Posted on 08/05/2026 4:51:32 AM PDT by MtnClimber
Here is a fundamental proposition to which I subscribe: The only thing worth being in life is an adult. By the word “adult” I have something specific in mind. An adult is someone who, at a minimum, either alone or in a family structure, provides for himself or herself. That’s the minimum. Even more worthwhile is being an adult who also, through effort and within a family structure, creates and provides for a family. Still more worthwhile is being an adult who, after fully providing for a family, also assists others who may need help, beginning with extended family, and potentially then reaching to the broader society and to charity.
I understand that there are substantial numbers of people who are not capable of achieving the status of “adult” as I have defined it. They may have mental illnesses or incapacities that make it impossible to cope in our challenging world. However, for myself, I cannot imagine living any other way than as an adult. And I also can’t imagine why anyone who is capable of living as an adult would willingly give up that opportunity.
The alternative to living as an adult is living as a dependent on others or on society. You are relieved of all responsibilities, and somebody else somehow comes up with whatever you may need in life, be it food or housing or health care. Your own life is no longer burdened by the need to provide for yourself and family, and you can live without stress and without need to fulfill obligations.
In other words, this is the life of a zoo animal. Does any human being actually want to live such a life?
If you think that no sentient human could possibly want such an existence, then you need to look at the program of the group calling itself the Democratic Socialists of America. That organization has posted what it calls “Our Program” at the website program.dsausa.org. Here is the image on the opening page:
And yes, the whole idea is that in the world we envision, no stress or effort is required on your part, while all the necessities of life will be provided as public goods. This apparently is the sales pitch that is catching on with some substantial cohort of college-educated young people. It turns out that remarkable numbers of people, particularly these young people, think that they would enjoy a life of zero stress plus handouts. I don’t believe they actually would enjoy it if they had to live it, but they seem to think they would.
I’ll provide some pithy quotes, but there is much more of same where this comes from.
First, imagine the stress-free life, where everything is provided by somebody else:
Speaking of bills: you don’t really have them anymore. You have no debt. You don’t need health insurance. You don’t pay a mortgage or have a landlord, because comfortable housing is a human right. Your retirement is publicly funded. Food, education, energy, medicine, and transportation aren’t for-profit businesses; they are common goods and utilities.
(Bold in original.).
In this imaginary world, there would be no need to work or pay bills:
[W]hat if you were free to spend your time how you like without worrying about cost or dreading going back to work? What if you didn’t have to think about paying rent or loans at the end of the month, or saving for college, or affording groceries? What would that be like?
But don’t worry; you “don’t have to live like this,” i.e., as an adult:
Democratic socialists know that no one has to live like this. If we lived in a classless society and governed ourselves, we could freely build a world without war or poverty. We could build a world where no one suffers for their race, gender, or religion, and everyone is free, equal, and cared for. Building this world is the guiding star of our movement. When we labor for our common good instead of private profit, we can all have a secure and dignified life, and use our time and talents how we wish.
A “classless society” where “everyone is free, equal, and cared for.” Yup, sounds like the zoo. But don’t they have zookeepers over there? How does somebody get to be one of those?
My experience in this is somewhat limited, but I’ve never known anyone who lived a grown-up life of dependency and was happy about it. People who live on handouts never find the handouts sufficient or satisfying. Why would they?
My daughter Jane has recently been making short reels and posting them on Instagram. A few days ago she posted one of these reels making fun of the DSA’s program. She alternates quotes from the DSA site with images of things like bread lines in the Soviet Union and garbage-strewn streets in Cuba. Here is a link .
|
Click here: to donate by Credit Card Or here: to donate by PayPal Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794 Thank you very much and God bless you. |
Manhattan Contrarian ping
But you would still need to work. Remember that Work Makes You Free (Arbeit Macht Frei, in the original).
Christopher Pike....................
Obamacare allowed for the ‘children’ to be on their parent’s policy(s) until they reach the age of 26 whether they live under the same roof or not. How that can be a win-win situation I have no idea (cough).
The cornerstone of socialism is to take from producers - under threat of incarceration and at gunpoint if necessary - and give to those who produce nothing.
What could go wrong?
This DSA heaven would be pure hell.
A 3 year old kid would understand the world better than the morons who wrote this drivel.
Workers deserve more!
_____________
Even the slogan is a lie.
US workers, the ones who do really work, are the best paid workers in the world. And, they are probably the least taxed.
In case of socialism, they would be the ones the most harmed. As in all socialist experiments.
To be truthful, they should change it to something like “parasites deserve more”.
IOW, they want to be an O'Brien and not a Winston.....
Even the Swedish Socialism, the one Bernie loves, collapsed.
It, surprisingly to its creators, ended up with the most income inequality ever.
The rich, the ones who were rich, before the Socialism started, ended up re-investing all their profits and building family empires, so they ended up avoiding most of the taxation.
The workers and the small businesses were stuck with the taxes, unable to build any substantial capital to expand.
So the 14 oligarchic families ended up fully controlling the economy and enjoying the lack of competition!
Eventually, Swedes figured it out and voted the socialist out!
I have often had the discussion, If I could, would I go back to having that 18 year old body again, and the invigoration of youth.
And I inevitably conclude-yes I would, but on one condition: that I could keep my 70 year old lessons learned, and knowledge.
If not, the answer is a hard "no" for me.
I just retired last year, and I am happier than I have ever been in my life. Even with a brain that occasionally just refuses to go when I step on the gas, a back and neck that makes it difficult to enjoy life, and all the knowledge that, in the end, you finally understand that you don't know everything.
Even with all that, I would never go back. Never.
As an adult, I feel in control of myself in a way I never did as a young man. And I understand the value of things much more intimately, such as self determination, being independent, having real freedom, the value of hard work and earning a living, and on and on.
Yeah. I enjoyed pondering the "...only thing worth being in life is an adult..." premise.
furries?
Some animals are more equal than others. The DSA wants a race to the bottom for the less equal ones.
Socialists do.
‘workers” (whoever they are) would likely have more if the socialists got out of the way.
ping
This author writes as if we didn't pass this point about 50 years ago. Look around. How many people today - right now - live dependent on others or on society? Probably a good 20% of the population does and a majority of the population is subsidized in some way or another by the state. That is the Welfare State that Americans have been voting to expand for about 100 years. And it has worked well for the Dems - promise more government subsidies paid for by the "rich" (whatever that means). People willing have traded their freedom for the Siren Song of security, which of course is false. The security provided by the government is not care for the elderly but is instead rationing healthcare, long lines, picking who gets care and ultimately encouraged suicide when someone costs too much to care for. Its not providing food and housing but instead funneling money to a massive system of NGOs that makes their executives and employees rich.
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.