Been seeing a lot of our Progressive friends defending Socialism – though most of them add “Democratic” in front of it, as some sort of attempt to soften the blow. Like saying a sh** sandwich is a cheese and sh** sandwich will make it better. But Socialism is death – it is purely evil and has no redeeming qualities whatsoever.
Of course, you and I know that. But, even so, I think it needs to be said – emphasized; said again and again and again until it is drilled into the public mind. And don’t think that the death part of Socialism is things like Stalin’s labor camps or Pol Pot wondering whether killing everyone will improve economic prospects. No: the very idea of Socialism is death. It is anti-human. It can’t do other than destroy.
First and foremost, it must be kept in mind that when a Socialist says things like “justice”, “freedom”, “democracy” the words don’t mean the same thing as when a sane, non-Socialist person uses them. For a Socialist, for instance, “justice” doesn’t mean the equitable enforcement of laws freely enacted by Constitutional means. No – to a Socialist, “justice” means “everyone I hate is punished”. “Freedom” means “I’m free to do whatever I want; you’re not”. “Democracy” means “we hold a vote: if I win, it is forever; if I lose, it means evil people cheated and we have to do it again until I win, and then we never do it again”.
A Socialist doesn’t care whether or not you have a house; food; medical care – he or she might say that is what will be provided, but if it is, it is incidental to the real purpose of Socialism – the punishment of those the Socialist hates. If punishing the object of ire means there’s less housing, food and medical care, that is perfectly ok, because the whole purpose is punishment. To a Socialist, what is non-Socialist is evil…and those who are non-Socialist don’t merely have a different view of what should be done but are, instead, actively evil. There is no other explanation, in the view of a Socialist, for opposition to Socialism.
But, you say, what about those kindly Socialists – Democratic-Socialists! – in Europe who have built up a Welfare State which ensures no one lacks the basic necessities? Surely they aren’t motivated by hate? Sorry, but they are. They were only able to provide the Welfare State because the United States picked up the tab for military defense (and allowed them to cheat on trade with us) – and it was only incidental that the Welfare State provided anything. Offering free stuff did get votes, but that the free stuff was provided (in a way) was of secondary importance. Far more important for the Socialists – even the kindly Democratic-Socialists of Europe – was destruction. Death. They pushed birth control, abortion, divorce, fornication, anti-religious propaganda…they taught the Europeans that their whole history was one, long crime against humanity. Europeans were taught to despise the people who had been their heroes. They were taught to think only of themselves. At the end of it all, people specifically hostile to all Europe was were imported – and given privileged status within the body politic. Small wonder that Europeans have a fertility rate of 1.58, significantly below replacement level. The destruction – death – of Europe is essentially complete. Socialism brought death…and only the immediate abandonment of Socialism can possibly save Europe from extinction.
In the end, it doesn’t matter if your Socialist is a Stalinist packing GULAG full of victims, or if he’s a Democratic-Socialist putting you on the dole and making sure you have easy access to abortion…the result is the same: death. And all of it done to punish – Europe, you see, had to be punished. It was evil, wrong, bad – in the eyes of Socialists, that is. And they were determined that it be destroyed – punished for the sin of not being Socialist.
We’re not far behind Europe – but, also, much better positioned to save ourselves from that fate. But part of saving ourselves from that fate is to start speaking firmly about Socialism. It isn’t a different means to a mutually desired end: it desires an end which is evil: namely, the end of the United States. That a Socialist USA might still have the name “United States” doesn’t really matter…it’ll just be a dead thing which hates what the United States actually is, with a population sunk into indifference and rapidly being replaced by people who have no connection to the country.
The Socialists – however they label themselves – are evil. They are the harbingers of death. Even if they don’t know it. Even if, that is, a particular Socialist you meet is someone merely gulled by the words of Socialism. Doesn’t matter if your murderer intended your death or only caused it accidentally – you’re still dead. All Socialism must be stopped. Eventually, every aspect of Socialism must be eliminated. And all Socialist ideology condemned to the point where no decent person would dream of adhering to it. It was a gigantic, anti-human mistake. And it has to go.
Blogs For Victory 
Socialism is economic slavery to the state. Democratic Socialism is the two wolves and the sheep combining to vote someone else into economic slavery …
Quote of the Day:
Most Socialist countries have had elections, or at least the form of elections. Did that make them less oppressive or less brutal? Of course not. “Democracy” means “we hold a vote: if I win, it is forever; if I lose, it means evil people cheated and we have to do it again until I win, and then we never do it again”.
In some districts, votes necessary to get or keep a Leftist in office can be “found” after the election is over. And tyrants tend to get nearly every single vote in “elections”—as if nearly every person in the country wants any given tyrant to stay in office. The Left can point to the process of having an election as proof of “democracy” while in fact they control the outcomes. Case in point: Barack Obama finally “won” an election after the powerful Chicago political machine got his opponent removed from the ballot. Then the same machine got his primary opponent slimed by getting into supposedly sealed court records and leaked the information that in a squabble he had allegedly used violence against his wife. That worked so well they did it again, getting a judge to open “sealed” records of his Republican opponent. Four days after Judge Schnider unsealed the custody records, Ryan dropped out of the race for the horror of (allegedly) propositioning his own wife and then taking “no” for an answer. The Left would, and did, point to these three “elections” as proof of “democracy” but in fact they were proof of the ability of the State to present the illusion of fair elections while using the power of the State to rig those elections to get a hard-core Leftist into the presidency.
So when the Left tacks the word “Democratic” onto the word “Socialism” to try to camouflage its true nature, we need to remember what “democratic” really means to the Left. It means a charade of pretense at choice while imposing its own rule
So when the Left tacks the word “Democratic” onto the word “Socialism” to try to camouflage its true nature
Or they go a step farther and add “republic” as well, as in the “Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.” Leftists worldwide are, first and foremost, about concealing their true nature.
I think most Americans who say they favor Democratic Socialism, but then reference the Social Democracies of Europe, don’t really understand the difference between the two. Democratic Socialism is a step toward eliminating capitalism while a Social Democracy is capitalist based with an expansive social welfare system.
Very good point. Too bad we don’t have a national voice explaining it.
The European social democracies actually worked well for a number of years, as long as their populations were relatively homogeneous and their economies were relatively healthy. Many of them, however, shot themselves in the foot by allowing in masses of Middle Eastern and African migrants at the same time their GDP’s were plummeting and their unemployment was rising.
They worked well for the reasons you listed, and they were acceptable to the people because every European nation had been a monarchy in its recent past, with a population accustomed to a powerful Central Authority. Their hybrid governments were steps away from that, whereas in the United States moving toward that would be moving backward, away from the success of our Constitution.
Socialism is Death
I think we probably all remember the testimony of the FBI agent who infiltrated the Weather Underground back in the 70’s.
Hmmmmm…..wasn’t that the group led by Obama buddies and allies Bill (“guilty as sin and free as a bird”) Ayers and his lovely murderous bride Bernadine Dorhn?
You know, the people who hosted his coming-out party (into politics, not out of the closet 😉 ) and accompanied the Obama party (unofficially) on a state visit to India, where Bernie gave vile lying interviews to Indian journalists about the evils of America?
If I remember correctly, Bernie was at the meeting the agent is talking about.
Socialism has never fostered a higher quality of living for any one other than those who impose it. That’s an undeniable fact but members of the Democrat proletariat are only interested in equality. Even if that means equally miserable. That’s how stupid they are.
Good morning from Siesta Key beach south of Sarasota. I encourage everyone to come see this place. Large expanses of white sandy beaches and turquoise waters and Trump friendly. I have found my happy place.
I have to laugh every time I hear the new Democrat tag line “Big Ideas” – how many times now have Democrats had “big ideas” only to fail even bigger? How about if focus on “small results”? And not any more hair brained “big ideas”
So my understanding is that the Russians “systemically” messed around with the 2016 elections from about 2014 …. I still would like to know what Obama knew and when did he know it. Why isn’t the media asking that question?
“Messed with” is not very descriptive.
Keep in mind that the Left is furious about Russia “interfering” with our election, but the “interference” seemed to fall into a couple of categories—–informing Americans of misdeeds that our own Complicit Agenda Media had been covering up or trolling for braindead morons on social media, which is what the Left does day in and day out. I haven’t seen an example of any actual tinkering with vote tallies, for example.
In the 2018 election, I don’t think the social media efforts made a difference. We are talking about people who, even when faced with absolute incontrovertible facts simply ignore them, or as we have seen in their reactions to the Mueller report simply say they mean the opposite of what they say. A few snide comments on Facebook are not going to shift them. So it comes down to outrage at having information made public, after they have tried so hard to keep it hidden.
I haven’t seen anyone on the Right point out that the “interference” mostly consisted of doing the job the American media had not been doing—that is, uncovering and making public the misdeeds of people like Hillary.
It really does stretch the imagination to think that our elections were “interfered with” due to Russians and their social media antics. They did nothing more than social activists and our media do day in and day out every day of the year. Morning Joe is more of a threat to our republic than the Russians could ever dream of being.
Honestly how can anyone be so ignorant of our republic?
Mayor Pete – “Twice in my young lifetime, I’ve seen the American people overruled by the electoral college. It’s time for that to go because it’s undemocratic,”
He should be embarrassed for this statement but that would require the interviewer correcting him on our form of government which never happened because the interviewer is equally as stupid. And that’s where we find ourselves in 2019 in America.
How about you simon? Do you know why there is an electoral college?
I heard a Mayor Pete interview with Hugh Hewitt a few weeks ago, and he sounded so reasonable and articulate and—reasonable—as he spouted absolute nonsense. He was talking about needing Supreme Court justices who “can think for themselves” and not be locked into an ideology. Well, on the surface that sounds pretty reasonable, till you consider that the entire PURPOSE of the Court is to enforce an ideology.
Duh.
The Court was created to make sure that all judicial rulings comply with the Constitution. That, my friends, is an ideology.
As for the Electoral College, the Colorado legislature has signed onto the Popular Vote Compact, which, if enacted, would effectively remove Colorado from presidential elections allowing our electoral college votes to be allocated according to how people in Los Angeles or Manhattan think they should be.
In the Jared Polis IQ Test For Coloradans, he is trying to convince us that the millions of dollars that will not come into the state during a presidential election because no candidate will bother to campaign here will be replaced by the millions of dollars he claims will flow into the state in primary battles as we have moved our primaries up to be very early. But in fact the Democrat legislature has simply removed Colorado from the presidential election, as have Dem legislatures in several other states. That is the power of Electoral College, or in the case of the Left the danger of the Electoral College—-it keeps smaller states like ours in play.
As for Pete’s whine, it just needs a little tweaking: “Twice in my young lifetime I have seen the American people overruled by Leftist elites in Los Angeles or New York City….” There—fixed.
As for the Electoral College, the Colorado legislature has signed onto the Popular Vote Compact, which, if enacted, would effectively remove Colorado from presidential elections allowing our electoral college votes to be allocated according to how people in Los Angeles or Manhattan think they should be.
I heard this discussed a couple weeks ago. The point was made that the National Popular Vote movement is unconstitutional, but that it can’t be contested in court until it’s actually implemented during an election, where someone can show harm. It clearly violates this section of the Constitution:
My feeling is that the violation occurs when the compact is made, not when it’s used to steal an election. I have almost zero confidence that the Left is not going to get away with this.
My feeling is that the violation occurs when the compact is made, not when it’s used to steal an election. I have almost zero confidence that the Left is not going to get away with this.
I think they are trying to get around this by saying it is not a compact yet, but only an agreement to enter into a compact once enough states have agreed to do so. But that only postpones the Constitutional challenges to the whole thing, which will be triggered by the first effort to make the preliminary agreement an actual compact.
I suspect it was never expected to succeed, and is only a sneaky way of getting the idea out there by getting a bunch of Leftist state legislatures to approve it and hopefully add some credibility to it. I think/hope it will backfire, as so far all it has done in Colorado is make people talk about the fact that it essentially strips us of a vote in the presidential elections (except for the token ability to affect, in our small way, the national total) and to ensure that we will be ignored by every presidential candidate.
I can’t think of anything funnier than having Trump win the national vote and seeing all these blue states required to support him in the Electoral College.
Well, except for more Jim Acosta efforts at self-promotion. It will always be tough to top those.
(BTW, is that a double negative meaning a positive? I have almost zero confidence that the Left is not going to get away with this. I’m a little confused.)
I am hoping that a couple of the conservatives in Colorado who follow state politics very closely are keeping track of the money wasted by this legislature—money spent to join in a lawsuit against Trump, money spent to defend stupidity like this compact and the unconstitutionality of their Red Flag Law, which allows any person to claim that any other person “is a danger to himself or others” upon which, with no investigation or warning, that person’s guns can be forcibly taken from him. No due process, and of course then the injured party has to prove that he is innocent.
I guess I could have said I’m almost 100% confident they ARE going to get away with it. Is that better?
It is amazing what comes out of Democrats mouths.
Former Obama Justice Department Spokesperson Matt Miller did his best yesterday to justify the DNC and Clinton campaign’s hiring of foreign spy Christopher Steele during the 2016 presidential election.
“It is legal under United States law for a campaign to hire a foreign individual, to hire someone, to pay them to go out and conduct research or do other things for you. Campaigns do that from time to time. That’s what the DNC did,” Miller said. “It is illegal to accept help from a foreigner.”
So you can hire them, but you can not accept their help? Can someone explain this to me?
So you can hire them, but you can not accept their help?
It’s even worse than that. You can solicit op-o research from agents of a foreign government through an American cut-out, but you can’t listen to what someone has to say before deciding whether it warrants informing the FBI.
You can not only hire foreign agents but you can hire them to negotiate with other agents of other countries, and not just to do research but to invent out of whole cloth salacious stories to smear the opposition.
We were just talking about Terri Schiavo the other day, so I thought I would pass this along:
https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/lefts-continuing-lies-about-the-terri-schiavo-case
The article misses some points, such as the fact that her husband was suspected of injuring her in the first place, causing her brain injury, so killing her removed the possibility that she might regain enough ability to communicate to end up sending him to prison.
It does not discuss the testimony of her caregivers: That she was terrified of her husband, showed great fear when he was coming to visit and went into deep depression after she was left alone with him for long periods of time (mandated by the court) and that he refused to allow any kind of care that might spare her pain, such as range of motion exercises to alleviate cramping from muscle and tendon atrophy. It did not touch on the testimony of her caregivers that she could follow directions, indicate taste preferences and was learning how to swallow
And it ignores the fact that she understood the significance of the removal of the feeding tubes and fought desperately for her life as they were forcibly removed.
It also completely omits mention of the ghouls demanding that she be killed—thousands of people howling for her death, writing the most foul and vile things online and literally demanding that she be put to death.
The people advocating for communism, and who consider themselves communists, are precisely the type of people which we eliminated in WWII, now the same thing must take place here on American in the form of a Civil War in order to prevent what happened to the victims of Soviet Russia and Hitler’s Germany.
An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.
Talk about “eliminating” people because of different politics is pretty creepy.
Deal with the politics, yes.
Limit power and ability to impose those politics on others, yes,
Educate Americans so they can see and realize the evils of those politics, yes.
But the list of nations which have tried to “eliminate” political opponents is a list of brutal and tyrannical nations.
There is far less loss of life during war time, than there is during peace-time in nation’s with totalitarian governments.
How would you “eliminate” people? What would be the criteria? Who would make the decisions? What would be the process? Re-education camps? Gas chambers? Firing squads?
Your claim that There is far less loss of life during war time, than there is during peace-time in nation’s (sic) with totalitarian governments might be true. But it also seems to support my comment, that only totalitarian governments try to eliminate opponents or groups they find unacceptable. And when you say you think we should eliminate certain groups you seem to be advocating for a totalitarian approach here in the United States.
Amazona, there would be nothing to do with “Gas Chambers” or “Re-education camps” or “Firing squads” Oh there would probably be a gun fight, but it wouldn’t be rounding people up like Pol-pot did. None of that.
Amazona, I want you to know that I am a peace-loving guy. I avoid confrontation at all costs. I don’t want to see anyone die. But when I see people in my country who want to see me and my family die, either by direct or indirect interaction with me, and my loved ones, I see a need to prevent the Left interacting with me. They are like diseased animals, who serve no purpose but to place fear and hatred into the hearts of millions.
So, I don’t want to see how I can have a dialogue with them, I quit having dialogue with them a long time ago. The only thing I want to see happen right now is how to put a stop to them.
I don’t have any military background, no ROTC, no Army, no Navy, no Marines, no nothing. I know though that there are people out there who do have military experience, and are fully capable of organizing a militia, who would answer the call to arms.
Civil War would be like foreign war, and would necessitate enormous strategic planning. Which battalion goes here, and what squadron goes there.
That said, I don’t think you have to worry about ever having a civil war. If you wanna know my personal opinion, I think America is going to let go of liberty without firing the first round. America is eventually gonna go under.
I know you’re probably, “well, geez, Jeremiah, that’s a “bright” outlook on life.” Well, yeah, it’s not very hopeful, that’s for sure. I think that eventually that’s what’s going to happen. So, we might as well face it, or figure out a way to prevent it.
No, I’m not going to backstep on what I believe the solution should be. And we can disagree, that’s fine. I have no problem with that at all. I just don’t want to get into a big argument about it.
As Spook says, eliminating the Left by force would make us no better than them. There is such a huge difference between self defense and simply working to “eliminate” those with whom you disagree, there is no reason to go into it. You get it or you don’t.
I am not only older than you, probably by a lot, but someone steeped in studies of Leftism. You can’t tell me anything about it I don’t already know, you can’t paint a worse picture of it than the one I already have. I also believe it is a system which has always resorted to violence, and efforts to “exterminate” those they see as a threat to their power, and when/if that happens the retaliation and defense should be extreme.
Sorry, but your “solution” reeks strongly of another “Final Solution” and I find it profoundly offensive. I hate having ideas like this linked to conservatism. It drags us into the gutter.
I’m constantly torn between sharing Jeremiah’s sentiments while, at the same time, realizing that eliminating the Left by force would make us no better than them. That said, I do think they are likely to give us no choice, but I still believe it will be the Left that fires the first shot, and then all bets are off.
Quote of the Day:
Fine quotes. Too bad a good many people are oblivious to history and her lessons.
A good friend emailed this to me this morning. I could not agree more.
In some of today’s headlines alone there are obvious reasons to show that the left must not gain or retain any level of power to impose their communist government.
”VERMONT GOP GOV. SIGNS BILL DENYING PARENTAL RIGHT TO NOTIFICATION OF CHILD’S ABORTION”
“UK BANS ‘HARMFUL’ GENDER STEREOTYPES IN ADVERTISEMENTS”
“DENVER COUNCILWOMAN CALLS FOR ‘COMMUNAL OWNERSHIP’ OF LAND”
It doesn’t take much if any imagination what the articles are about, but as you read them you shake your head even more at the insanity. A Civil war is definitely here. It’s not currently fought with conventional weapons. Considering how the left’s policies and actions are flying off the hinges, I have little doubt it may come to that. I pray for Devine intervention before it gets to that and believe that Trump winning the Presidency is one such gift from Heaven. We’ll see what the future has in store. It will likely get uglier but not all of the negative will be carried on the shoulders of the right.
I was in my local sporting goods shop today, and the guns were flying off the shelves. Young people and elderly alike. It seems more and more that you can feel the sense of urgency in the air to prepare for some type of conflict. People are getting wound up. There was even a service member who came and purchased a firearm, he was all decked out in his uniform gear.
I agree, Spook, that was a great article. That guy , he knows his stuff when it comes to the current political situation.
I seen a long time ago, that there is no voting out of our political situation, there’s just too many people who have been indoctrinated in the schools who are concretely anti-American. And are firmly entrenched in the mindset that America must be governed according to a Stalinesque style regime. I just hope and pray that enough people can see this , and are willing to fight it with every ounce of grit and tenacity that they have when the time is ripe.
I agree with the writer. He used a phrase I like” “professional politician”. Many people voted for Trump because was, and is, NOT a professional politician, and so far he has been learning how to deal with politics without becoming one. That has made him a threat to all who have made politics their lifetime careers, even those who do not share the goals and agendas of the Left.
My latest audio book is about the philosophical foundation of the United States, and as the lecturer has gotten into the 1770s. with his foundation laid of the developing dissatisfaction with the government provided to the colonies by England, familiar names have started to pop up. Right now it is Benjamin Franklin, being discussed in detail, with a long quotation from John Hancock and, of course, passing references to people like Jefferson. I am hoping for a lot about more of the major players in the Revolution.
But what struck me as he went into detail about Franklin is that Franklin was a man who was a success in many fields, with an international reputation for his accomplishments, BEFORE he got involved in politics. And as I pondered that, I realized the superstars of the day who were wholly responsible for the successful revolution and then the creation of the most brilliant Constitution of any nation in the history of man were all like Franklin—-men who were successful in many areas of life, who were called to politics because of the circumstances of the day. And I realized that Trump can be described as such.
We have talked here about the original concept of our government as being run by citizens who would step out of their lives for a few years to serve their nation and then return to what we would hope had been successful lives—because we hoped for successful people to bring their talents to the government.
Trump has been shining a multi-million candlepower light on the dangers of professional politicians, and inevitable descent into tyranny they represent if not stopped. I think it would be powerful for the voices on the Right to start developing that theme, leading up to the election.