Forum Home | Log in | Signup | My Page | Rules | FAQ | Boards | Members | Search
« 6TH POPE Home | Email msg. | Reply to msg. | Post new | Board info. Previous | Home | Next

Re: My post to an economist

By: Fiz in 6TH POPE | Recommend this post (0)
Fri, 15 Jul 22 11:54 PM | 30 view(s)
Boardmark this board | 6th Edition Pope Board 		Msg. 33670 of 60008
(This msg. is a reply to 33665 by Beldin)
Jump:
Jump to board:
Jump to msg. #

Very thoughtful, Beldin! Maybe you can help me tighten this up?

My goal, again, isn't to come up with a too-long list of reasons why Socialism isn't a good idea. I think that has been tried by intellectuals for over a century, and the Socialism keeps spreading.

My idea is to strike the root and leave the opposition either speechless ... or ADMITTING they are opposed to liberty and in favor of Collectivism.

I am also thinking I may start using the word "collectivism" a lot more. I've been using words like "totalitarianism", "Statism", "Communism", and "Fascism" for some time because I can define them cleanly.

But "collectivism" makes it considerably more clear, I think? To my mind, CHOICE REALLY ONLY APPLIES TO INDIVIDUALS. Collectives are all about LACK-OF-CHOICE, typically because they will break you or KILL YOU if you don't shut up and go along with THEIR collective.

By the way, every layer of restriction is another degree of freedom removed. As I like to point out, a governor in a mechanical system is something which REDUCES freedom (choice). A government is always and everywhere about REMOVING freedom. One freedom or another, one minority at a time, is inexorably extinguished.

People who think “their” minority group is somehow going to gain long term security and benefit by stripping the security, choice, and freedom of other minority groups is a pervasive disease in the world.

And, yes, Hayek is also right that socialism translates to higher prices and increased corruption, as people stop doing productive things and others realize they can win big by becoming "King of the Hill". But, when you only have one minute to explain the problem with socialism, the argument needs to be VERY concise and hard to dismiss.


 - - - - -
View Replies (1) »



» You can also:
- - - - -
The above is a reply to the following message:
Re: My post to an economist
By: Beldin in 6TH POPE
Fri, 15 Jul 22 10:37 PM 		Msg. 33665 of 60008

fizzy,

I use the terms Classical Liberal and Socialist.

A Socialist believes the power of choice belongs to the state, rather than the individual, and the state should use its power (through coercion) to bring about "equality" - Karl Marx ~ "From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs."

A Classical Liberal believes the power of choice belongs with the individual. Each individual should be equal as to opportunity, but one must also acknowledge that everyone has different abilities and work ethics with which to apply the abilities they have been given. Therefore, "equality of outcome," which is the desire of Socialists, ultimately will not - cannot - actually happen. The state should exist to facilitate, to the best of its ability while dutifully honoring the superiority of individual rights and freedoms over the restricted powers of the state, the "equality of opportunity" for all of its citizens and then stay out of the way to allow them to succeed or fail based on their own merits and efforts.

Socialism fails EVERY. DAMN. TIME. it is tried because:

1. "Equality of outcome" is a childish fantasy that will never, ever happen in actuality. Some people are smarter and work harder than others, and they will either enjoy the rewards of their successful efforts or they will "go John Gault." Ultimately, the producers in society will refuse to continue to apply themselves if the majority of the rewards from their efforts are confiscated by the state and financial support for the state will eventually wither.

2. The state will quickly become heavily bureaucratic, which will make it very inefficient and incompetent. It WILL NOT be able to compensate for the brain-drain caused by the reclusive withdrawal of its most productive citizens and WILL FUBAR everything it tries to control.

3. The leaders of the state, belying their expressed sentiment of "equality," will actually view themselves as "the elite" who should be provided with a luxurious lifestyle at the expense of the other "little people" whom they purport to rule over. This will definitely cause simmering resentment that will continue to grow until it finally boils over.

4. Generally, people will only suffer so much coercion before they start to sabotage the efforts of their oppressors and then move on towards open rebellion.

Don't know if my thoughts are of any help, but the foregoing is my quick 2 cents worth.

Regards,

B. 

« 6TH POPE Home | Email msg. | Reply to msg. | Post new | Board info. Previous | Home | Next