[Faith Presses On]

It's a liberal pointing this out, and not too prominently, and it begs the question why conservatives aren't talking about this more, how much young people today don't know about recent history, and how much older people have forgotten it.

And of course, we talk so little about China, even though it is still anything but a free society even as it grows more powerful.

[Read Write Repeat]

They have no idea what it’s like growing up with nuclear attack drills.

They grew up with united Germany.

They think Stasi is a chick on Vanderpump Rules.

[SamAdams76]

It is true that most young people do not realize how bad socialism and communism is. It's not completely their fault as the schools teach it only as another form of government. They point to civilized and wealthy countries in Europe as an example of it and don't mention the gulags of the Soviet Union or Red China.

By the way, the main reason socialism even "works" in Europe is because the United States pours trillions of dollars into that region to provide them military protection. This allows these countries to take money that otherwise would have gone to military and defense and spend it on social welfare.

[Billthedrill]

It's really two separate questions and the author got one of them spot-on. The good: yes, there is an entire cohort of young voters who weren't born when the Soviet Union fell. They don't get it. The Scandinavian countries staggering under immigration and debt are portrayed as paradises, and Venezuela never happened, or at least it can't happen here. Inequality of wealth is a cardinal sin. Racism is the ultimate sin. You can't talk youth out of certitude, you can only hope they grow out of it.

The bad: no, it isn't Bernie's rumpled appearance (that he can get away with because he's - gasp! - a male) that is putting him over Hillary. One's a septuagenarian crazy uncle who's promising them free money. The other is a nearly-septuagenarian totalitarian criminal who wants to control them. Guess who wins that one?

Socialism and its etymological offshoot "social justice" are systems consisting of theft and justification for theft. Political power confers the ability to commit theft without consequences - need I say more than "Hillary Clinton" to make that point? And so, with moral justification, however weak, and no consequences, we have the enshrinement of theft, a kleptocracy, a socialist paradise until the other people's money runs out. That, unfortunately, tends to be swift and irreversible. But that's for tomorrow, and tomorrow never comes.

[Tzimisce]

We haven’t educated people.

[familyop]

As if feminists weren’t hard socialists,...