Posted on 01/28/2019 8:56:52 AM PST by george76
In the age of A.O.C., the lesson must be learned again.
Conspicuous by its absence in much of the mainstream news coverage of Venezuela’s political crisis is the word “socialism.” Yes, every sensible observer agrees that Latin America’s once-richest country, sitting atop the world’s largest proven oil reserves, is an economic basket case, a humanitarian disaster, and a dictatorship whose demise cannot come soon enough.
But … socialist? Perish the thought.
...
the Venezuelan regime’s admirers used to speak of “21st century socialism,” as it was dubbed by Hugo Chávez. The late Venezuelan president, said Britain’s Jeremy Corbyn, “showed us there is a different and a better way of doing things. It’s called socialism, it’s called social justice, and it’s something that Venezuela has made a big step toward.” Noam Chomsky was similarly enthusiastic when he praised Chávez in 2009. “What’s so exciting about at last visiting Venezuela,” the linguist said, is that “I can see how a better world is being created and can speak to the person who’s inspired it.”
...
New York University professor Greg Grandin opined, “the biggest problem Venezuela faced during his rule was not that Chávez was authoritarian but that he wasn’t authoritarian enough.”
At least Grandin could implicitly concede that socialism ultimately requires coercion to achieve its political aims; otherwise, it’s human nature for people to find loopholes and workarounds to keep as much of their property as they can.
...
in the age of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez it has to be explained all over again. Why does socialism never work? Because, as Margaret Thatcher explained, “eventually you run out of other people’s money.”
...
Twenty years of socialism, cheered by Corbyn, Klein, Chomsky and Co., led to the ruin of a nation.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
The true believers will go to their graves believing that Socialism/Marxism and all great “progressive” “isms” can only be done right as the new Americansim.
They also have Douthat and David Brooks. It’s a regular GOP over there! :P:
Become a congresscritter?
The difference between Nazism and Socialism/Communism is that you never hear anyone say; “Well, the reason Nazism failed is because you didn’t have the right people in charge.”
The fundamental of socialism is cynicism towards society, used to justify large, intrusive government.But the fundamental rule of good management is that you must "never separate responsibility from authority.” When you support socialism, you are supporting precisely that kind of abusive mismanagement. Under socialism, government has arbitrary authority, but deflects all responsibility onto society (in the form of employers and companies).
The result is arbitrary punishment of the leaders of society, while the bureaucrats centralize all authority for themselves.
It's not my place to run the train
The whistle I can't blow.It's not my place to say how far
The train's allowed to go.It's not my place to shoot off steam
Nor even clang the bell.But let the damn thing jump the track
And see who catches hell.
The difference between Nazism and Socialism used to be that Nazism was anti-Semitic and pagan, i.e. - anti-Christian.
Now, even those differences have faded away.
. . . who once said (my words, but) that conservatives think that the Constitution is so perfect that it doesn’t need to be defended.Which is precisely the opposite of what conservatives actually think.
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.