(And will it matter whether we’re talking about the Dems’ primary or the Presidential election?
It’s easy to frown and say, “Spare me your exaggeration! Socialism isn’t communism!”
Well…
“The goal of socialism is communism.” This quote is attributed to Vladimir Lenin, who knew something about both.
From history.com:
“Marxists often refer to socialism as the first, necessary phase on the way from capitalism to communism. Marx and Engels themselves didn’t consistently or clearly differentiate communism from socialism, which helped ensure lasting confusion between the two terms.” Read more at https://www.history.com/news/socialism-communism-differences .
One thing they seem to have in common is a policy of “guns for our party members only.”
Gonna be a couple of interesting races in any case…
I am still struggling to understand the difference between Socialism and Communism. Any difference is so subtle that I am unable to discern it.
The difference is in pronouncement and spelling!!
Socialism is the umbrella which covers Communism, Fascism, Nazism and other evil ‘isms’.
I’ve always found definitions based in economics to be a useful starting place.
Capitalism: The means of production is owned by the owner (what a concept!).
Fascism: The means of production is owned by the State, but in secret, thus it tells the owner what to do as if pulling on a marionette’s strings.
Socialism: The means of production is owned (stolen from the rightful owner) by the State.
Communism: The means of production is owned by the people, which defaults to State control, since the notion of “The People” is purposely amorphous.
Barack Obama, when confronted by Charlie Gibson with the statement that raising capital gains tax rates could result in a REDUCTION of revenues to the treasury, he replied, “Well, Charlie, what I’ve said is that I would look at raising the capital gains tax for purposes of fairness.”
What the Left hates is inequality of financial condition. Where Kennedy said “A rising tide lifts all boats,” the Left says that we must EQUALIZE classes, EVEN IF ALL OF THEM ARE LOWERED.
They won’t SAY they want a police state, but many of them would accept one as long as the ‘millionaires and billionaires’ get their come-uppance.
https://taxfoundation.org/obama-and-gibson-capital-gains-tax-exchange/
Over many years of perusal, I have concluded what socialists are all about: They are underachievers who are eaten up with jealousy of those who have worked harder or made better decisions than they. They wrap themselves in the mantle of lifting up the poor, but their real focus is to tear down the rich. When they have to choose between the two, every time they will attack the rich and let the poor fend for themselves. They idolize Cuba because Cuba has universal education, universal health care, and… universal poverty. To the socialists, the poverty is a good thing because it means there are no rich people for them to be jealous of and no high achievers for them to feel inferior to. To them, it truly is paradise.
Tom in Castle Rock,
Well said!!! I just want to point out that in addition to what you listed as the reasons for under-achieving, some people simply have less talent or vision than others. A person can do everything right, and work hard, but the Market may not like their product. For whatever reasons, some people in America will earn more than others. Instead of being thankful to be in this land of plenty, socialists are ungrateful, and envy others. They break the Tenth Commandment, and make themselves miserable.
I’m thankful to be around rich people. I don’t fear them, they don’t beg from me. They can be great customers, and they can hire me to work in their companies. The only benefit a poor person can bring to society is to be a worker. They don’t make good customers, and they don’t provide jobs for others. The rich help society by buying things, providing jobs and paying a lot of taxes. Of course not all rich people are beneficial. Some are like locusts George Soros.
Look at the poor in Los Angeles; living in tents on the sidewalk, using drugs, dropping the needles on the ground, defecating on the street and bothering people. Rich people live in nice-looking homes and they don’t bother others. Yeah, I’d rather hang out with the rich.
Keep this in mind. America does not consist of the haves and the have nots, America consists of the haves and the have-a-lots.
Of course, I need to point out that America would be better if any job at all could support a single person, if inflation didn’t eat up savings, and if Moms were not forced to work outside the home just to survive. Married Moms should be able to choose to stay home. I understand the attraction of socialism, because just being middle class in America is difficult for many who work hard.
yep – Khrushchev said they’d get us in small increments. And while our country can vote it’s way into socialism/communism, we’d have to shoot our way out of it! (not an original thought, but I think it succinctly expresses the situation)
If Karl Marx and Vladimir Lenin didn’t bother distinguishing between communism and socialism, I don’t see why Bernie Sanders should require me to distinguish between socialism and democratic socialism.
Nor, for that matter, between international socialism and national socialism. All the subtle variations on totalitarian government trend homicidal, and mostly genocidal.
Communism is simply Socialism on steroids. Technically, Socialism advocates that the means of industrial production shall be under State (or Government) control. Basically, it advocates that the all means of industrial production be Nationalized.
Communism carries this a step further by placing the whole of society under State control. Not simply just industrial production but with collective farms, government schools and universities, and with the elimination of any competing ideology that is not under central government control. For example, the suppression of other religions which represent competing ideologies.
I say “other religions” because the left-wing ideology seeks to become the universal religion. It seeks to replace worship of a Divine Creator with worship of the State. A universal central government is the God-Head to a left-wing communist.
So, Communism is simply a maximum form of Socialism that has been extended to the complete control of all aspects of a society rather than just specific control of the means of industrial production.
Both Socialism and Communism flow from the left-wing worldview that mankind is “Good but Weak”. The view that people, if left alone, will be forced into evil conditions by negative social forces. However, leftists believe that an Utopian Society can be built if an ultra-powerful Central Government can assume complete control over all aspects of a Society. Communism is a manifestation of the Left-Wing desire to place society under complete control so as to build this Utopia.
For example, in the case of Soviet Communism, the Marxists blamed the social forces of capitalism and class warfare for creating poverty and suffering for the people. Left-wing theory suggests that the replacement of capitalism by communism (with central party control of all of society) will eliminate poverty and class differences and create a Utopia (A Worker’s Paradise).
However, as anyone who is willing to actually learn from History knows, Communism (and its milder form of Socialism) only produces a loss of Freedom and a loss of initiative leading to a stagnate economy. Society become such that the Party Bosses become the Ruling Class and EVERYONE else languishes in poverty and misery.
This has been the pattern in dozens of countries. Venezuela is just the latest example. It is AMAZING to me that anyone still has any faith in Socialist / Communist principles after more than a century of repeated failures. It just goes to show the power of left-wing ideology (which is rooted deep in human psychology) and the power of propaganda and indoctrination as practiced by our left-wing school teachers and left-wing media / entertainment industries.
P.S. – Bernie Sanders calls himself a Democratic Socialist. The term is an oxymoron. A democracy is a society controlled by the people. Socialism is a society (ultimately) controlled by a powerful central government. Unless one assumes that the entirety of society is left-wing and supports the central government fully (which the leftists would love but which can never happen due to the inherent differences in human psychology), then democracy and socialism must ultimately be at odds with each other. Therefore, logically, they cannot exist together and the term Democratic Socialist is a fiction.
I suspect that Mr. Sanders knows this truth but uses the term anyway as pure propaganda. Mr. Sanders is, in fact, a pure Socialist and (if he ever gets power) may well prove to actually be a Communist.
Notable countries that suffered badly (and some still do) under despotic Communist rule–China, Cuba, North Korea, and the former Soviet Union and East Germany are excellent examples–didn’t start out as socialist states; they had experienced extreme internal crises such as gross political corruption, social inequality, terrible economies, foreign invasion, and revolution. Apparently communism initially seemed appealing to some citizens of those countries, at least until their regimes’ autocratic honchos took over. Yet much the same can be said about fascist countries in the early- to mid-20th century.
Some countries that embraced unrestricted socialism–here I’m thinking of Venezuela and Greece–where almost everyone is on the dole, typically collapse due to national bankruptcy, laziness, and political cupidity.
Yet other countries–such as Sweden, Denmark, Norway–practice socialist domestic policies like universal healthcare, public pension plans, strong labor unions, etc., but are still fundamentally capitalist, and their citizens report significantly more satisfaction than free-market-economy countries like the good ol’ USA, where only the super-wealthy enjoy socialism (huge tax breaks, subsidies, total access to political weasels who protect the rich) while the rest of us get laissez-faire capitalism!
Right on the money! And oddly enough, money is what socialists/communists are greedy for, though they deny it.
Spencer – I disagree with the ideas expressed in your final paragraph. If you listen to the propaganda put out by the Anti-American Media, it will certainly lead you to think that America is the “Arm Pit” of the World. Those people truly are the “Anti-American Media”. What else would they say?
The European Countries that you mention do seem to try to mix a “Socialist-Lite” domestic policy with a Capitalist economic policy. They are counting upon the performance of a Capitalist economy to help provide the funding for all the State-Provided benefits.
However, there is a price to pay for these benefits. Despite what Socialists, like Sanders and Warren say, there is no “Free Lunch”. The people in these counties pay for these benefits with sky-high taxes and (inevitability) a loss of Liberty.
I recommend against consuming too much of the poison put out by the Anti-American Media. Consuming too much of that stuff is bad for your mental health. I would also note that recent surveys have found that about 90% of Americans are satisfied with their life under the Trump Administration. See this link:
https://news.gallup.com/poll/284285/new-high-americans-satisfied-personal-life.aspx
If these Socialist-Lite, Euro-Countries are doing better than 90%, then their citizens must truly be giddy with JOY! 🙂
Socialism / Communism is not in the “dust-bin” of History (as it should be!) because of various negative traits in Human Psychology:
1) Envy – There will always be people who look around and see other people doing better than themselves. This envy will always create a desire to play Robin Hood (to rob the rich and give to the poor). Socialism / Communism appeals to these people.
2) Sloth – Working for a living is hard. Getting an easy and secure “Government” job can be an less-stressful path. Especially if you can “network” into the “Club” so that you can reap your share of the tax-payer’s dollars. The large Government approach of Socialism / Communism creates plenty of Government Jobs and, so, appeals to these people.
3) Lust for Power – An all powerful, Central Government really appeals to those who lust for power and influence. Those who seek to RULE the LIVES of OTHERS. Those who are tyrants in their Hearts. Socialism / Communism really, really, really appeals to these people. It appeals to them like catnip does to a cat!
So, Socialism / Communism is driven by some of the darkest influences in the human soul. It is driven by envy, sloth and an unquenchable lust for political power. It is a dark and negative ideology that has never proved beneficial, to the people, in the long run. Do not be fooled by the lipstick that the Media puts on this PIG!
Socialism / Communism is one of the most destructive and dangerous ideologies ever devised by the Human Mind. It is a “Siren’s Song” that lures people and entire Nations to their DOOM! Heed the Words of Jesus and say “Get Behind Me, Satan” whenever anyone tries to push this ideology upon you!
Hmmm, TN_MAN, who exactly are the “Anti-American Media”, and what is their agenda? Could they be organizations that dare to disagree with the prevaricating Orange Blowhard in the White House and his sycophants in Congress?
But to your point about the satisfaction of some (and certainly not all) European (quasi-socialist) countries’ citizens, according to the studies I’ve perused, the vast majority of those folk are quite happy to pay higher taxes to obtain the government benefits they receive. Verily, there “is no free lunch”, but in certain cases the lunch is plentiful and tasty–if one pays for it.
Spencer – “who exactly are the ‘Anti-American Media’, and what is their agenda?
I am somewhat taken back by your question. It is rather like having someone ask you (in all seriousness as a blind person might), what is the Sun? The question is bewildering since the answer is so obvious. However, I will attempt to explain it as I would to someone who is a new visitor to the United States from Tajikistan.
The news media in the United States has always leaned a bit toward the left side of the political spectrum. They have also always shown a propensity for “Yellow Journalism”. This has been true going all the way back to the days of William Randolph Hearst.
However, during the turbulent 1960’s and the coverage of the Vietnam War, the news media in the United States increasingly turned “Hard Left”. One factor in this has been the consolidation of media ownership by just a few big media companies. These parent companies have formed a “crony Capitalism” relationship with Establishment Democrats and, even, some establishment Republicans in Big Government.
The result is that true journalism is effectively DEAD (at least in most of the big Media Companies) in 21st Century America. As we have seen with their fawning coverage of Democrat Presidents (Example: President Obama) and their poisonous coverage of Republican Presidents (Examples: Presidents Trump, George W. Bush and Ronald Reagan), much of big media in the U.S. have become propagandists for the Democrats and for the worldwide Left in general.
In fact, these media outlets (controlled by global corporations) are really organs of the World-wide, globalist, left-wing movement. Their allegiance is to global left-wing ideology, not to America. They push a worldview that is distinctly “Anti-American” nowadays. This is one reason that they hate President Trump so intensely. His message of “Make America Great Again” flies in the face of a Media who want to push the message of “Make Left-Wing Ideology World Dominate” and who would greatly prefer to see America “brought to Heel” under left-wing control.
The partizan nature of the current media is beyond doubt. Even they acknowledge it. For example, see this link:
https://www.lifezette.com/2018/10/trump-faced-92-percent-negative-media-coverage-mrc-study-shows/
So, who are the “Anti-American” Media? All I tell you is to just tune your TV to CNN, MSNBC, the BBC or open up your web browser and go to the pages for the New York Times or the Washington Post. The globalist, left-wing, “Anti-American” agenda will come pouring out of your viewing screen.
Just follow my previous advice and do not consume too much of this stuff. It is not good for your mental health. I believe that to be true even if you are a rabid leftist yourself. It is pure poison if you are a Conservative.
“no free lunch” in Sweden, Denmark, etc? Then WHY are the Swedes in piarticular raging against the govenment policies that provide that FREE LUNCH to the hordes of recent human imports who are freeloading off their system disrupting and destroying life as they’ve known it for fifty plus years, and may leaving? Precisely BECAUSE the FREE LUNCH govenment are handing uot to these hordes of imports? These imprts refuse to assimilata and become productive, involved memers of Swdish society, oreferring t barricade themselves into encaves where they persist in living like thy had in the SHoles they left, and to be fed, coddled, housed, etc, at pubilc expense. And they CERTAINLY will not have any part of abiding by the lwas of Sweden. In fact, thye are working very hard at imposing THEIR form of law, sharia, upon the rest of their “ungrateful” host nation.
Of course, no media person will openly declare themselves anti-american; they just continue to throw rocks at America. Speaking of prevarication, when was the last time you heard, in the dominant media, the phrase “left-wing extremist”? From the common media offerings, one could easily conclude there are none. The spectrum normally presented is on one side are the right-wing extremists and the conservative ideologues while opposing them are the “moderates”.
I’ve heard Sweden, Norway and Denmark described as capitalist economies with big welfare programs. It’s almost as if they use capitalism to create abundance, then try to use the government to dole out some of that abundance. It works until they run out of other people’s money, as Margaret Thatcher said.
Isn’t it odd that Karl Marx tried to create a new form of government, yet, when tried, it ends up looking just like the old monarchies? We don’t call the leaders of communist countries kings, but they rule like kings anyway. This is especially true in North Korea, where Kim Jong Un followed his father and grandfather into power.
In the old monarchies, the king and those around him lived well, but the serfs or peasants didn’t have it so great. In communist countries, members of the communist party live well, but the people? Not so much.
Comrade Sanders should borrow a well used slogan from his idol Vladimir Lenin and promise his fanatical supporters, “A chicken in every pot!” then add his own line, “And pot with every chicken!” Naturally, the pot will be supplied by Barry Obama who probably sold lots of that stuff before he became our Dear Leader, and the birds will be provided by Bernie’s uncle, Colonel Harlan in Kentucky.
When I was a young man, Sweden was extolled as the shining example of a socialist democratic state. Funny how it also led the world in suicides, but that’s another story.
I worked with a Swede with a green card. He taught me a lot of things, but could be irritating. When problems arose you could count of him to intone “In Sveeden is not like this”. One night we got into a discussion on why he was in the US and he had a one word answer: “Taxes” and went on to explain. Yep, all the blessings of socialism were paid for with sky high taxes. And, while there was no strong person on a white horse dictatorship, it was replaced by a dictatorship of the faceless bureaucrat who’s just going by the regulations. (Frequently exercising their own petty authority while cloaking themselves in those regs. I met several of those folks while handling administrative stuff here in the US. I never beat them directly, but always won on appeal. At least under the current system.)
Somewhere around the time that Maggie Thatcher managed to wean the UK from some of the worst of their particular experiment, Sweden realized she was right, and they were, in fact, running out of other people’s money and quietly made some changes. But, somehow, they lost their status of being the “shining state on the mountain.”
I expect a lot of the appeal of socialism comes from our educational system. One of my particular gripes is that professional “educators” in the public school systems spend very little time relating any of the stuff they’re teaching to the real world. Back when, there was a concerted effort to make sure that what was being taught was linked to the real world. (We’re apparently in the 3rd or 4th version of “new math”.) Oh, wait, could it be that very little of what the currently teach has relation to the real world? I do know from experience that they don’t relate trigonometry to the real world, where it’s very necessary in a wide variety of tasks.
The icing on the cake is the higher education system. The costs of which have escalated at several times the rate of inflation or cost/price spiral. The emphasis that you’ve gotta get that sheepskin to have a good life has been way oversold. As the institutions grew, the number of departments in the various university “schools” have multiplied beyond that marketplace need. Naturally, if one gets a worthless education, “leveling the playing field” becomes attractive. Of course, we also have all those “experts” in various fields explaining why our current system is so WRONG.
The difference between socialism and communism is that in communism the “proletariat” own the means of production (although ownership and control aren’t the same things) while in socialism the government owns and controls the means of production.
“Means of production” includes everything from a 10×10 garden patch to a steel mill and a nuclear energy facility.
Communism presumes that all men are inherently fair and just and it is the system that makes some selfish and power hungry. So if the system is inherently fair then all humans will be happy and satisfied little worker ants, to each according to his needs, from each according to his abilities. Thus communism is based on a totally absurd belief in the human condition and cannot possibly work.
Socialism, on the other hand presumes that the ruling elite, being in charge, having managed to manipulate their way to weaalth and power, also know what is best for everybody else as well. Socialism is where control, ownership is an irrelevance, control of the means of production is centralised in the hands of the elite who, as history has shown us again and again, autocratically dictate not merely production but also the mores and behaviors of all those not part of the ruling class.
Because the elite have no concept of what real life for the vast majority of the population is like their rules and plans are ultimately dysfunctional and if they cannot maintain an iron control (and even if they can) the system will crumble (eventually) due to poor management.
We are now seeing the rsults of socialist-cum-communist governments in Venezuela, N. Korea and mainland China (whose GDP figures may have been fudged over the past decades to make it appear their system works better than it actually does) where a bio-warfare virus has been released (presumably in error) because the workers are not happy people in their dictatorial surveillance state.
The difference between communism and socialism is that communism cannot exist and socialism cannot succeed.
I think it was Dr. Sowell who wondered why socialism is to be judged only by the lofty aspirations of its promoters, whilst capitalism is to be judged only by the worst example of it practice that anyone can find for any period of time.
So someone has the perfect political system? Highly debatable, but even if it was perfect, perfect to whom? Who gets to define perfection? The communists never could figure out why so few of the proletariat came over to their side, after all, they knew what was best for them. And they would what was best for them, even if they had to slaughter them by the million. Even if they had to keep them behind an iron curtain. After so many broken eggs, an omelet was bound to show up some decade or another.
America is where each citizen gets to decide what happiness to pursue, and how to try to get there, so long as they do not injure others.
Come to think of it, there is a socialist paradise several miles to the west of me. They stay there for free. None of them go hungry. No churches. Medicine is always there when sickness goes around. Absolutely no guns. They are not over worked. It kind of stinks though, as it is a cattle feed lot. Those who want to live like feed lot cattle should plot their course to a country more in line with their leanings, instead of trying to ruin one of the last really free places left on earth.
For a real eye opener, find a copy of one of the reprints of William Brandford’s amazing account of the Pilgrims as they left England for Holland, came back when the old king died, then left again this time under charter by the new King to establsh a colony in NOrth America. Bradford was involved the entire time. After they arrived in Plymouth Massachussetts they firsts set about taking care of basic survival issues as winter was fast aproaching. In the wpring the little community (half had died from disease/ijury on the hard voyage across) set about plotting out the land they had settled upon. The former occupants had left and gone away, so they were not “stealing” that land, no one had it. They dividd theland amongst themselves, and established a socialist system, “from each according to his ability, to each according to their need”. The farmlends were held in common, folks worked as they saw fit, the plan was to share the produce evenly amongst themslves. Harvest came, it was put by, and they nearly starved that winter. As pring was upon them they began to examine what they had done and searched the Scriptures to find a better way. They did. What was that “better way” Capitalism, of ocurse. The land was divided up into parcels, and each family took up one appropriate to the size of the family.Each familyh worked their own land, planting, tilling, watring, etc, as THEY saw fit, and as often as they chose to. That next fall the abundance of the harvest frmo the exactlh same acreage on which they’d nearly straved the first full year there was several multiples of their near starvation. They realised that the cause of the wildly increased prosperity was MOTIVATION. Each family worked THEIR OWN land, applied themselves diligently to be good stewards of THEIR plot, tools, resources, tc. They had a superabindance that next winter gave generously to the indians, theyr new friends, and it was upwrad from there. tose people becomeing VERY prosperous in a sort period of time. As that little colony became larger, Bradford was selcted to be their first governor. His account covered the time in England, Holland, Egnalnd again, getting the Mayflower and preparing for the corssing, the ovyage, settlement, and the first fory years of that colony. “Of Plymouth Olantatioon” is the name of the book, It is his first person account of some sixty years with those people.
I have often thuoght that the first attmpt at socialism and its utter failure, and its replacement with captialism and private owners hip the ofllowng year is a lesson buried in a largey unkown period of our history.
I’d like to grab Bernie by the scruff, sit him down, put his nose into that book and MAKE him read, out loud….. but he won’t.
Tionico,
I believe everything you wrote, except one small detail. If I’m not mistaken, no Pilgrims died during the Mayflower voyage, but one of the ship’s crewmen died. About half of the Pilgrims did die, but it was during that first very hard winter on land. The Mayflower may have been anchored and used for supplies, and even as living quarters, but they had already landed at Plymouth Rock when the dying began. As you said, they experimented with communism, then turned to capitalism and prospered.
It should be remembered that (the First American, Native American, Indian) Squanto taught them to plant corn using fish for fertilizer. He had been to England and spoke English. Most of his tribe died from disease before the Pilgrims arrived.
We only need to look back at history to see how Socialism is the beginning of Communism. Good points Mas, keep up the great posts, I look forward to reading them and reading the comments!
“Power flows from the barrel of a gun!” Is one on Chairman Moa’s best know quotes. At the local Farmers Market, the local group against charter schools cites reasons like “Social Justice (justus) “ and other thing straight out the the Red Army manual of 1943. The candidates are only a symptom of a lager problem! Most of the “issues “ in the campaign are not something most of us heard people talking about at the dinner or while getting a hair cu. Our Academy is totally out of touch with reality! And is productive in expanding the problems!
Uncle Dave,
If children were required to be in a government building six hours a day, where they could be bullied, taught anti-scientific things about multiple genders, taught to hate their own country, taught that there lifestyle was destroying the planet, were not taught accurate versions of history and civics, and were not prepared to succeed in the world economy, and were often left defenseless against killers, would that qualify as child abuse?
I see Moms accompany their children at the bus stop because they are afraid a panel van will drive up and kidnap their children. They are sending their kids to a school which will teach them to become helpless, dependent Democrats. Strong delusion.
Oops! Wrong “their” there before the word “lifestyle.” I capitalize “Moms” on purpose to show respect. I will try anything to try and strengthen the American family.
In reference to our Socialist Comrades on the Left, the Pro-2A Group, Gun Owners of America, is trying their hand at using the Left’s own tactics against them. After all, a good sword should cut both ways, isn’t that so?
See this link for the story:
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2020/03/gun_owners_of_america_uses_alinsky_tactics_against_sen_chuck_schumer.html
While a good idea, I am doubtful that this tactic will be effective. The American Left has also been careful to rig up a “Two-Tiered” Justice System anywhere that they have sway. This “unjust” Justice System is carefully designed to exempt Democrats from having to live by the laws that they impose upon us “Deplorables”. So, I fully expect that a Left-Wing NY Judge will sweep this complaint “under the rug” just as fast as he can grab hold of a broom. 🙂
Still, it is fun to highlight the “deep and wide” hypocrisy of the American Left.
TN_MAN,
I have a different take on this one. I believe Senator Schumer has First Amendment rights and can say whatever he wants. We need to be free to speak offensively and we need to extend that right to the other side as well.
Mad Donna’s words about blowing up the White House and Kathy Griffin’s severed head stunt were worse than what Schumer said. But it is fun to show their hypocrisy, as you said,
@ Roger – “I believe Senator Schumer has First Amendment rights and can say whatever he wants.”
That is certainly one way to look at it. However, another way to look at it is that there are limits to all Rights. Even the Right of Free Speech. Did Senator Schumer cross the line and engage in threats rather than just “Free Speech”? Did he threaten Justices of the SCOTUS on the very grounds of the Court (a violation of Federal Law)? Did his words rise to the level of a threat against others as defined under New York’s Red Flag Law.
Some argue that Senator Schumer went too far to claim exemption for his words under the First Amendment.
Maybe Senator Schumer should “face the music” and let the Law work out whether he went too far or not. The Left wants to impose these Red Flag laws upon us. Should not this law apply to Senator Schumer too? Or are Politically-Powerful Democrats above the law?
If the Laws are not applied equally, then we have a problem. Perhaps the Gun Owners of America want a “test case” to illustrate if there is a problem or not. After all, the first step in dealing with any problem is to acknowledge that the problem exists.
Socialism means, “a piece of pie for everyone, if we have a pie.”
Communism means, “a piece of pie for everyone, if we believe it’s good for you.”
Capitalism means, “a piece of pie for everyone, if you want it and work for it.”
To paraphrase the sage Col. Jeff Cooper…”The answer to socialism and communism is retaliation..” We have not been good at that. The frog is getting VERY hot in the pot…
Dee Herman,
I agree with you. Someone could make the case that we have had some success keeping communism out of other countries, like South Korea. We’ve also kept it out of some other countries, while failing at a few. The big problem is, like you say, we have not been very good at keeping communism out of America! This is because America strives to be tolerant, and the communism here masks itself. It really is Fabian Socialism, but tends to the same thing as communism………a big, all-powerful government, which is the opposite of the America ideal.
Tru dat!
We are supposed to be tolerant of the intolerance we are subjected to.
We are supposed to have ‘zero tolerance’ of gun violence. Yet, I just had to reprimand an employee for threatening to ‘go get his gun’ because he is a ‘disgruntled employee’. I wanted to fire him immediately, but was overruled by Ownership. Only got a ‘final warning’ for it. He ‘didn’t remember saying it’, although multiple parties heard him. Then he has the nerve to say ‘ain’t nobody needs to carry a gun anyway’. Really? He is one of the reasons I DO CARRY, every stinkin’ day! And, I suppose it would not be ‘fair’ if I protected myself with my AR Pistol if he only has a .380!
As a former Manager I had 20 years ago would say, ‘Fair is where you get cotton candy.’ Life is not fair. Bad Guys are not fair. Disease is not fair. But Communism, they would have you believe, IS !
Dee Herman,
Communism is almost fair. The people are all poor, but the members of the ruling party are rich. If the rulers and the ruled were all poor, then communism would be fair.
Bernie Sanders doesn’t like all the inequality he sees in the USA. Billionaires, homeless and everyone in between. I’ll take American inequality over communist equality.
Consider that for a few days America has had a toilet paper shortage while for a few years, Venezuela has had a food shortage.
Comments are closed.