WHY THEY QUIT BEING LEFTISTS

What led these people (along with Octavio Paz, Vargas Llosa, Ernesto Sábato, Plinio Apuleyo Mendoza, and so many other valuable intellectuals) to abandon communism and begin to defend the values of liberty? In the first place, the painful realization that the communist governments, without exception, built societies that were very poor and brutal, from which people invariably tried to flee in desperation. All the communist experiments failed, regardless of the substrata on which they tried to erect their systems. The Germans, the Slavs, the Latin Americans (Cuba and Nicaragua), the Asians, the black Africans failed—all, without exception. Why? This was the second discovery: because communism was a theoretical blunder. It wasn’t that the doctrine was beautiful but its execution faulty. The doctrine was based on a major intellectual mistake and on a lamentable lack of morality that inevitably led to disaster and terror. That is why the more intelligent people, and those who were genuinely interested in their neighbors, abandoned it. The book Why I Quit Being a Leftist explains that with irrefutable clarity

communism was a theoretical blunder.

The natural disposition is always to believe. It is acquired wisdom and experience only that teach incredulity, and they very seldom teach it enough. The wisest and most cautious of us all frequently gives credit to stories which he himself is afterwards both ashamed and astonished that he could possibly think of believing. - Adam Smith, Theory of Moral Sentiments

In my experience, leftists systematically conflate "society" and government. This error is not new:
SOME writers have so confounded society with government, as to leave little or no distinction between them; whereas they are not only different, but have different origins. Society is produced by our wants, and government by our wickedness; the former promotes our happiness POSITIVELY by uniting our affections, the latter NEGATIVELY by restraining our vices. The one encourages intercourse, the other creates distinctions. The first is a patron, the last a punisher.
Society in every state is a blessing, but Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one: for when we suffer, or are exposed to the same miseries BY A GOVERNMENT, which we might expect in a country WITHOUT GOVERNMENT, our calamity is heightened by reflecting that we furnish the means by which we suffer. Government, like dress, is the badge of lost innocence; the palaces of kings are built upon the ruins of the bowers of paradise. For were the impulses of conscience clear, uniform and irresistibly obeyed, man would need no other lawgiver; but that not being the case, he finds it necessary to surrender up a part of his property to furnish means for the protection of the rest; and this he is induced to do by the same prudence which in every other case advises him, out of two evils to choose the least. Wherefore, security being the true design and end of government, it unanswerably follows that whatever form thereof appears most likely to ensure it to us, with the least expense and greatest benefit, is preferable to all others. - Thomas Paine, Common Sense (1776)
Although not nearly as well known, I, Pencil (Leonard E. Read, 1958) is a minor classic in its own right, and it illustrates the fallacy of central planning superbly. It makes the point that there is no real delineation point between the various workings of society which - in the illustration of the pencil - enables and facilitates the production of a product which is nominally created by a single company, Eberhard Faber.
Note to Elizibeth Warren, Barak Obama - and, yes, Hillary Clinton - I did say, "society." And in saying that I emphatically did not mean, "government." Your "wonderful" government did indeed pave the roads, but it did not even decide where most of them went - people were making paths from time immemorial, and most roads followed paths delineated by society and merely improved by government. When you say, "you didn't build that," you neglect the actual work required even to maintain a business, let alone actually to build it. In the real world, neither society nor government knows what is needed until someone (e.g., Steve Jobs) puts it on offer. And delivers the goods at an attractive price. And - yes - draws attention to those goods, their desirable properties, and the terms on which they are available.

The totalitarian socialist speech in Latin America

Posted on June 10 by Dimitri

https://dimbox.wordpress.com/2014/06/10/analysis-on-the-totalitarian-socialist-discoursein-latin-america/

I want to share this with you. It’s an analysis on the fashionable totalitarian socialist speech in Latin America.

I took the liberty of translating a piece of such majestic analysis made by a Spanish writer and journalist regarding the current situation of Latin America.

I, for one, think it’s one of the best analysis I’ve recently seen on the matter. It’s both excellent and disturbing at the same time as it fits sentence by sentence to reality.

César Vidal makes a semantic analysis regarding the socialist speech in South America.

Countries like Cuba, Venezuela, Argentina or Nicaragua, victims of totalitarian socialist systems, formed by an undisputed perverted oligarchy and by a misuse of the language and semantics –like the former USSR– are demonstrating again the totalitarian socialist system‘s failure which, historically and objectively speaking, is absolutely undeniable and irrefutable.

In Latin America there has never been a capitalist system –understood as free market, free competition and independent justice– but a continuation of the Hispanic wealth system, speaking in general terms. Such Hispanic wealth system understood as a richness which does not come from competition, talent or judicial independence, but from one’s proximity to political power. It is not for nothing that there has been no Steve Jobs or Bill Gates from these lands.

Thus, all these Latin American socialist systems have become oligarchic systems, such as Venezuela, whose wealth lives due to the aforementioned political power.

The Hispanic wealth system is obviously not the best legacy that Spain could leave Latin America — accusing of unpatriotic those who want freedom for their country and at the same time forgetting Jefferson’s words “the greatest patriot is the dissident one“, because above political interests, what this patriot really wants is the freedom and prosperity of his country.

Showing the falsity of language, making use of lies and perverting cherished values will be the most important and difficult task of our times as it involves identifying, reporting and fighting how, behind the chatter in favor of peace and justice, seeds of violence, scarcity, poverty and hunger for power willing to remain a despotic and dominant form, are being seeded and sowed.

Such a task to perform for a clear purpose: for these beloved people to know and experiment the fruits of democracy, prosperity, peace and freedom.

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.