by Patricia Anthone, America Outloud:
Why do we on the political right continue to argue that “socialism doesn’t work”? Is there an instance in which socialism has failed to deliver total control to the governing administration that institutes it?
Since the goal of socialism is totalitarian control by a dictatorial central government, we must conclude that socialism actually works BRILLIANTLY.
We who would preserve economic liberty seem to be losing the “argument” against the rising popularity of socialism primarily because we fail to frame the debate at all. A “debate” is short-lived when framed by socialists as a contest between “greedy capitalists and compassionate socialists.”
TRUTH LIVES on at https://sgtreport.tv/
(1) We assume that to “work,” a governing system must permit human progress and prosperity.
In the mind of a power-seeker, such human thriving is not at all necessary. In fact, a population teetering on the edge of survival is easier to control in many respects. Control is the goal. Socialism delivers control effectively. Therefore, socialism “works.” We must accept the power-lust of those who promote socialism. Evil exists. Assuming that socialists mean well but are mistaken delays and diminishes our defensive response.
(2) By accepting socialists’ fake-morality frame.
“Yeah, but we can’t afford it” is a patently stupid response that allows socialists to claim the moral high ground. Yet it forms the basis of most Congressional Republicans’ response to socialist policy proposals.
A competent response to socialist proposals must first deconstruct the fake-compassion frame. There is nothing moral about power-seeking at the expense of respect for individual persons.
Mamdani’s plan to drive private grocers from the NYC market, for example, won’t reduce the real costs of producing, processing, packaging, distributing, or retailing food even if that plan involves temporarily undercutting grocery store prices with tax-subsidized “city-owned grocery” stores. The only goal that such a plan can achieve is the elimination of a great many sources of food from NYC.
When we speak out about this scheme, our focus should be on the immorality of abusing the force of law and the power to tax in a destructive campaign to do lasting harm to NYC’s food-market sector.
(3) We allow socialists to conflate bodily needs with “basic human rights.”
Having done so, we are then presented as heartless bastards for asserting that food, housing, clothing, and medical care, while necessities of living, are not rights.
“If it’s required for survival, then it’s only moral that we should ALL own it because we all have a right to live,” argues the young socialist.
Wrong.
If “all” own the food stores, the hospitals, the pharmaceutical corps., the suppliers of lumber, computer components, phones, etc., then,
…who exercises the RIGHTS of OWNERSHIP?
“Collective ownership” is actually government ownership because the rights of ownership cannot be socialized. The government will appoint one of its own to decide who will produce what, when, and for whom. The government will exercise all the rights of ownership.
Read More @ AmericaOutloud.com
