Posted on 01/30/2004 12:42:48 AM PST by GeronL
This should be sent to all the talk show hosts...
Interesting stuff
Production ends, people starve.
Hey, FR has been mentioned in several newspaper articles lately, I just did a google search...
Thanks for posting it!!!!
Just damn.
If you want on the list, FReepmail me. This IS a high-volume PING list...
. . . It is high time to discard, once and for all, these most harmful illusions about the possibility of “unity” or “peace” with the Dittmanns and the Crispiens, with the Right wing of the German Independent Social-Democratic Party, the British Independent Labour Party, the French Socialist Party, etc. It is high time for all revolutionary workers to purge their parties of these trends, and form genuinely united Communist parties of the proletariat.. . . which makes clear that Lennin applied the term "right wing" to other socialists who were not sufficently militant.N. Lenin
September 24, 1920
Letter To
The German and the French Workers
And as Hayek bemoans in a preface to later editions of his classic The Road to Serfdom, American usage of the word "liberal" means "very nearly the opposite" of what Hayek meant, writing in Britain. That, to my understanding, is because the brand name "socialism" didn't sell in America as it did in Europe, so the socialists rebranded themselves "liberals"--thereby taking from those of us whom Americans now call "conservatives" what Hayek called "a nearly indispensible word."
"Liberal" socialists and "conservative" advocates of freedom to change are really a singular American confusion. And the confusion of "right wing" versions of socialism with--of all things--American traditions of freedom, is of a piece with that. And no accident. Indeed the very root "social" in "socialism" is deceitful; socialists systematically conflate "society" with "government." They do so because "society" is a nice, cooperative word whereas "government"--their actual intent--is coersion. And they do it so unremittingly that we have learned to check our wallets whenever we hear the word "social." Notwithstanding the fact that social interaction--e.g., free markets--is what we stand for. But they have essentially evicerated the word.
Such systematic confusion betrays the existence of a systematic effort to control the language and thus to control thought--that is, Newspeak. The natural question is, "How could Newspeak possibly be instituted in free America?" I believe that I am converging on the answer in this FR thread. A sort of conspiracy, actually driven by obvious commercial incentives, operates in plain sight in journalism. Anyone with one eye open has seen it, but (surprise!) it is hard to give it a name.
This "law" established that only Aryan Germans who could prove the purity of their bloodline back to 1800 could own a farm.The Old Testament can I believe be used to suport the idea of, as law of the founding era put it, holding property "in fee tail." Precisely how the feudal estates were held together--the oldest son inherited the entire real estate of his father with the proviso that he had to pass the entire real estate down to his oldest son. Which of course excludes the idea of using the property as collateral for a loan; it would be illegal to relinquish ownership of it.Every farm up to 308 acres was declared a hereditary estate-it could not be sold, divided, mortgaged or foreclosed on for debt. With the death of its owner, it would pass to his nearest male relative, who in turn was obligated to provide an income and education for his relatives. The peasant farmer was called a bauer or peasant, an "honored title" that he forfeited if he broke the "peasant honor code"-that is, if he stopped farming.
The inheritor of such land might easily be "property poor," and (according to Dumas Malone's biography of Jefferson) it was common for members of the House of Burgess of Virginia to get a law passed which allowed a member to sell a particular parcel of land to escape the problem. But Jefferson, when he fell into the clutches of that trap, cut the Gordian Knot--he pushed through the House of Burgess the following law:
Problem solved. Not evaded, but abolished.
The irony of Hitler's version is that it pretty clearly turns the landowner into a de facto serf.
Under 'pure' socialism, production stops and people stave, experiment over.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.