast with saintly socialist<br />
elites. Whew! Good thing that socialism is popular and the communists<br />
demonized fascism.<br />
&#8212;<br />
Nobody has every used the rhetoric and ideals<br />
of socialism to abuse their political power and soak taxpayers.<br />
Bureaucrats are the saints. It&#8217;s the capitalists that are evil so make<br />
the bureaucrats sovereign over the capital! According to you socialism<br />
has never existed other than as an idea. OK.&#8221;</p>
<p>I didn&#8217;t say anyone lied about anything. I said that Fascists used nationality to control people. It&#8217;s no different than using religion to control people. Furthermore, socialism does not have to have bureaucrats, there doesn&#8217;t even need to be a government. In fact, bureaucrats are so evil that socialism advocates removing the middleman. You&#8217;re still trying to push Cold War era lies about Russia being &#8220;Communist&#8221;. No actual socialist believes what you&#8217;re pushing.</p>
<p>And no, there have been no socialist countries ever. Communism is a stateless, classless society. That is the definition from the left because that is what the definition has always been. Russia was so not communist that Lenin, leader of the revolution, claimed it wasn&#8217;t communist. He referred to it as &#8220;state capitalist&#8221; because he didn&#8217;t think Russia was ready for communism. Having a communist party doesn&#8217;t make you communist anymore than having a Democratic party means fights with Republicans about whether or not the country gets to be a republic or a democracy.</p>
<p>&#8220;I see. Some of them might like the ideas of socialism but don&#8217;t blame<br />
socialism when the Ponzi schemes fail. Don&#8217;t blame communism when the<br />
Soviet Union fails. Got it.&#8221;<br />
&#8212;</p>
<p>Capitalism took around 400 years to establish itself. Do the failures in that time mean that capitalism has been a failure? When the monarchies damaged capitalist interests in favor of the nobility, did that mean that capitalism should have just been relegated to the history books? That&#8217;s nonsense. I&#8217;ve covered the Soviets here umpteen times, so i won&#8217;t address this one again.</p>
<p>&#8220;Uh huh. And your experience running businesses and paying taxes is<br />
what? Nothing? You accept the Marxist bullshit because it&#8217;s easier to<br />
feel like a victim than taking responsibility for your own success or<br />
failure.</p>
<p>So basically private ownership of capital is theft. Just<br />
like the queen of the United Kingdom kind of stole that power through<br />
inheritance, that is how capitalists gained power and sovereignty over<br />
the proletariat.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m familiar with Marxist narratives dummy. I&#8217;m telling people how it plays out in the real world.&#8221;</p>
<p>&#8212;</p>
<p>Nice personal attack, buddy. I&#8217;m automatically wrong because you don&#8217;t know anything about me? Good one. But knowing anything about me doesn&#8217;t change the message.</p>
<p>I accept socialist ideals because I accept democracy. I believe in giving people a say. And I believe in freedom. </p>
<p>To quote Abraham Lincoln: &#8220;The Democracy of to-day hold the liberty of one man to be absolutely<br />
nothing, when in conflict with another man&#8217;s right of property&#8221;</p>
<p>I believe in liberty.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: objectivefactsmatter</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/ben-shapiro/why-socialism-is-on-the-rise/comment-page-1/#comment-5397533</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[objectivefactsmatter]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Apr 2014 11:13:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=214838#comment-5397533</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&quot;Sorry, buddy, but I&#039;m afraid that crony capitalism is still capitalism. Capitalism is when the means of production (things used to make things) are owned by private citizens. That&#039;s it. That&#039;s the dictionary definition.&quot;

So socialism replaces capitalism?

Notice I didn&#039;t say that all crony capitalism is socialist.

&quot;As business leaders&#039; incomes rise, they use that income to better their own positions. Examples are buying machinery, buying labor, buying land, or lobbying for better regulations. &quot;Crony&quot; capitalism is all the capitalism that has ever existed. Capitalists have never not fought for their own interests. It would take a saint to do that. And most of us aren&#039;t.&quot;

Power corrupts. Capital is power. Capitalists are corrupt. Let&#039;s make the government sovereign over capital?

&quot;Furthermore, Fascism is a far right ideology, socialism is far left. Fascism is a dictatorial system, exalting things like nationality to control people. Socialism is ownership of the means of production by the workers, whether that be directly collective (people at the workplace deciding things by vote) or through government (lack of lobbying and the like to make it so the people each get an equal say in government). Russia was not communist (a stateless (no government), classless society. Russia was not socialist (Stalin was a dictator and the Party demanded work be done).&quot;


Fascists must be evil liars in contrast with saintly socialist elites. Whew! Good thing that socialism is popular and the communists demonized fascism.

Nobody has every used the rhetoric and ideals of socialism to abuse their political power and soak taxpayers. Bureaucrats are the saints. It&#039;s the capitalists that are evil so make the bureaucrats sovereign over the capital! According to you socialism has never existed other than as an idea. OK.

&quot;Big government is not socialist.&quot;


A democratic government that wants to increase its power has to get the public to believe that it wants or needs to grow the government for the good of the people. Those angelic pols should also be sovereign over all capital too, don&#039;t you think?


&quot;The US government is not socialist. Neither Sweden nor Norway are socialist. They&#039;re all capitalist nations. Yes, they have regulations, but private owners still own things. If a nation were to make it so all the businesses in the country were worker cooperatives, it would be socialist because the workers would have a say.&quot;

I see. Some of them might like the ideas of socialism but don&#039;t blame socialism when the Ponzi schemes fail. Don&#039;t blame communism when the Soviet Union fails. Got it.

&quot;Socialism is a workplace democracy, capitalism is workplace dictatorship. Saying a capitalist deserves it because of all of the &quot;work&quot; they did is the same as saying that the Queen of England deserves to control the country because of all of the work she&#039;s done.&quot;





Uh huh. And your experience running businesses and paying taxes is what? Nothing? You accept the Marxist bullshit because it&#039;s easier to feel like a victim than taking responsibility for your own success or failure.


So basically private ownership of capital is theft. Just like the queen of the United Kingdom kind of stole that power through inheritance, that is how capitalists gained power and sovereignty over the proletariat. 


I&#039;m familiar with Marxist narratives dummy. I&#039;m telling people how it plays out in the real world.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Sorry, buddy, but I&#8217;m afraid that crony capitalism is still capitalism. Capitalism is when the means of production (things used to make things) are owned by private citizens. That&#8217;s it. That&#8217;s the dictionary definition.&#8221;</p>
<p>So socialism replaces capitalism?</p>
<p>Notice I didn&#8217;t say that all crony capitalism is socialist.</p>
<p>&#8220;As business leaders&#8217; incomes rise, they use that income to better their own positions. Examples are buying machinery, buying labor, buying land, or lobbying for better regulations. &#8220;Crony&#8221; capitalism is all the capitalism that has ever existed. Capitalists have never not fought for their own interests. It would take a saint to do that. And most of us aren&#8217;t.&#8221;</p>
<p>Power corrupts. Capital is power. Capitalists are corrupt. Let&#8217;s make the government sovereign over capital?</p>
<p>&#8220;Furthermore, Fascism is a far right ideology, socialism is far left. Fascism is a dictatorial system, exalting things like nationality to control people. Socialism is ownership of the means of production by the workers, whether that be directly collective (people at the workplace deciding things by vote) or through government (lack of lobbying and the like to make it so the people each get an equal say in government). Russia was not communist (a stateless (no government), classless society. Russia was not socialist (Stalin was a dictator and the Party demanded work be done).&#8221;</p>
<p>Fascists must be evil liars in contrast with saintly socialist elites. Whew! Good thing that socialism is popular and the communists demonized fascism.</p>
<p>Nobody has every used the rhetoric and ideals of socialism to abuse their political power and soak taxpayers. Bureaucrats are the saints. It&#8217;s the capitalists that are evil so make the bureaucrats sovereign over the capital! According to you socialism has never existed other than as an idea. OK.</p>
<p>&#8220;Big government is not socialist.&#8221;</p>
<p>A democratic government that wants to increase its power has to get the public to believe that it wants or needs to grow the government for the good of the people. Those angelic pols should also be sovereign over all capital too, don&#8217;t you think?</p>
<p>&#8220;The US government is not socialist. Neither Sweden nor Norway are socialist. They&#8217;re all capitalist nations. Yes, they have regulations, but private owners still own things. If a nation were to make it so all the businesses in the country were worker cooperatives, it would be socialist because the workers would have a say.&#8221;</p>
<p>I see. Some of them might like the ideas of socialism but don&#8217;t blame socialism when the Ponzi schemes fail. Don&#8217;t blame communism when the Soviet Union fails. Got it.</p>
<p>&#8220;Socialism is a workplace democracy, capitalism is workplace dictatorship. Saying a capitalist deserves it because of all of the &#8220;work&#8221; they did is the same as saying that the Queen of England deserves to control the country because of all of the work she&#8217;s done.&#8221;</p>
<p>Uh huh. And your experience running businesses and paying taxes is what? Nothing? You accept the Marxist bullshit because it&#8217;s easier to feel like a victim than taking responsibility for your own success or failure.</p>
<p>So basically private ownership of capital is theft. Just like the queen of the United Kingdom kind of stole that power through inheritance, that is how capitalists gained power and sovereignty over the proletariat. </p>
<p>I&#8217;m familiar with Marxist narratives dummy. I&#8217;m telling people how it plays out in the real world.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: InfoStorm</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/ben-shapiro/why-socialism-is-on-the-rise/comment-page-1/#comment-5397522</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[InfoStorm]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Apr 2014 08:10:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=214838#comment-5397522</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Sorry, buddy, but I&#039;m afraid that crony capitalism is still capitalism. Capitalism is when the means of production (things used to make things) are owned by private citizens. That&#039;s it. That&#039;s the dictionary definition.

As business leaders&#039; incomes rise, they use that income to better their own positions. Examples are buying machinery, buying labor, buying land, or lobbying for better regulations. &quot;Crony&quot; capitalism is all the capitalism that has ever existed. Capitalists have never not fought for their own interests. It would take a saint to do that. And most of us aren&#039;t.

Furthermore, Fascism is a far right ideology, socialism is far left. Fascism is a dictatorial system, exalting things like nationality to control people. Socialism is ownership of the means of production by the workers, whether that be directly collective (people at the workplace deciding things by vote) or through government (lack of lobbying and the like to make it so the people each get an equal say in government).  Russia was not communist (a stateless (no government), classless society. Russia was not socialist (Stalin was a dictator and the Party demanded work be done).

Big government is not socialist. The US government is not socialist. Neither Sweden nor Norway are socialist. They&#039;re all capitalist nations. Yes, they have regulations, but private owners still own things. If a nation were to make it so all the businesses in the country were worker cooperatives, it would be socialist because the workers would have a say.

Socialism is a workplace democracy, capitalism is workplace dictatorship. Saying a capitalist deserves it because of all of the &quot;work&quot; they did is the same as saying that the Queen of England deserves to control the country because of all of the work she&#039;s done.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sorry, buddy, but I&#8217;m afraid that crony capitalism is still capitalism. Capitalism is when the means of production (things used to make things) are owned by private citizens. That&#8217;s it. That&#8217;s the dictionary definition.</p>
<p>As business leaders&#8217; incomes rise, they use that income to better their own positions. Examples are buying machinery, buying labor, buying land, or lobbying for better regulations. &#8220;Crony&#8221; capitalism is all the capitalism that has ever existed. Capitalists have never not fought for their own interests. It would take a saint to do that. And most of us aren&#8217;t.</p>
<p>Furthermore, Fascism is a far right ideology, socialism is far left. Fascism is a dictatorial system, exalting things like nationality to control people. Socialism is ownership of the means of production by the workers, whether that be directly collective (people at the workplace deciding things by vote) or through government (lack of lobbying and the like to make it so the people each get an equal say in government).  Russia was not communist (a stateless (no government), classless society. Russia was not socialist (Stalin was a dictator and the Party demanded work be done).</p>
<p>Big government is not socialist. The US government is not socialist. Neither Sweden nor Norway are socialist. They&#8217;re all capitalist nations. Yes, they have regulations, but private owners still own things. If a nation were to make it so all the businesses in the country were worker cooperatives, it would be socialist because the workers would have a say.</p>
<p>Socialism is a workplace democracy, capitalism is workplace dictatorship. Saying a capitalist deserves it because of all of the &#8220;work&#8221; they did is the same as saying that the Queen of England deserves to control the country because of all of the work she&#8217;s done.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: kernals</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/ben-shapiro/why-socialism-is-on-the-rise/comment-page-1/#comment-5394140</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[kernals]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2014 02:08:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=214838#comment-5394140</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[look at Russia in 1917]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>look at Russia in 1917</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: kernals</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/ben-shapiro/why-socialism-is-on-the-rise/comment-page-1/#comment-5394139</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[kernals]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2014 02:07:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=214838#comment-5394139</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Delaware gets 50 cents for every dollar it sends to the federal government. South Carolina gets 8 bucks]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Delaware gets 50 cents for every dollar it sends to the federal government. South Carolina gets 8 bucks</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: kernals</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/ben-shapiro/why-socialism-is-on-the-rise/comment-page-2/#comment-5394138</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[kernals]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2014 02:04:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=214838#comment-5394138</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[the new deal saved America from communism, so a new new deal will do the same 80 years later]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>the new deal saved America from communism, so a new new deal will do the same 80 years later</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Object Caching 751/784 objects using disk
Content Delivery Network via cdn.frontpagemag.com

 Served from: www.frontpagemag.com @ 2014-12-30 02:14:14 by W3 Total Cache -->