What Socialism Is

by: nancy morgan | published: 09 04, 2009

When a word comes too close to actually identifying an inconvenient reality, secular progressives spring into action. The offending word is either redefined or reduced its first letter, thereby signifying that polite society will no longer accept it. You've heard of the N word, the B word (think Hillary) and now comes the S word.

By its abbreviation, the S word, formerly known as socialism, infers a negative connotation. A negative connotation richly deserved due to the incontrovertible fact that socialism has failed every where it has been tried.

In a nutshell, socialism is an economic system where property is held in common, not individually, and its ideal is a centrally directed economy. Socialism entails the substitution of group decision making for individual choice. In this case, the 'group' making the decisions are the 32 (and counting) unelected and unaccountable czars Obama is anointing.

The origins of socialist thought come directly from Aristotle. Aristotle believed that since only actions aiming at a perceived benefit to others were, to his mind, morally approved, then actions solely for personal gain (capitalism) must be bad.

This theory of Aristotle's is the basic premise of the Obama administration. By claiming the 'moral high ground' of the 'greater good' Obama and his minions have free reign to radically alter both our system of government and the hundreds of years of tradition it represents.

Under the guise of altruism and the greater good, Obama has launched a full scale attack on capitalism. The very capitalism that has fed the world for decades. The capitalism that has produced the highest standard of living in the freest and most productive country in the world. But, according to the ruling elite, capitalism is bad, because it entails, gasp, 'profit'. And every progressive worth his salt knows profit is only possible on the backs of less fortunate. Right?

Obama and the secular progressives who now determine policy in America pride themselves on being the intellectual representatives of modern thought and thus superior in knowledge, wisdom and moral virtue than those who hold traditional values (conservatives). They believe their duty is to offer new ideas to the public and deride whatever is conventional and/or traditional. Newness, not truth, is their main value.*

The fly in Obama's ointment is the fact that the system of socialism isn't very good at creating wealth. Only individuals do that. But hey, socialism is 'ethically superior' and that's what counts. Right?

Obama was voted into office based on his skill at selling abstract ideas like equality and justice. Millions of Americans bought into his spiel. Most likely the very same Americans who buy lottery tickets. Against all reason, they were led to believe that the government can provide them a free lunch. And there will be no cost to them. And best of all, these moochers can also claim the moral high ground. After all, they are victims of rich capitalists. And that's not fair! And its not their fault that they haven't won life's lottery.

The problem with their premise can be reduced to two words. Free will. God gave us free will - the ability to fail or succeed based on the choices we make. Obama proposes to do away with free will and vest those decisions in a central government.

Losers can now breathe a sigh of relief. Whew. Now, instead of losers, they're much valued victims. And the new socialist society Obama and friends are in the process of implementing has a moral duty to shield them from the consequences of their bad choices. But best of all, socialism allows life's losers the moral high ground as they systematically plunder the fruits of another man's labor.

This is socialism. This is what President Obama wants America to be. But students of history insist on asking the question: How long can a society survive that rewards failure and punishes success? Unfortunately, America will get an answer to that question if Obama is allowed to continue transforming our country into his 'new and improved' idea of a socialist utopia.

* Hayek's 'The Errors of Socialism'

comments

• Reply to this comment

  Gary

  The Regressive Immaturity of Progressive Grandiosty

  The American spirit was evident in the words contained within the Declaration of Independence. “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” These are words of ’self-determinism’, giving the individual a Government that allows for a persons own pursuits. The Constitution neither confers greater rights to the individual, nor does it in any way limit an individual so long as they are operating within the Law; which of itself, does not limit anyone’s pursuit of happiness nor success. A self determined life recognizes that the onus of responsibility rests squarely on the shoulders of the individual. One has the right to pursue their dreams, but no where is it stated that one is entitled to their dreams. Without getting tangled up in all the theological and philosophical aspects of self-determinism, for purposes of this post I will simply define the drives behind it in its most basic terms:

  Need for competence: refers to the need to experience oneself as capable and competent in controlling the environment and being able to reliably predict outcomes.

  Need for autonomy: refers to the need to actively participate in determining own behavior. It includes the need to experience one’s actions as result of autonomous choice without external interference.

  Need for relatedness: refers to need to care for and be related to others. It includes the need to experience authentic relatedness from others and to experience satisfaction in participation and involvement with the social world. Legislated relatedness is not authentic.

  Lacking the attendant responsibility of self-determinism is where socialism over-extends its basic supportive role in our society. Obviously those that are in some way handicapped deserve our assistance. Those that have been discriminated against deserve a fair chance. Yet socialism has become the forerunner to Progressive Liberalism, inasmuch that socialism exploded beyond its economically defined boundary becomes a model of equalizing humanity. In our modern reiteration of socialism, equal opportunity is translated to mean ‘everyone should be equal’. This is regressive. It is in fact a perversion, inasmuch that a perversion (by definition) is the pathological distortion of Truth.

  It is interesting to note that all perversions (and many psychological disorders) always seek ‘more’. The sick mind is voracious in its appetite, always consuming, never giving, and never sated. America is being consumed by this ravenous appetite, as perversion seeks justification behind its’ rationalization of a false nobility.

  We Were all Born Dependent

  Primary archaic narcissism is our state of being upon birth. There is no distinction between self and other, there is only primal ’self’ and the need for narcissistic supplies to ameliorate a very fearful primal existence. The dispensing of these supplies ameliorates fears, develops the super-ego, and indoctrinates the budding human being into responsible social and self-awareness in contrast to “other”. Developmental anomalies in this process can lead to pathological Narcissism.

  Simplifying narcissism, it can be said that narcissism is a defense against Emptiness as it struggles to ameliorate the anxieties between Ego and Object. This severely truncates the maturation process and gives rise to all manner of psychological and social aberrations.

  Progressive Liberalism shouts “i deserve”. Rather then struggling with the maturation process of defining self, it cries out from the dark womb of emptiness and ineptitude. It seeks comfort in the same manner that an infant suckles at the breast. When a person has not adequately matured within the family environment, they seek an over emphasized need from Society. Most psychological disorders can be traced to having their roots in an imbalance between Home and Society. Society is unfeeling. Society does not give narcissistic supplies to the individual. Society is largely neutral, a blank blackboard awaiting the individual to take the chalk and author their personal script for their life. Society bestows upon the individuals that inhabit it the self-deterministic ‘freedom of choice’. When there are aberrations in those supplies that spring forth from the home, then an individual seeks more from Society then its intended purpose. Society is then subconsciously perceived as the Mother’s Breast, and those that remain fearful of life want to suck Society dry. The tit of society becomes the pacifier against the fear of maturation and the responsibilities inherent therein.

  we were all born liberal, just some of us grew up

  
  

add a comment