Support
Contact
Ace:
aceofspadeshq at gee mail.com
CBD:
cbd.aoshq at gee mail.com
Buck:
buck.throckmorton at protonmail.com
joe mannix:
mannix2024 at proton.me
MisHum:
petmorons at gee mail.com
J.J. Sefton:
sefton at cutjibnewsletter.com
aceofspadeshq at gee mail.com
CBD:
cbd.aoshq at gee mail.com
Buck:
buck.throckmorton at protonmail.com
joe mannix:
mannix2024 at proton.me
MisHum:
petmorons at gee mail.com
J.J. Sefton:
sefton at cutjibnewsletter.com
Fundamental Concepts - The Enduring Appeal of Socialism: Blame the Family [Weirddave]
One of the things that puzzles many conservatives is the appeal of socialism. Just what is it about this poisonous concept that appeals to so many people? It's never worked anywhere it's been tried. In the past century, mankind has experimented with national socialism, international socialism, socialism as a cult of personality and every other variation you can think of. They have all failed. All of them.
"But Western Europe! But Scandinavia!" cry the socialist apologists. Failed. The "successful" democratic socialist regimes in Europe only "succeed" because we were paying their freight, through subsidies, grants, loans or outright gifts, not to mention the big one: they outsourced their defense to us. None of them could afford their lavish cradle to grave entitlement state if they had to pay for their own defense. If we hadn't defended them, and they had chosen to forgo defense to fund their entitlements, they would have become a different type of socialist state in short order: Soviet.Even letting that aside there's not much that I would call a success in Western Europe. Their societies are all suffering cancer of the culture. Birthrates are below replacement levels, third world immigrants with worldviews inimical to freedom are flooding their countries with no end in sight, and the native people can't even be arsed to defend what they claim to believe in (for more on this see Steyn, Mark; anything he's written, basically).
So why, given its abject real world failure, does socialism remain a compelling vision to so many people? The answer has two parts. First is the nature of mankind. Humans are tribal animals. Socialism is a top down model, and tribes are almost always run in a top down manner. Humans respond to this on an instinctive level. Ordered liberty, free market capitalism, rule of law and other bottom up organizational methods are the aberration in human history. Humans are not wired to respond to these concepts the way they respond to a hierarchy. It's better for them, but it isn't instinctive. Think about it like throwing a ball. Humans naturally throw "like a girl". Give a kid who has never held a ball a ball and tell him to throw it, and that's how he'll do it. We have to be shown how to throw properly. Once we learn how, man, we can throw so much better and further and more accurately, but it's not instinctive. So humans are hard wired to identify with one of the basic tenants of socialism. Second, there is one structure that is inherently socialistic, one that is familiar to and revered by almost everyone, and one that works quite well. That structure is the family. Families are little groups of people functioning on the socialist model. There is a central authority (mom, dad) that sets the rules and makes sure that the resources of the family are distributed "fairly" (let your sister have the last piece of chicken!) for the benefit of all (survival of all its members). That is the basic unit of human organization, and it's completely socialistic. Whether they realize it consciously or not, most people are predisposed to think favorably of socialism because that's the model that defined their world as they grew to self awareness. The problem is that what works for four people likely won't for forty and damn sure won't for four hundred. Families are bonded by love and dedication to each other, forces that are much weaker in a tribe and non-existent in a nation. Socialism can only work within groups that have that level of bond to each other. However, because of theses two facts, socialism feels "natural" to most human beings until they take the time to reason it out. Most people don't bother to do that, so when a Socialist happens along spouting their Utopian garbage, it resonates with people on an instinctive level, and the cycle starts over again. Socialism inevitably fails, but damnit, it "feels" like it SHOULD work. And that's why it is so bloody hard to defeat socialism.Comments
(Jump to bottom of comments)1
Foist?
Posted by: olddog in mo at December 13, 2014 11:01 AM (6hrmc)
2
I remember in high school our sociology teacher handed out this scenario we were supposed to address. It involved a small group of us being stranded on an island with no hope of rescue.
What would we do about shelter? Food? Organizing work?
Naturally, we gravitated toward what we know -- the very "family socialism" that Weirddave has described.
I can't help but think this was a way of getting us to indoctrinate ourselves into a socialist worldview. After all, if we came up with socialism on our own, with no outside interference (big, bad capitalist corporations, parents, lessons of history), what would keep us from extrapolating that to the world in general?
What would we do about shelter? Food? Organizing work?
Naturally, we gravitated toward what we know -- the very "family socialism" that Weirddave has described.
I can't help but think this was a way of getting us to indoctrinate ourselves into a socialist worldview. After all, if we came up with socialism on our own, with no outside interference (big, bad capitalist corporations, parents, lessons of history), what would keep us from extrapolating that to the world in general?
Posted by: Michael Rittenhouse at December 13, 2014 11:01 AM (QGTpc)
3
I'll go get the others.
Posted by: olddog in mo at December 13, 2014 11:01 AM (6hrmc)
4
What's this thread about......?
Posted by: Ricardo Kill at December 13, 2014 11:03 AM (oEpV1)
Posted by: fairweatherbill bucking the wind at December 13, 2014 11:04 AM (WFDo3)
6
Everybody's still asleep.
Posted by: Ricardo Kill at December 13, 2014 11:05 AM (oEpV1)
7
Everybody went to the liquor store.
Posted by: fairweatherbill bucking the wind at December 13, 2014 11:07 AM (WFDo3)
8
Bravo! Succinctly explained! I may even be able to get my teeny-bopper to daughter read this. We are battling the effects of a public school indoctrination....
Posted by: Jen at December 13, 2014 11:08 AM (msAGT)
9
There is also the element of postitive re-enforcement: once you convince everyone that it is fair to share, you get to choose who gets to say who gets what, and that person gets to divvy stuff up for his friends and people who are deserving of good stuff. So everyone wants to be that guy, and everyone had to work to support the systemin order to get a chance at that brass ring.
Posted by: Kindltot at December 13, 2014 11:08 AM (t//F+)
10
Yeah, the family thing is probably correct.
The funny thing is-
pretty much every leftard I've ever met is a ball of parent issues.
They can't wait to leave home and shoot the finger at Dad or Mom or both and do whatever I want because I'm my own person with my own opinions Da-a-a-a-ad and anyway it's my life, Mo-o-other!!111!And you just don't get it!!!!1!1!!!!
And yet...
And yet....they can't wait to turn over all this new freedom to their new Daddy - the state.
It is a quandary.
My guess is that the parents didn't raise the kid with the expectation that they would have to stand on their own two feet nor teach them independence and self-control-
it's why so many of them seem like spoiled little (Irony Alert!!!!) Momma's Boys and Daddy's Girls in attitude toward the gov't.
I absolutely couldn't wait to leave home as a teen-
but it wasn't because I hated my folks,
it was because it was a big, beautiful, exciting world out there and I was itching to prove what I could do.
The funny thing is-
pretty much every leftard I've ever met is a ball of parent issues.
They can't wait to leave home and shoot the finger at Dad or Mom or both and do whatever I want because I'm my own person with my own opinions Da-a-a-a-ad and anyway it's my life, Mo-o-other!!111!And you just don't get it!!!!1!1!!!!
And yet...
And yet....they can't wait to turn over all this new freedom to their new Daddy - the state.
It is a quandary.
My guess is that the parents didn't raise the kid with the expectation that they would have to stand on their own two feet nor teach them independence and self-control-
it's why so many of them seem like spoiled little (Irony Alert!!!!) Momma's Boys and Daddy's Girls in attitude toward the gov't.
I absolutely couldn't wait to leave home as a teen-
but it wasn't because I hated my folks,
it was because it was a big, beautiful, exciting world out there and I was itching to prove what I could do.
Posted by: naturalfake at December 13, 2014 11:08 AM (KBvAm)
11
Don't forget about the anti-meritocratic aspect of socialism. Socialism espouses a shared equality of material possessions, regardless of your ability or work ethic. This never pans out well in practice. Every attempt at socialism still had caste systems, as the monarchies were replaced by the ruling government classes.
Posted by: Brass Bancroft at December 13, 2014 11:09 AM (iyYUA)
Posted by: Barack Almighty at December 13, 2014 11:09 AM (FcR7P)
Posted by: Ricardo Kill at December 13, 2014 11:10 AM (oEpV1)
14
So is Robinson Crusoe pure socialism, or pure capitalism? I sort of wonder if those labels are even applicable in a society so small that every member knows every other member.
Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon at December 13, 2014 11:11 AM (8Fl6F)
15
Here's another catch with socialism: For it to work outside the family, everyone needs to love strangers as much as they do their closet family members.
Sorry. I don't. I love my best friend like a brother and would not hesitate to lay down my life for him - but if I absolutely had to choose between protecting him and protecting my kids: sorry, brother, you're a grown-ass man like me and you can take care of yourself. And because he's my best friend I know he sees it that way too.
Remember that wonderful exchange between Phil Gramm and this sweet, over-ambitious education bureaucrat?
Gramm: "My plan is based on the idea that I know what's best for my kids; that you don't love my kids as much as I do."
Education Lady: "Yes I do!"
Gramm, after a beat: "What are their names?"
Sorry. I don't. I love my best friend like a brother and would not hesitate to lay down my life for him - but if I absolutely had to choose between protecting him and protecting my kids: sorry, brother, you're a grown-ass man like me and you can take care of yourself. And because he's my best friend I know he sees it that way too.
Remember that wonderful exchange between Phil Gramm and this sweet, over-ambitious education bureaucrat?
Gramm: "My plan is based on the idea that I know what's best for my kids; that you don't love my kids as much as I do."
Education Lady: "Yes I do!"
Gramm, after a beat: "What are their names?"
Posted by: JPS at December 13, 2014 11:12 AM (T8WIJ)
16
Socialism espouses a shared equality of material possessions, regardless of your ability or work ethic. This never pans out well in practice.
And it's probably why every kid leaves home as early as he can- except for the youngest one.
And it's probably why every kid leaves home as early as he can- except for the youngest one.
Posted by: t-bird at December 13, 2014 11:13 AM (FcR7P)
17
Is this why leftists are always trying to undermine parental authority? The don't want competition?
Posted by: Serena at December 13, 2014 11:14 AM (mPcx4)
18
"So is Robinson Crusoe"
Mentioned above. Family. All working together for the benefit of the group.
Mentioned above. Family. All working together for the benefit of the group.
Posted by: Ricardo Kill at December 13, 2014 11:14 AM (oEpV1)
19
Ok, since most people won't spend much mental effort to reason why - pardon the expression - national socialism is always disastrous, we need short slogans that say it all. "Four legs good, two legs bad."
Socialism: good at the family level, bad at the national level.
You cobs polish that up now.
Socialism: good at the family level, bad at the national level.
You cobs polish that up now.
Posted by: Bill Lever at December 13, 2014 11:14 AM (KBjDG)
20
You know, I've been thinking. Do you think UVa. would be a good fit for me?
Posted by: Mallard Duck at December 13, 2014 11:16 AM (8zvUY)
21
Socialism works at the dinner table, not at the cafeteria.
Posted by: Bill Lever at December 13, 2014 11:16 AM (KBjDG)
22
Two kind of people buy into socialism: Lazy people, and megalomaniacs.
They either assume they'll get something for nothing or get power.
They either assume they'll get something for nothing or get power.
Posted by: --- at December 13, 2014 11:16 AM (MMC8r)
23
Posted by: Michael Rittenhouse at December 13, 2014 11:01 AM (QGTpc
It interesting though because the powerful state that socialism needs to survive (that is despotic) undercuts your ability to choose for your family (aside for the other infantilization problems WD describes that results in basically the slow fall of a culture.)
Also to WD's first point about getting buy on us: France is slowly turning down the Marx knob to about 9:http://t.co/D7kQwJH1GT They have to, the gravy train is ending (and the only reason Scandinavia keeps going is they have oil.)
It interesting though because the powerful state that socialism needs to survive (that is despotic) undercuts your ability to choose for your family (aside for the other infantilization problems WD describes that results in basically the slow fall of a culture.)
Also to WD's first point about getting buy on us: France is slowly turning down the Marx knob to about 9:http://t.co/D7kQwJH1GT They have to, the gravy train is ending (and the only reason Scandinavia keeps going is they have oil.)
Posted by: tsrblke, PhD(c) And father to be in 3 (short) weeks! at December 13, 2014 11:16 AM (HDwDg)
24
"For it to work outside the family, everyone needs to love strangers as much as they do their closet family members."
Yeah.
No offense, but, eff you. Get away.
Yeah.
No offense, but, eff you. Get away.
Posted by: Ricardo Kill at December 13, 2014 11:16 AM (oEpV1)
25
Socialism: good at the family level, bad at the national level.
I'd put it more like this:
Socialism: Until you're an adult.
I'd put it more like this:
Socialism: Until you're an adult.
Posted by: t-bird at December 13, 2014 11:17 AM (FcR7P)
26
7 Everybody went to the liquor store.
Posted by: fairweatherbill bucking the wind at December 13, 2014 11:07 AM (WFDo3)
I bottled wine last nite. In Cicero Kid's house, the liquor stores goes to YOU!
Posted by: fairweatherbill bucking the wind at December 13, 2014 11:07 AM (WFDo3)
I bottled wine last nite. In Cicero Kid's house, the liquor stores goes to YOU!
Posted by: Cicero Kaboom! Kid at December 13, 2014 11:18 AM (uSAVP)
27
"Socialism: Nobody pees in your bathtub, but you know they do in the community pool."
Posted by: Bill Lever at December 13, 2014 11:18 AM (KBjDG)
28
Socialism is a top down model, and tribes are almost always run in a top down manner....
There is a central authority (mom, dad) that sets the rules and makes sure that the resources of the family are distributed "fairly" (let your sister have the last piece of chicken!)
Do those at the top in Socialism make sure the chicken is fairly distributed? Or is that done after they have filled their stomachs?
Central Authority in the family distributed resources fairly among "bottom tier" often at their own expense and sacrifice. That doesn't sound like Socialism to me.
There is a central authority (mom, dad) that sets the rules and makes sure that the resources of the family are distributed "fairly" (let your sister have the last piece of chicken!)
Do those at the top in Socialism make sure the chicken is fairly distributed? Or is that done after they have filled their stomachs?
Central Authority in the family distributed resources fairly among "bottom tier" often at their own expense and sacrifice. That doesn't sound like Socialism to me.
Posted by: olddog in mo at December 13, 2014 11:19 AM (6hrmc)
29
>>Everybody went to the liquor store.
Posted by: fairweatherbill bucking the wind
Yeah, ast night.
Posted by: fairweatherbill bucking the wind
Yeah, ast night.
Posted by: Aviator at December 13, 2014 11:19 AM (3rrMW)
30
Mentioned above. Family. All working together for the benefit of the group.
Posted by: Ricardo Kill at December 13, 2014 11:14 AM (oEpV1)
One could argue that Robinson Crusoe was the prototypical free-enterprise entrepeneur. He was stranded on an island, with some capital (the salvage from the wreck), and over the years, he built himself a fine estate, vastly improving his property. He even took in an apprentice (man Friday), and taught him the methods of his "business".
Posted by: Ricardo Kill at December 13, 2014 11:14 AM (oEpV1)
One could argue that Robinson Crusoe was the prototypical free-enterprise entrepeneur. He was stranded on an island, with some capital (the salvage from the wreck), and over the years, he built himself a fine estate, vastly improving his property. He even took in an apprentice (man Friday), and taught him the methods of his "business".
Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon at December 13, 2014 11:19 AM (8Fl6F)
31
Still a more basic fact of human nature;
Most people love the idea of getting free shit
Did we as kids look forward to Christmas because of all the things we were going to give out?
Hell no, we were looking forward to those presents with our names on them
Most people love the idea of getting free shit
Did we as kids look forward to Christmas because of all the things we were going to give out?
Hell no, we were looking forward to those presents with our names on them
Posted by: kbdabear at December 13, 2014 11:19 AM (GrXXa)
32
Socialism-from those who do to those who won't.
Posted by: Sven S Blade a.k.a. El Assassin@sven10077 at December 13, 2014 11:20 AM (/4AZU)
33
I have done my best to alert my kids to institutional socialism. One gets it, the other is oblivious.
For myself I had a perfect storm of influences hitting me at the same time. I'd graduated from a business school that treated capitalism like weather. No good or bad, just if the high pressure system comes in from here then this happens. And my BFF and I started exchanging letters (dead tree variety. that long ago) about the Federalist Papers and the Constitution and stuff.
And then I worked on the de-commiefication of East Germany. I was on the ground in the wake of communism in East Germany, Belarus, Hungary, Slovenia, Russia, and Macedonia. There was a 1:1 relationship between how communist places were and how shitty it turned out.
For myself I had a perfect storm of influences hitting me at the same time. I'd graduated from a business school that treated capitalism like weather. No good or bad, just if the high pressure system comes in from here then this happens. And my BFF and I started exchanging letters (dead tree variety. that long ago) about the Federalist Papers and the Constitution and stuff.
And then I worked on the de-commiefication of East Germany. I was on the ground in the wake of communism in East Germany, Belarus, Hungary, Slovenia, Russia, and Macedonia. There was a 1:1 relationship between how communist places were and how shitty it turned out.
Posted by: Bandersnatch at December 13, 2014 11:21 AM (1xUj/)
34
"Socialism" seems to work in Western Europe, or at least it has for several decades. You need to address that. I think it's about to collapse, but it hasn't yet.
Posted by: parisParamus at December 13, 2014 11:21 AM (xveoA)
Posted by: Aviator at December 13, 2014 11:21 AM (3rrMW)
36
31 Posted by: kbdabear at December 13, 2014 11:19 AM (GrXXa)
Theoretically as one ages they are expected to understand the true joy of the Yule is in fact in the giving.
At 42 I enjoy the giving of gifts more than the getting, and the fellowship of the gathering as much as any expected reward.
There is a societal short circuit in some folks.
Theoretically as one ages they are expected to understand the true joy of the Yule is in fact in the giving.
At 42 I enjoy the giving of gifts more than the getting, and the fellowship of the gathering as much as any expected reward.
There is a societal short circuit in some folks.
Posted by: Sven S Blade a.k.a. El Assassin@sven10077 at December 13, 2014 11:21 AM (/4AZU)
37
Socialism-from those who do to those who won't.
...via those who administrate (and are in for just a tiny little cut)
...via those who administrate (and are in for just a tiny little cut)
Posted by: t-bird at December 13, 2014 11:22 AM (FcR7P)
38
Didn't the original Plymouth colony almost starve to death because they used the socialist model?
Posted by: kbdabear at December 13, 2014 11:22 AM (GrXXa)
39
I had this wonderful button I used to wear on my backpack strap, as an undergraduate:
Socialism Is Just a Stage You're Going Through
Socialism Is Just a Stage You're Going Through
Posted by: Michael Rittenhouse at December 13, 2014 11:23 AM (QGTpc)
40
34 Posted by: parisParamus at December 13, 2014 11:21 AM (xveoA)
Socialism doesn't work, it imports cheaper scut labor while keeping natives subsidized in their sloth.
Even Scandia is reforming away from the mega generosity of the welfare state.
Socialism doesn't work, it imports cheaper scut labor while keeping natives subsidized in their sloth.
Even Scandia is reforming away from the mega generosity of the welfare state.
Posted by: Sven S Blade a.k.a. El Assassin@sven10077 at December 13, 2014 11:23 AM (/4AZU)
41
Good post. Surely socialism will work great with our AoShQ barracks in camp. ... that is... if we try hard enough comrades
Posted by: Yip at December 13, 2014 11:23 AM (84SRe)
Posted by: Ricardo Kill at December 13, 2014 11:23 AM (oEpV1)
43
Only place I know where socialism works is on a Hutterite colony, but most of them are rabidly capatalists working off the books (black market) so they can afford a cell phone contract...which they try to hide from the minister (boss man), who probably is their brother-in-law. So I guess it doesn't truly work there either.
Only place I know where socialism works is on a Hutterite colony, but most of them are rabidly capatalists working off the books (black market) so they can afford a cell phone contract...which they try to hide from the minister (boss man), who probably is their brother-in-law. So I guess it doesn't truly work there either.
Posted by: fairweatherbill bucking the wind at December 13, 2014 11:24 AM (WFDo3)
44
Central Authority in the family distributed resources fairly among
"bottom tier" often at their own expense and sacrifice. That doesn't
sound like Socialism to me.
That's socialism working as it claims it will, parents are sacrificing their own needs or wants for the betterment of weaker members of the group. I'm a father, I'd do that for Little. I won't do it for some stranger. It works on the micro scale but not the macro.
"bottom tier" often at their own expense and sacrifice. That doesn't
sound like Socialism to me.
That's socialism working as it claims it will, parents are sacrificing their own needs or wants for the betterment of weaker members of the group. I'm a father, I'd do that for Little. I won't do it for some stranger. It works on the micro scale but not the macro.
Posted by: Weirddave at December 13, 2014 11:24 AM (KAmzK)
45
Just a reminder, today the good guys play navy. Or, if you prefer, the DoD men's and women's departments conduct a gridiron battle. GO ARMY BEAT NAVY!!!!!!!!
Posted by: Assassin6 at December 13, 2014 11:24 AM (FfukH)
46
Socialism doesn't work, it imports cheaper scut labor while keeping natives subsidized in their sloth.
Even Scandia is reforming away from the mega generosity of the welfare state.
Posted by: Sven S Blade a.k.a. El Assassin@sven10077 at December 13, 2014 11:23 AM (/4AZU)
I believe it was Margaret Thatcher who said, "Socialism works, until you start running out of other peoples' money."
Even Scandia is reforming away from the mega generosity of the welfare state.
Posted by: Sven S Blade a.k.a. El Assassin@sven10077 at December 13, 2014 11:23 AM (/4AZU)
I believe it was Margaret Thatcher who said, "Socialism works, until you start running out of other peoples' money."
Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon at December 13, 2014 11:25 AM (8Fl6F)
47
At 42 I enjoy the giving of gifts more than the getting, and the fellowship of the gathering as much as any expected reward.
----
Me, too.
In fact, I still go through the horror of assembling a "bundle" of presents to mail Back East to my family. Just shipped them off yesterday.
----
Me, too.
In fact, I still go through the horror of assembling a "bundle" of presents to mail Back East to my family. Just shipped them off yesterday.
Posted by: Y-not at December 13, 2014 11:25 AM (9BRsg)
48
"Socialism" seems to work in Western Europe, or at least it has for several decades. You need to address that. I think it's about to collapse, but it hasn't yet.
Posted by: parisParamus at December 13, 2014 11:21 AM (xveoA)
Addressed in post.
Europeans have received huge financial benefit from the US essentially paying for and providing the bulk of their national defense.
Among the things like beneficial trade, etc.
Without that - no "democratic" socialism.
It's one reason why I'd like us to pull out of Europe.
OTOH, Russia just can't help being' a crazy bitch.
So...
Posted by: parisParamus at December 13, 2014 11:21 AM (xveoA)
Addressed in post.
Europeans have received huge financial benefit from the US essentially paying for and providing the bulk of their national defense.
Among the things like beneficial trade, etc.
Without that - no "democratic" socialism.
It's one reason why I'd like us to pull out of Europe.
OTOH, Russia just can't help being' a crazy bitch.
So...
Posted by: naturalfake at December 13, 2014 11:26 AM (KBvAm)
49
Sven, I agree, but post-Reforms, Sweden and Germany and Denmark and Holland and Switzerland and Austria will all still be a lot more socialist that we are. I'm looking for responses when this point is raised.
Posted by: parisParamus at December 13, 2014 11:26 AM (xveoA)
50
Family isn't so much socialism as it is benevolent dictatorship.
Posted by: --- at December 13, 2014 11:26 AM (MMC8r)
51
"Socialism" seems to work in Western Europe, or at least it has for
several decades. You need to address that. I think it's about to
collapse, but it hasn't yet.
I did. They've been subsidized by the US the whole time. Subsidized socialism works fine-until the subsidy ends.
several decades. You need to address that. I think it's about to
collapse, but it hasn't yet.
I did. They've been subsidized by the US the whole time. Subsidized socialism works fine-until the subsidy ends.
Posted by: Weirddave at December 13, 2014 11:27 AM (KAmzK)
Posted by: Ricardo Kill at December 13, 2014 11:28 AM (oEpV1)
53
Posted by: Weirddave at December 13, 2014 11:24 AM (KAmzK
Well that sorta misses a point though.
Families are more communitarian than they are socialist.
Such a model might be possible for broader society: if we all lived out perfectly the virtue of charity.
But we can't.
So it won't.
So instead Socialism runs on state force. (Which is counter productive to any virtue.)
Well that sorta misses a point though.
Families are more communitarian than they are socialist.
Such a model might be possible for broader society: if we all lived out perfectly the virtue of charity.
But we can't.
So it won't.
So instead Socialism runs on state force. (Which is counter productive to any virtue.)
Posted by: tsrblke, PhD(c) And father to be in 3 (short) weeks! at December 13, 2014 11:28 AM (HDwDg)
54
Nstural flake, that's essentially what I say when the idiots confront me with this point. Just playing devil's advocate and looking for more ammunition...
Posted by: parisParamus at December 13, 2014 11:28 AM (xveoA)
55
I once saw a lefty comment about the righteousness of the Left's fight against the "tyranny of the family". Don't think he was thinking ahead to where his philosophy was leading.
Relevant: Paul Rahe on Alexis de Toqueville and the "inner nanny" in all of us, resentment of parental authority and the uncertainty inherent in a free society:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nWecQUX_xOY
Relevant: Paul Rahe on Alexis de Toqueville and the "inner nanny" in all of us, resentment of parental authority and the uncertainty inherent in a free society:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nWecQUX_xOY
Posted by: KTbarthedoor at December 13, 2014 11:28 AM (qahv/)
56
You need to address that. I think it's about to collapse, but it hasn't yet.
With 'seems to work' and 'about to collapse' in the same thought, you kind of already addressed it. We're milking today for all it's worth, and burying our heads in the sand when considering the future.
With 'seems to work' and 'about to collapse' in the same thought, you kind of already addressed it. We're milking today for all it's worth, and burying our heads in the sand when considering the future.
Posted by: t-bird at December 13, 2014 11:30 AM (FcR7P)
57
The euros demonize US to make them look better. That's part of the formula as well...
Posted by: parisParamus at December 13, 2014 11:30 AM (xveoA)
58
49 Posted by: parisParamus at December 13, 2014 11:26 AM (xveoA)
"it works in EUrope" is usually some college educated willfully ignorant putz...
it's a lot like Ogabecare, it only works because EUtopia sleeps under what was an American shield....
although Putin has shown that shield is in fact gone.
The EUtopians had by the end of the 70s decided they had a 15% or so "Yankee bonus" on their books and put their defense budgets on autopilot. Every dime the socialist gives required taking a quarter from someone and usually has as a "bonus" a half dollars' worth of regulatory fiat levied on the economy.
There is no such thing as a free lunch.
"it works in EUrope" is usually some college educated willfully ignorant putz...
it's a lot like Ogabecare, it only works because EUtopia sleeps under what was an American shield....
although Putin has shown that shield is in fact gone.
The EUtopians had by the end of the 70s decided they had a 15% or so "Yankee bonus" on their books and put their defense budgets on autopilot. Every dime the socialist gives required taking a quarter from someone and usually has as a "bonus" a half dollars' worth of regulatory fiat levied on the economy.
There is no such thing as a free lunch.
Posted by: Sven S Blade a.k.a. El Assassin@sven10077 at December 13, 2014 11:30 AM (/4AZU)
59
I once saw a lefty comment about the righteousness of the Left's fight against the "tyranny of the family". Don't think he was thinking ahead to where his philosophy was leading.
Our inner cities are filled with their success...feral youth.
Our inner cities are filled with their success...feral youth.
Posted by: --- at December 13, 2014 11:30 AM (MMC8r)
60
...and the reason those Socialist nations have made it as long as they did is because we have, up until about 6 years ago, have made the need to maintain their own military unnecessary. Also, cheap vodka.
Posted by: Brave Sir Robin at December 13, 2014 11:30 AM (5buP8)
61
""Socialism" seems to work in Western Europe, or at least it has for
several decades. You need to address that. I think it's about to
collapse, but it hasn't yet."
A system built upon taking from those who produce and gifting to those that don't. It's against human nature.
several decades. You need to address that. I think it's about to
collapse, but it hasn't yet."
A system built upon taking from those who produce and gifting to those that don't. It's against human nature.
Posted by: Ricardo Kill at December 13, 2014 11:31 AM (oEpV1)
62
34 "Socialism" seems to work in Western Europe, or at least it has for several decades. You need to address that. I think it's about to collapse, but it hasn't yet.
I think I just did.
I think I just did.
Posted by: Brave Sir Robin at December 13, 2014 11:33 AM (5buP8)
63
kindness/responsibility to humanity coerced isn't charitable but is theft. And It doesn't build the right response to helping those that actually need a help Up, it angers those not able to be part of the decision on who should be helped and who should hit bottom to grow to have the ability to help themselves.
the taker and the giver are both screwed because neither gets a choice in freedom.
the taker and the giver are both screwed because neither gets a choice in freedom.
Posted by: willow at December 13, 2014 11:34 AM (nqBYe)
64
Posted by: naturalfake at December 13, 2014 11:26 AM (KBvAm)
Sorry, didn't mean to step on your post. Great minds?
Sorry, didn't mean to step on your post. Great minds?
Posted by: Brave Sir Robin at December 13, 2014 11:34 AM (5buP8)
65
A tribe is just a very large extended family.
And the socialist countries that have had the most success have been small and ethnically monolithic. An ethnic group is just a very, very, very large extended family. Literally that's why we can measure ethnicity by DNA tests - via genetic distance.
The Scandinavian welfare states have been breaking down the last few decades as the Scandis bought into the Diversity Cult and imported lots of foreigners with no ethnic ties to Scandinavia.
The Scandi nations are small, with fewer people than our large cities.
Ethnic ties + the Scandi/Germanic preference for rule following meant a large welfare state could function with less abuse than other other states. People are more willing to share with co-ethnics and less willing to cheat and abuses the system for their own gain.
In Diverse societies, the welfare state get's massively abused. Look at India. Extremely Diverse ethnically and linguistically.
The Tradition in India is that anyone who is honest is a sucker. Everybody else is scamming the system for their family and tribe and group -- so the honest man is just a sucker who's letting his family down by not cheating and lying and demanding bribes.
That's happening now in the Scandi nations. As we've seen in Germany and Britain. The ethnically separate muslims they've brought in feel no shame in scamming the pale infidel Scandis out of as much welfare cash as possible.
The backlash to limit the generosity of the welfare system has grown quick once such obvious large-scale abuse started happening.
And the socialist countries that have had the most success have been small and ethnically monolithic. An ethnic group is just a very, very, very large extended family. Literally that's why we can measure ethnicity by DNA tests - via genetic distance.
The Scandinavian welfare states have been breaking down the last few decades as the Scandis bought into the Diversity Cult and imported lots of foreigners with no ethnic ties to Scandinavia.
The Scandi nations are small, with fewer people than our large cities.
Ethnic ties + the Scandi/Germanic preference for rule following meant a large welfare state could function with less abuse than other other states. People are more willing to share with co-ethnics and less willing to cheat and abuses the system for their own gain.
In Diverse societies, the welfare state get's massively abused. Look at India. Extremely Diverse ethnically and linguistically.
The Tradition in India is that anyone who is honest is a sucker. Everybody else is scamming the system for their family and tribe and group -- so the honest man is just a sucker who's letting his family down by not cheating and lying and demanding bribes.
That's happening now in the Scandi nations. As we've seen in Germany and Britain. The ethnically separate muslims they've brought in feel no shame in scamming the pale infidel Scandis out of as much welfare cash as possible.
The backlash to limit the generosity of the welfare system has grown quick once such obvious large-scale abuse started happening.
Posted by: Costanza Defense at December 13, 2014 11:34 AM (ZPrif)
66
Europe's also been in serious retraction since WWII in power and influence. Britain's the only one with any notable global reach, and that's nothing compared to their days of Empire. They're dwindling as they stay home for their free healthcare and cradle-to-grave benefits.
Posted by: --- at December 13, 2014 11:35 AM (MMC8r)
67
(perhaps my comment was left wanting) It's hard to be concise and inclusive to such a heavy topic.
Posted by: willow at December 13, 2014 11:35 AM (nqBYe)
68
Socialism is the way private clubs work. The closer your country is to being a small, private club, the better socialism will work for you. The larger and more diverse your society is, the worse socialism will work for you.
Socialism is the way private clubs work. The closer your country is to being a small, private club, the better socialism will work for you. The larger and more diverse your society is, the worse socialism will work for you.
Posted by: Dave H at December 13, 2014 11:36 AM (DeQAd)
69
"I think I just did."
Declining birth-rate and tax base. Imports not abiding by the law. Industry evaporating.
Declining birth-rate and tax base. Imports not abiding by the law. Industry evaporating.
Posted by: Ricardo Kill at December 13, 2014 11:38 AM (oEpV1)
70
socialism might work if everyone felt a responsibility to themselves, their families and to themselves.
Posted by: willow at December 13, 2014 11:38 AM (nqBYe)
71
frik! that was a question 70#
Posted by: willow at December 13, 2014 11:38 AM (nqBYe)
72
This is why I am merely "Mostly" Right. in business and family life I have seen how awfully the policies of the Left work outside of theory the farther you get from the small, personal unit where everyone knows each other by name and has a voice. I sometimes vote to raise fees or taxes for the HOA to improve the property and make it more competitive, for increases in funding in my town for education or parks or what have you. But by the time you reach the larger town, then city, then county, then state, then Federal, and finally U.N./global level things progressively (see what I did there?) things fall apart. The farther you get from the family, from knowing each person enough that your actions are based on a spectrum of unconditional love of that person or at least having to look them in the eye when you wrong them, to the point where they are just some far off statistic in fly-over country, socialist ideology fails. I'll occasionally vote Democrat at the extremely local level, but never have at the County, State or Federal level.
Posted by: MostlyRight at December 13, 2014 11:39 AM (K420L)
73
We had the 'bomb shelter with only space for fifteen. The class then had a list of people with skills so that you could choose which of the thirty or forty would get space in the shelter.
I went with me, two other males and twelve women of child-bearing age on the theory that the genetic diversity was sufficient with three men and that repopulation was going to be the priority so fill out the rest with females who can repopulate.
That did not go over ... well.
I then changed my answer to be "Just the women" because ... fuck it ... we as a species deserved to die.
That went over ... slightly better.
I went with me, two other males and twelve women of child-bearing age on the theory that the genetic diversity was sufficient with three men and that repopulation was going to be the priority so fill out the rest with females who can repopulate.
That did not go over ... well.
I then changed my answer to be "Just the women" because ... fuck it ... we as a species deserved to die.
That went over ... slightly better.
Posted by: BumperStickerist at December 13, 2014 11:39 AM (4CVLy)
74
Another point re the Scandinavian countries, they have been *very* dependent upon exports to less socialized countries. In the case of Norway, there is also the matter of the $85 Billion/year in oil exports.
Now..., should we also discuss the homogeneity of the cultures?
Now..., should we also discuss the homogeneity of the cultures?
Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at December 13, 2014 11:39 AM (vPh3W)
75
Where are the bewbs and jokes in this thread?
Posted by: Ricardo Kill at December 13, 2014 11:41 AM (oEpV1)
76
or at least having to look them in the eye when you wrong them
That is an extremely honest line. I am a big fan of honesty.
That is an extremely honest line. I am a big fan of honesty.
Posted by: Bandersnatch at December 13, 2014 11:42 AM (1xUj/)
77
my boobs could be considered a joke.
Posted by: willow at December 13, 2014 11:42 AM (nqBYe)
78
From my time living in Italy - socialism breeds corruption. People who have acquired material wealth don't want to be mandated to share/give it to others so many alternative i.e. illegal routes are taken.
Posted by: Cheri at December 13, 2014 11:43 AM (ZFPMM)
79
Socialism is the way private clubs work. The closer your country is to being a small, private club, the better socialism will work for you. The larger and more diverse your society is, the worse socialism will work for you.
Posted by: Dave
-------------------
Even fairly small models fail. There have been a number of small collectives attempted in the U.S., they all failed. The Grandaddy of all would be the Plymouth Colony. New Harmony, Indiana comes to mind..
Posted by: Dave
-------------------
Even fairly small models fail. There have been a number of small collectives attempted in the U.S., they all failed. The Grandaddy of all would be the Plymouth Colony. New Harmony, Indiana comes to mind..
Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at December 13, 2014 11:43 AM (vPh3W)
80
I don't think you have to be taught to throw. If you set a goal for throwing harder and more accurately, and you try different ways to do that (a lot of practice), you'll eventually find a movement that does that.
I can throw pretty damn hard, even at my age, and I don't remember anyone teaching me.
I can throw pretty damn hard, even at my age, and I don't remember anyone teaching me.
Posted by: Bat Chain Puller at December 13, 2014 11:44 AM (jpc8l)
Posted by: Ricardo Kill at December 13, 2014 11:44 AM (oEpV1)
82
I went with me, two other males and twelve women of child-bearing age on the theory that...
...the other two would be working for you? Nice. Moron-topia.
...the other two would be working for you? Nice. Moron-topia.
Posted by: t-bird at December 13, 2014 11:44 AM (FcR7P)
83
Mike, i am reminded of ocupy wallstreet, where they wanted their student loans paid off by everyone else.
yet they didn't want to share their food to those that wanted some of their pie.
yet they didn't want to share their food to those that wanted some of their pie.
Posted by: willow at December 13, 2014 11:45 AM (nqBYe)
84
We'd have to see them to make that determination. For science.
Posted by: A Moron at December 13, 2014 11:46 AM (yxw0r)
85
sniff tks
Posted by: willow at December 13, 2014 11:46 AM (nqBYe)
86
Britain's the only one with any notable global reach, and that's nothing compared to their days of Empire. They're dwindling as they stay home for their free healthcare and cradle-to-grave benefits.
Posted by: ---
--------------------
I spoke a pair of older Brits in a restaurant last week. They had been in the States for a long time, but were planning on going home, "Because we'll have the NHS, you see..."
Posted by: ---
--------------------
I spoke a pair of older Brits in a restaurant last week. They had been in the States for a long time, but were planning on going home, "Because we'll have the NHS, you see..."
Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at December 13, 2014 11:46 AM (vPh3W)
87
Yeah, I don't know how anyone concludes socialism in the family is a good way to live FOREVER.
Babies need socialism. Toddlers do. Preteens mostly do, and to some extent teenager do. Beyond that, socialism is a hindrance, not a help.
And tell me one parent who doesn't feel the ecstatic joy of NO LONGER HAVING TO SUPPORT THE UNGRATEFUL SNOTS that are their loving and loved children.
Babies need socialism. Toddlers do. Preteens mostly do, and to some extent teenager do. Beyond that, socialism is a hindrance, not a help.
And tell me one parent who doesn't feel the ecstatic joy of NO LONGER HAVING TO SUPPORT THE UNGRATEFUL SNOTS that are their loving and loved children.
Posted by: BurtTC at December 13, 2014 11:47 AM (Dj0WE)
88
I have been told that the end result for socialism is that the state owns everything and the proles basically work for food.
Which is pretty much the experience of the family farm or the small family business. Social planners forget that stuff.
The Aurora colony in Oregon was pretty successful for a couple of generations. They were not a "true" socialist experience, they were instead more of a community set up as a corporation.
However there was not common ownership of property, they acted more like a community wide fraternal organization (their church) that also acted as a source of capital for the community itself. Because they were self funding and interdependent they were a very successful community.
They were a faith-based society, with a strong element of the virtue of work, mostly from inter-related families that came to Oregon about the same time, they were very committed, and after a few generations civilly broke up and portioned out the shares to the members.
Opposed to that in the same area are the "Russian Farmers" who are old believers that immigrated in the 1970's. I once asked one of the berry farmers why they didn't try to set up a packing plant like the Amish did out East. The response was that you couldn't trust people like those other farmers not to cheat on you.
When I asked about just using relatives, I basically got the impression that they were the relatives.
Which is pretty much the experience of the family farm or the small family business. Social planners forget that stuff.
The Aurora colony in Oregon was pretty successful for a couple of generations. They were not a "true" socialist experience, they were instead more of a community set up as a corporation.
However there was not common ownership of property, they acted more like a community wide fraternal organization (their church) that also acted as a source of capital for the community itself. Because they were self funding and interdependent they were a very successful community.
They were a faith-based society, with a strong element of the virtue of work, mostly from inter-related families that came to Oregon about the same time, they were very committed, and after a few generations civilly broke up and portioned out the shares to the members.
Opposed to that in the same area are the "Russian Farmers" who are old believers that immigrated in the 1970's. I once asked one of the berry farmers why they didn't try to set up a packing plant like the Amish did out East. The response was that you couldn't trust people like those other farmers not to cheat on you.
When I asked about just using relatives, I basically got the impression that they were the relatives.
Posted by: Kindltot at December 13, 2014 11:48 AM (t//F+)
89
Again, you can point to the homogenous nature of Scandi countries. You can mention North Sea oil all you want. It's all true. But the fact of the matter is that without US protection they would have all been overrun and subjugated by the Soviet Union decades ago.
If you remove the US from the equation, they would be very different countries because they would have been forced to spend 10-15% or more of GDP on defense, which crashes that entire welfare state that people are claiming "works".
If you remove the US from the equation, they would be very different countries because they would have been forced to spend 10-15% or more of GDP on defense, which crashes that entire welfare state that people are claiming "works".
Posted by: Weirddave at December 13, 2014 11:49 AM (KAmzK)
90
Wordy bunch today......
Posted by: Ricardo Kill at December 13, 2014 11:49 AM (oEpV1)
91
Classic Phil Gramm line:
Your Kids Aren't Your Own http://natl.re/12EDziM via @NRO
This impulse toward the state as über-parent is based on a profound fallacy and a profound truth. The fallacy is that anyone can care about someone else’s children as much as his own. The former Texas Republican senator Phil Gramm liked to illustrate the hollowness of professions to the contrary with a story. He told a woman, “My educational policies are based on the fact that I care more about my children than you do.” She said, “No, you don’t.” Gramm replied, “Okay: What are their names?”
Your Kids Aren't Your Own http://natl.re/12EDziM via @NRO
This impulse toward the state as über-parent is based on a profound fallacy and a profound truth. The fallacy is that anyone can care about someone else’s children as much as his own. The former Texas Republican senator Phil Gramm liked to illustrate the hollowness of professions to the contrary with a story. He told a woman, “My educational policies are based on the fact that I care more about my children than you do.” She said, “No, you don’t.” Gramm replied, “Okay: What are their names?”
Posted by: Costanza Defense at December 13, 2014 11:49 AM (ZPrif)
92
Socialism only appeals to about 25% of people. Unfortunately among them are the most hateful conniving psychopathic degenerates, who are good at social climbing and seizing the levers of power and communication, making it seem as though their ideology is more appealing than it is. We are fighting against something that appeals to at most 3 in 10.
Posted by: Mega at December 13, 2014 11:49 AM (S3OMN)
93
A leftist will tell you the true socialism or communism just has never been done "right" and that it would work in our country if it was just done "right".
What is right?
What is right?
Posted by: Cheri at December 13, 2014 11:50 AM (ZFPMM)
94
Yeah, my gf is British. Questining the NHS is a no-no. I was in Britain for the first time this past summer. It felt much like France (with more depressing weather..). The big cities and privileged towns are nice. Everything else feels sad and austere. And suffocating. I predict collapse of most of Europe soon; Britain's will be delayed a bit.
Posted by: ParisParamus at December 13, 2014 11:50 AM (xveoA)
95
Greater New York City has about the same population as Sweden. The Swedish government has more flexibility than the USA just based on the country's size. But I don't think Swedish policies would work even in NYC, with subsidies.
Most Scandinavians have managed to hang on to a Protestant Work Ethic, at least to some degree. And I think the cold winters impose a bit of reality on the mind. They also aren't adverse to kicking somebody out of a co-op apartment if that person fails to show the proper concern for the collectivist ideal. There is a strong social stigma attached to abusing "the system".
Interesting that all of the European PIIGS were formerly Catholic or Orthodox. The word for "earn" in French is "gagner", with a core meaning of, "to win". This does not encourage respect for people who "win" more than you do.
Most Scandinavians have managed to hang on to a Protestant Work Ethic, at least to some degree. And I think the cold winters impose a bit of reality on the mind. They also aren't adverse to kicking somebody out of a co-op apartment if that person fails to show the proper concern for the collectivist ideal. There is a strong social stigma attached to abusing "the system".
Interesting that all of the European PIIGS were formerly Catholic or Orthodox. The word for "earn" in French is "gagner", with a core meaning of, "to win". This does not encourage respect for people who "win" more than you do.
Posted by: KTbarthedoor at December 13, 2014 11:50 AM (qahv/)
96
You are conflating family social structure with large scale social and political networks.
They are not the same, and extrapolating observations of one to conclusions about the others is inaccurate.
They are not the same, and extrapolating observations of one to conclusions about the others is inaccurate.
Posted by: CBD at December 13, 2014 11:51 AM (uncZC)
97
91- I think was during a Senate hearing..., maybe with Jocelyn Elders?
Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at December 13, 2014 11:53 AM (vPh3W)
98
we also expect something back from our family social structure, sharing chores, respect for eachother, no beating grampa up etc.
Posted by: willow at December 13, 2014 11:54 AM (nqBYe)
99
Still no bewb or phart jokes...................
Posted by: Ricardo Kill at December 13, 2014 11:55 AM (oEpV1)
100
TEFFGIACOMT. And every single one of them and their free s*** army believe in the single most important principle of socialism: FU, pay me.
Posted by: John A. Fleming at December 13, 2014 11:55 AM (WfYBe)
101
83 Mike, i am reminded of ocupy wallstreet, where they wanted their student loans paid off by everyone else.
yet they didn't want to share their food to those that wanted some of their pie.
Posted by: willow at December 13, 2014 11:45 AM (nqBYe)
I remember an occupooper whining about "private property is theft", then whining about somebody swiping his i-Phone
"You don't believe in private property, but you are angry because someone stole YOUR property"
"My phone is my PERSONAL property, that's different!"
So the occupooper definition goes like this
Private Property = Your Shit
Personal Property = My Shit
yet they didn't want to share their food to those that wanted some of their pie.
Posted by: willow at December 13, 2014 11:45 AM (nqBYe)
I remember an occupooper whining about "private property is theft", then whining about somebody swiping his i-Phone
"You don't believe in private property, but you are angry because someone stole YOUR property"
"My phone is my PERSONAL property, that's different!"
So the occupooper definition goes like this
Private Property = Your Shit
Personal Property = My Shit
Posted by: kbdabear at December 13, 2014 11:56 AM (GrXXa)
102
96 -
Dave can speak for himself, but I think that was the point. People do that. They extrapolate their observations of the one, and make assumptions about the larger.
Now, I would argue that anyone who grew up in a reasonably well-functioning family would NEVER want to recreate that structure on the whole of society, and that socialists are as often as not, people who did not grow up in healthy families. They have an idealized version they think would work on society, partly because they have never really seen it in practice, inside their own homes.
Dave can speak for himself, but I think that was the point. People do that. They extrapolate their observations of the one, and make assumptions about the larger.
Now, I would argue that anyone who grew up in a reasonably well-functioning family would NEVER want to recreate that structure on the whole of society, and that socialists are as often as not, people who did not grow up in healthy families. They have an idealized version they think would work on society, partly because they have never really seen it in practice, inside their own homes.
Posted by: BurtTC at December 13, 2014 11:57 AM (Dj0WE)
103
Interesting essay and many good points. There is one more that helps to explain socialism's appeal.
Christianity. The essential message of Christianity has socialist tones that socialist tyrants are happy to exploit. Their tactic, however, is to pervert a religious philosophy about how individuals are to govern their lives to achieve eternal salvation in order to impose an authoritarian politico-economic system.
Many places where "socialism" has been tried were already Christian and so the population was spring loaded to accept the false appeal of socialism that it is only about "Christian kindness and sharing".
Christianity. The essential message of Christianity has socialist tones that socialist tyrants are happy to exploit. Their tactic, however, is to pervert a religious philosophy about how individuals are to govern their lives to achieve eternal salvation in order to impose an authoritarian politico-economic system.
Many places where "socialism" has been tried were already Christian and so the population was spring loaded to accept the false appeal of socialism that it is only about "Christian kindness and sharing".
Posted by: T Lex at December 13, 2014 11:57 AM (4HYng)
104
kbdabear, exactly. as we also kno of many rich that want freeshit for everybody they like but hide their funds so their shit doesn't have to share that much of the pie.
Posted by: willow at December 13, 2014 11:58 AM (nqBYe)
Posted by: BurtTC at December 13, 2014 11:58 AM (Dj0WE)
106
Burt i know right? That should at least be awarded enough for an iphone.
Posted by: willow at December 13, 2014 12:00 PM (nqBYe)
107
Posted by: BurtTC at December 13, 2014 11:57 AM (Dj0WE)
My point is that family structure is not "socialistic." The comparison is false.
Tsrblke explained it well upthread.
My point is that family structure is not "socialistic." The comparison is false.
Tsrblke explained it well upthread.
Posted by: CBD at December 13, 2014 12:01 PM (uncZC)
108
Interesting that all of the European PIIGS were
formerly Catholic or Orthodox. The word for "earn" in French is
"gagner", with a core meaning of, "to win". This does not encourage
respect for people who "win" more than you do.
Posted by: KTbarthedoor at December 13, 2014 11:50 AM (qahv/)
There is a Spanish Economist, Jesus Huerta de Soto, who does speak against the Protestant work ethic, in that it puts too much emphasis on the value of work instead of value on the results of the work, and argues that this is one of the roots of the Marxist theory of value depending on the work performed and not the demand.
I do wonder if it is the Catholic or Language thing that caused the PIIGS to be PIIGS, or if it was that they were feudal societies that turned into rich and powerful feudal societies that never shed the whole idea of feudalism while trying to spend themselves into the perfect welfare state by printing money.
formerly Catholic or Orthodox. The word for "earn" in French is
"gagner", with a core meaning of, "to win". This does not encourage
respect for people who "win" more than you do.
Posted by: KTbarthedoor at December 13, 2014 11:50 AM (qahv/)
There is a Spanish Economist, Jesus Huerta de Soto, who does speak against the Protestant work ethic, in that it puts too much emphasis on the value of work instead of value on the results of the work, and argues that this is one of the roots of the Marxist theory of value depending on the work performed and not the demand.
I do wonder if it is the Catholic or Language thing that caused the PIIGS to be PIIGS, or if it was that they were feudal societies that turned into rich and powerful feudal societies that never shed the whole idea of feudalism while trying to spend themselves into the perfect welfare state by printing money.
Posted by: Kindltot at December 13, 2014 12:01 PM (t//F+)
109
"22
Two kind of people buy into socialism: Lazy people, and megalomaniacs.
They either assume they'll get something for nothing or get power.
Posted by: --- at December 13, 2014 11:16 AM (MMC8r)"
I am not sure that is entirely true. For some reason, Jews, Scandinavians and Germans seem to be enamored of socialism. These are generally people who are not viewed as lazy. In fact, I think that is their downfall. They all have a well developed work ethic and seem to have a hard time understanding those of us like myself and all my Irish relations who would treat socialism as an invitation to never work another day in our lives.
Two kind of people buy into socialism: Lazy people, and megalomaniacs.
They either assume they'll get something for nothing or get power.
Posted by: --- at December 13, 2014 11:16 AM (MMC8r)"
I am not sure that is entirely true. For some reason, Jews, Scandinavians and Germans seem to be enamored of socialism. These are generally people who are not viewed as lazy. In fact, I think that is their downfall. They all have a well developed work ethic and seem to have a hard time understanding those of us like myself and all my Irish relations who would treat socialism as an invitation to never work another day in our lives.
Posted by: Obnoxious A-Hole at December 13, 2014 12:01 PM (PD6iL)
110
Furthermore, working for one's self is inbred and natural while socialism is an artificial imposed dictum. Capitalism uses govt regulation to limit its excess; socialism needs govt to fundamentally exist.
Posted by: T at December 13, 2014 12:01 PM (ry+UY)
111
NDSU draws first blood! Woot!
Posted by: Y-not on the phone at December 13, 2014 12:02 PM (9BRsg)
112
From my time living in Italy - socialism breeds corruption.
In socialism, a living is an entitlement.
In socialism, no one cares, because it's all an entitlement.
Because no one cares, no one respects the rules or each other.
Because no one respects the rules or each other, they cheat and steal.
In socialism, a living is an entitlement.
In socialism, no one cares, because it's all an entitlement.
Because no one cares, no one respects the rules or each other.
Because no one respects the rules or each other, they cheat and steal.
Posted by: --- at December 13, 2014 12:03 PM (MMC8r)
113
Until we end withholding, the wobblies will have the upper hand.
Posted by: Jean at December 13, 2014 12:04 PM (TETYm)
114
Even fairly small models fail. There have been a number of small collectives attempted in the U.S., they all failed. The Grandaddy of all would be the Plymouth Colony. New Harmony, Indiana comes to miand
Yeah, New Harmony was the site for 2 utopian/commie colonies. They both failed. It's still a fascinating little town to visit. The open air church is pretty interesting...
Yeah, New Harmony was the site for 2 utopian/commie colonies. They both failed. It's still a fascinating little town to visit. The open air church is pretty interesting...
Posted by: Brave Sir Robin at December 13, 2014 12:04 PM (5buP8)
115
106 -
Except now I made myself think of the fact that I never really knew any of my grandparents, and that makes me a little bit sad.
Except now I made myself think of the fact that I never really knew any of my grandparents, and that makes me a little bit sad.
Posted by: BurtTC at December 13, 2014 12:04 PM (Dj0WE)
116
Sweden obviously received security benefits from the existence of NATO and American support for NATO. However, the suggestion that the United States funded the defense of Sweden during the Cold War is fundamentally absurd. Another flawed fundamental concept.
Posted by: RioBravo at December 13, 2014 12:05 PM (z27Ny)
117
Sweden's military posture since WWII has ALWAYS been predicated on the intervention of the US and NATO in the event of a Soviet incursion.
Posted by: richard mcenroe at December 13, 2014 12:06 PM (XO6WW)
118
"93
A leftist will tell you the true socialism or communism just has never
been done "right" and that it would work in our country if it was just
done "right".
What is right?
Posted by: Cheri at December 13, 2014 11:50 AM (ZFPMM)"
Socialism done right is defined as me and my pothead buddies in charge.
A leftist will tell you the true socialism or communism just has never
been done "right" and that it would work in our country if it was just
done "right".
What is right?
Posted by: Cheri at December 13, 2014 11:50 AM (ZFPMM)"
Socialism done right is defined as me and my pothead buddies in charge.
Posted by: Obnoxious A-Hole at December 13, 2014 12:06 PM (PD6iL)
119
Obnoxious, they are also working from the assumption they have homogenous societies. It might work, but not with negative replacement ratios due to malthusian social policies.
Posted by: Jean at December 13, 2014 12:07 PM (TETYm)
Posted by: Jean at December 13, 2014 12:08 PM (TETYm)
121
None of them could afford their lavish cradle to grave entitlement state if they had to pay for their own defense.
The irony is that after Europe built its welfare state, then leftist Americans pointed to its lavish benefits, five-week vacations, and socialized medicine as examples to follow. "They're so much more advanced than us!"
Remember the old slogan, "Wouldn't it be great if our schools got all the money they needed and the Air Force had to hold a bake sale to buy a bomber?"
Which completely missed the point, of course.
The irony is that after Europe built its welfare state, then leftist Americans pointed to its lavish benefits, five-week vacations, and socialized medicine as examples to follow. "They're so much more advanced than us!"
Remember the old slogan, "Wouldn't it be great if our schools got all the money they needed and the Air Force had to hold a bake sale to buy a bomber?"
Which completely missed the point, of course.
Posted by: rickl at December 13, 2014 12:08 PM (sdi6R)
122
i'm sorry Burt, I did know my grandfather and do not remember my other grandparents. He was a storage of information i never wouold have known without him.
someone spoke of christmas and i had thought i understood from tales of yore that their was also a lump of coal involved for badness.
someone spoke of christmas and i had thought i understood from tales of yore that their was also a lump of coal involved for badness.
Posted by: willow at December 13, 2014 12:08 PM (nqBYe)
123
107 -
Now you want me to go and read upthread? How communist of you...
But seriously, if the argument is that because socialism needs force, I'm not sure what the difference is.
When I was a kid, the only reason I did chores was because I was made to. By force. I didn't have any sense of shared responsibility.
Now you want me to go and read upthread? How communist of you...
But seriously, if the argument is that because socialism needs force, I'm not sure what the difference is.
When I was a kid, the only reason I did chores was because I was made to. By force. I didn't have any sense of shared responsibility.
Posted by: BurtTC at December 13, 2014 12:08 PM (Dj0WE)
124
You also forget greed.
Leftists are fucking greedy.
And they see socialism as a way to the top to sate their greed.
Leftists are fucking greedy.
And they see socialism as a way to the top to sate their greed.
Posted by: royaloil at December 13, 2014 12:08 PM (5yHi1)
125
My lib "proud socialist" sister "credits" her socialism to her journo school professor.
She broke our parents hearts' before they died.
Wish I could have five minutes alone in a room with her perfesser.
She broke our parents hearts' before they died.
Wish I could have five minutes alone in a room with her perfesser.
Posted by: Jane D'oh at December 13, 2014 12:09 PM (FsuaD)
126
Sweden's military posture since WWII has ALWAYS been predicated on the intervention of the US and NATO in the event of a Soviet incursion.
Posted by: richard mcenroe at December 13, 2014 12:06 PM (XO6WW)
---
True, but that says nothing about the level of Swedish defense expenditure or their manpower mobilization strategy. Sweden also supported a diverse defense industrial establishment at great cost. To suggest that the American security shield allowed their socialist economy to function as it otherwise would not is stupid. And unsupportable by historic facts.
Posted by: richard mcenroe at December 13, 2014 12:06 PM (XO6WW)
---
True, but that says nothing about the level of Swedish defense expenditure or their manpower mobilization strategy. Sweden also supported a diverse defense industrial establishment at great cost. To suggest that the American security shield allowed their socialist economy to function as it otherwise would not is stupid. And unsupportable by historic facts.
Posted by: RioBravo at December 13, 2014 12:10 PM (z27Ny)
127
I explained it to my kids this way:
You work really hard in school and get all A's.
Other kids are out partying and screwing around and get D's and F's. To be "Fair" you need to give those kids some of your hard earned A's and take some of their D's and F's - for FAIRNESS sake.
They got it.
You work really hard in school and get all A's.
Other kids are out partying and screwing around and get D's and F's. To be "Fair" you need to give those kids some of your hard earned A's and take some of their D's and F's - for FAIRNESS sake.
They got it.
Posted by: Cheri at December 13, 2014 12:11 PM (ZFPMM)
128
122 -
It's alright. We have the family histories we do. My children have had a richness of grandparenting (at least partially, they are down to 1 remaining).
It's alright. We have the family histories we do. My children have had a richness of grandparenting (at least partially, they are down to 1 remaining).
Posted by: BurtTC at December 13, 2014 12:11 PM (Dj0WE)
129
The word for "earn" in French is "gagner", with a core meaning of, "to win".
As in krautish, where the word for profit is "Gewinn" (same root of "to win"). There is so much culture buried in language. It's fascinating.
The krautish word for debt, Schuld, also means guilt.
As in krautish, where the word for profit is "Gewinn" (same root of "to win"). There is so much culture buried in language. It's fascinating.
The krautish word for debt, Schuld, also means guilt.
Posted by: Bandersnatch at December 13, 2014 12:11 PM (1xUj/)
130
so what does sweden do that brings in the bacon and afford them their lifestyle?
serious question
serious question
Posted by: willow at December 13, 2014 12:11 PM (nqBYe)
131
When I was a kid, the only reason I did chores was because I was made to. By force. I didn't have any sense of shared responsibility.
Yeah, we didn't get allowance, work was expected, enforced through the long arm of my dad. That's why I got a paper route when I was 8 y/o. I didn't mind working, but it's a lot more fun when you get $$ for it. GI Joes and Sweet Tarts aren't cheap!
Yeah, we didn't get allowance, work was expected, enforced through the long arm of my dad. That's why I got a paper route when I was 8 y/o. I didn't mind working, but it's a lot more fun when you get $$ for it. GI Joes and Sweet Tarts aren't cheap!
Posted by: Brave Sir Robin at December 13, 2014 12:12 PM (5buP8)
132
Irish Socialism Explained.
Paddy and Mike were sitting the pub at lunchtime one fine weekday. Mike was reading the paper and turned to Paddy and asked, "Paddy, you're a foin educated man. Can you tell me? What's this socialism they're always on about?"
Paddy replies, "Ah, Mike 'tis the finest ting in da world, this socialism is. I'll tell you all about it."
Paddy goes on, "Mike, let's say you've two pigs, and I've got none. You give me one of your pigs, then we're the same. THAT's socialism."
Mike exclaims, " 'tis brilliant! Is there any more you can tell me?"
"Suren' there is" says Paddy. "Spose'n you've two sheep, and I've got none. You give me one of your sheep, then we've got the the same and THAT's socialism."
"'tis the good Lord's own Christian generosity on earth!" declares Mike "Is that all?"
"Not tat 'tall", says Paddy, "Think if you had two cows, and I've none. You give me one of your cows, then we've both got one cow and THAT's socialism."
"I've never heard the like of it!!" says Mike, "dat's the most wicked, sinful, teeevin' ting I've ever heard. The devil 'imself must've invented it!"
Paddy is shocked by Mike's outburst. "Mike, I don't understand" Paddy says, "The pigs. The sheep. You were fine with those. What about the cows is so different?"
"Well" says Mike, "I really do own two cows."
Paddy and Mike were sitting the pub at lunchtime one fine weekday. Mike was reading the paper and turned to Paddy and asked, "Paddy, you're a foin educated man. Can you tell me? What's this socialism they're always on about?"
Paddy replies, "Ah, Mike 'tis the finest ting in da world, this socialism is. I'll tell you all about it."
Paddy goes on, "Mike, let's say you've two pigs, and I've got none. You give me one of your pigs, then we're the same. THAT's socialism."
Mike exclaims, " 'tis brilliant! Is there any more you can tell me?"
"Suren' there is" says Paddy. "Spose'n you've two sheep, and I've got none. You give me one of your sheep, then we've got the the same and THAT's socialism."
"'tis the good Lord's own Christian generosity on earth!" declares Mike "Is that all?"
"Not tat 'tall", says Paddy, "Think if you had two cows, and I've none. You give me one of your cows, then we've both got one cow and THAT's socialism."
"I've never heard the like of it!!" says Mike, "dat's the most wicked, sinful, teeevin' ting I've ever heard. The devil 'imself must've invented it!"
Paddy is shocked by Mike's outburst. "Mike, I don't understand" Paddy says, "The pigs. The sheep. You were fine with those. What about the cows is so different?"
"Well" says Mike, "I really do own two cows."
Posted by: Angry brooding Mick at December 13, 2014 12:13 PM (4HYng)
133
126 Posted by: RioBravo at December 13, 2014 12:10 PM (z27Ny)
The idea that Sweden was at all capable of defending her worker's paradise vis a vis Ivan sans America is hilarious.
The phalanx that allowed Sweden such magnanimous largesse in her benefits pool was the Strategic shield of America and Sweden's strategic defense is a joke.
The idea that Sweden was at all capable of defending her worker's paradise vis a vis Ivan sans America is hilarious.
The phalanx that allowed Sweden such magnanimous largesse in her benefits pool was the Strategic shield of America and Sweden's strategic defense is a joke.
Posted by: Sven S Blade a.k.a. El Assassin@sven10077 at December 13, 2014 12:13 PM (/4AZU)
134
oo cheri i like that!
Posted by: willow at December 13, 2014 12:13 PM (nqBYe)
135
130 so what does sweden do that brings in the bacon and afford them their lifestyle?
serious question
Vodka and (summer) tourism come to mind. I don't know if they make anything exporting hot blondes, but I'm sure they could figure it out...
serious question
Vodka and (summer) tourism come to mind. I don't know if they make anything exporting hot blondes, but I'm sure they could figure it out...
Posted by: Brave Sir Robin at December 13, 2014 12:13 PM (5buP8)
136
However, the suggestion that the United States
funded the defense of Sweden during the Cold War is fundamentally
absurd. Another flawed fundamental concept.
Posted by: RioBravo at December 13, 2014 12:05 PM (z27Ny)
AbsoDAMNF*CKINright RioBravo.
The Soviets were always sending those letters to the UN and the OAS about the Finnish and Swedish nuclear weapon stockpiles, "A palpable threat against the Motherland" they named it, "an unconscionable threat to the safety of the world"
and "an affront to a peaceable solution to the unrest in the Baltic"
I mean, Ski troops, Saab fighters and an abundance of anti-tank launchers and Lahti pistols would only have held back an invasion for maybe 3 months, one week and 5 days?
funded the defense of Sweden during the Cold War is fundamentally
absurd. Another flawed fundamental concept.
Posted by: RioBravo at December 13, 2014 12:05 PM (z27Ny)
AbsoDAMNF*CKINright RioBravo.
The Soviets were always sending those letters to the UN and the OAS about the Finnish and Swedish nuclear weapon stockpiles, "A palpable threat against the Motherland" they named it, "an unconscionable threat to the safety of the world"
and "an affront to a peaceable solution to the unrest in the Baltic"
I mean, Ski troops, Saab fighters and an abundance of anti-tank launchers and Lahti pistols would only have held back an invasion for maybe 3 months, one week and 5 days?
Posted by: Kindltot at December 13, 2014 12:13 PM (t//F+)
137
Rio, we directly funded substantial, expensive elements of their defense. That's in addition to the indirect investments in RD their defense industry implements. They have always been viewed as a critical flank, and the cooperation continues to this day. My inbox this morning had some great examples of it ... surface to air variants of the AIM170 for them.
Posted by: Jean at December 13, 2014 12:14 PM (TETYm)
138
One other point that has not been touched on so far, is that one has to draw a distinction between "socialism", and a command economy. The "democratic" socialist countries allow private corporations to flourish, albeit with a great regulatory burden, in most cases. And the socialist bureaucracy essentially parasitizes the wealth generated by the corporations (and individual labor, natch). But if Maytag wants to make and sell a microwave hotdog cooker, by golly, they can do it.
In a command economy, corporations still exist, as they did in nazi Germany, but they are subservient to the State. Manufacturers might be permitted some latitude to make consumer goods, but only if the State's goals were met first. And, in the case of nazi Germany, one of the State's goals was that consumers had enough goods available to live fairly well, so that dissatisfaction with the State was muted.
The end-point of the command economy is outright Communism, in which the State is everything, and owns everything, and nobody is permitted to enter into self-directed economic activity. And that ultimately fails, because the ponderous bureaucracy is simply not nimble enough to meet needs as they arise, by redirecting effort. Peoples' Tractor Factory #32 will continue building tractors, despite there being unused tractors sitting in the fields, along with the crops that are rotting there due to a lack of trucks.
In a command economy, corporations still exist, as they did in nazi Germany, but they are subservient to the State. Manufacturers might be permitted some latitude to make consumer goods, but only if the State's goals were met first. And, in the case of nazi Germany, one of the State's goals was that consumers had enough goods available to live fairly well, so that dissatisfaction with the State was muted.
The end-point of the command economy is outright Communism, in which the State is everything, and owns everything, and nobody is permitted to enter into self-directed economic activity. And that ultimately fails, because the ponderous bureaucracy is simply not nimble enough to meet needs as they arise, by redirecting effort. Peoples' Tractor Factory #32 will continue building tractors, despite there being unused tractors sitting in the fields, along with the crops that are rotting there due to a lack of trucks.
Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon at December 13, 2014 12:14 PM (8Fl6F)
139
130 Posted by: willow at December 13, 2014 12:11 PM (nqBYe)
IKEA baby, and SAAB, and uh iron...
no seriously Sweden's economy is not a joke, although their national identity is about to be.
IKEA baby, and SAAB, and uh iron...
no seriously Sweden's economy is not a joke, although their national identity is about to be.
Posted by: Sven S Blade a.k.a. El Assassin@sven10077 at December 13, 2014 12:15 PM (/4AZU)
140
Russian incursion of Sweden? What we want Sweden for? Skinny pancakes, that's all they got. In Russia pancakes look like good woman. Plump. plenty of bounce. Soaks up more syrup. Juicy, you know. Skinny Swede pancakes wouldn't make good tire patch.
Posted by: Boss Putin at December 13, 2014 12:15 PM (WFDo3)
141
To suggest that the American security shield allowed their socialist economy to function as it otherwise would not is stupid. And unsupportable by historic facts.
-
What? That's ... just wrong. The opposite is true.
-
What? That's ... just wrong. The opposite is true.
Posted by: Costanza Defense at December 13, 2014 12:15 PM (ZPrif)
Posted by: --- at December 13, 2014 12:15 PM (MMC8r)
143
136 Posted by: Kindltot at December 13, 2014 12:13 PM (t//F+)
Well their Finnish cousins are kind of like man sized nuclear weapons...
Well their Finnish cousins are kind of like man sized nuclear weapons...
Posted by: Sven S Blade a.k.a. El Assassin@sven10077 at December 13, 2014 12:16 PM (/4AZU)
144
Swedish defense planning was entirely predicated on support from NATO and the US -- despite the official stance of neutrality. That's a historical fact.
Posted by: Costanza Defense at December 13, 2014 12:16 PM (ZPrif)
145
Sven, with knives and vodka. Lots of knives.
Posted by: Jean at December 13, 2014 12:17 PM (TETYm)
146
The idea that Sweden was at all capable of defending her worker's paradise vis a vis Ivan sans America is hilarious.
The phalanx that allowed Sweden such magnanimous largesse in her benefits pool was the Strategic shield of America and Sweden's strategic defense is a joke.
Posted by: Sven S Blade a.k.a. El Assassin@sven10077 at December 13, 2014 12:13 PM (/4AZU)
-----
That may explain why the Soviet Union never attacked Sweden. It does not mean that Sweden did not bear a major defense burden and that they were free riders under an American security umbrella. The argument that it was American defense guarantees that allowed Sweden to spend on socialist goodies still ignores the level of Swedish defense preparations.
The phalanx that allowed Sweden such magnanimous largesse in her benefits pool was the Strategic shield of America and Sweden's strategic defense is a joke.
Posted by: Sven S Blade a.k.a. El Assassin@sven10077 at December 13, 2014 12:13 PM (/4AZU)
-----
That may explain why the Soviet Union never attacked Sweden. It does not mean that Sweden did not bear a major defense burden and that they were free riders under an American security umbrella. The argument that it was American defense guarantees that allowed Sweden to spend on socialist goodies still ignores the level of Swedish defense preparations.
Posted by: RioBravo at December 13, 2014 12:18 PM (z27Ny)
147
dammit, i should have thought ikea, not that i own any of their products but it's well known.
gah, my sister owned a saab , nothing to gloat over.
LOL
gah, my sister owned a saab , nothing to gloat over.
LOL
Posted by: willow at December 13, 2014 12:18 PM (nqBYe)
148
144 Posted by: Costanza Defense at December 13, 2014 12:16 PM (ZPrif)
Sweden was neutral like Fwance was neutral...
neutral in ideal only....
145 Posted by: Jean at December 13, 2014 12:17 PM (TETYm)
The Finns are stubborn and tough enough to cow the Ivans and the Ivans are stubborn and tough enough to cow SMOD...
Sweden was neutral like Fwance was neutral...
neutral in ideal only....
145 Posted by: Jean at December 13, 2014 12:17 PM (TETYm)
The Finns are stubborn and tough enough to cow the Ivans and the Ivans are stubborn and tough enough to cow SMOD...
Posted by: Sven S Blade a.k.a. El Assassin@sven10077 at December 13, 2014 12:18 PM (/4AZU)
149
141 To suggest that the American security shield allowed their socialist economy to function as it otherwise would not is stupid. And unsupportable by historic facts.
It didn't maintain the integrity of the everyday economy, it saved on government to maintain a standing army and developing/procuring weapons that would credibly defend them from the bear just east of them. =more free shit for Swedes.
It didn't maintain the integrity of the everyday economy, it saved on government to maintain a standing army and developing/procuring weapons that would credibly defend them from the bear just east of them. =more free shit for Swedes.
Posted by: Brave Sir Robin at December 13, 2014 12:19 PM (5buP8)
150
Part of the reason why socialism hangs around is because of the infiltration of academia.
People are indoctrinated from pre-K now to believe in this bullshit and the effects are corrosive on civilization. The left LOVES headstart, not because it employs more unionized teachers or provides free daycare to welfare cases, but because it gets the government into the lives of children sooner in an impressionable setting.
The first thing the marxists did when they hit the shores here was attempt to take over the schools. The effects of the Frankfurters taking over Columbia and other schools in the 1920s/1930s lead to most teachers and professors in the country believing in that rot by mid century. It's a big part of the reason why the quality of education has fallen since the 1950s. It was about that time that the 1920s/30s graduates of Columbia, etc. started to become senior level administrators.
People are indoctrinated from pre-K now to believe in this bullshit and the effects are corrosive on civilization. The left LOVES headstart, not because it employs more unionized teachers or provides free daycare to welfare cases, but because it gets the government into the lives of children sooner in an impressionable setting.
The first thing the marxists did when they hit the shores here was attempt to take over the schools. The effects of the Frankfurters taking over Columbia and other schools in the 1920s/1930s lead to most teachers and professors in the country believing in that rot by mid century. It's a big part of the reason why the quality of education has fallen since the 1950s. It was about that time that the 1920s/30s graduates of Columbia, etc. started to become senior level administrators.
Posted by: BlueFalcon in Boston at December 13, 2014 12:19 PM (A1Dcl)
151
131 -
Same here, no allowance.
I am sad to admit it, but for me baseball cards were like crack. I had to have them. I stole from my father's coin stash to get them.
When I got old enough to earn money to buy them myself, I realized how dumb it was to spend hard earned money on such frivolous things. (Little did I realized baseball cards would become a serious investment one day).
So yeah, being young and stupid is socialism.
Same here, no allowance.
I am sad to admit it, but for me baseball cards were like crack. I had to have them. I stole from my father's coin stash to get them.
When I got old enough to earn money to buy them myself, I realized how dumb it was to spend hard earned money on such frivolous things. (Little did I realized baseball cards would become a serious investment one day).
So yeah, being young and stupid is socialism.
Posted by: BurtTC at December 13, 2014 12:20 PM (Dj0WE)
152
146 Posted by: RioBravo at December 13, 2014 12:18 PM (z27Ny)
The Swedes had a very narrow band of excellence on defense expenditures and it was funded to mostly avid hobbyist levels.
At the end of the day Sweden's defense industry was gnat on the ass of America and Russia's.
The Swedes had a very narrow band of excellence on defense expenditures and it was funded to mostly avid hobbyist levels.
At the end of the day Sweden's defense industry was gnat on the ass of America and Russia's.
Posted by: Sven S Blade a.k.a. El Assassin@sven10077 at December 13, 2014 12:20 PM (/4AZU)
153
It will be a great day when all children go to private schools, and the money wasted on public education goes into building bombers.
Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at December 13, 2014 12:20 PM (vPh3W)
154
Excellent post, WeirdDave.
The problem is that what works for four people likely won't for forty
and damn sure won't for four hundred. Families are bonded by love and
dedication to each other, forces that are much weaker in a tribe and
non-existent in a nation. Socialism can only work within groups that
have that level of bond to each other.
It's even worse in a "diverse" society. Socialism can kinda semi-work in a close-knit, homogeneous society, as Sweden used to be. Taking more than your share means doing one of your (distant) kin out of his share, and guilt/social pressure/blood ties kick in to make you at least consider the impact on others.
But in a "diverse" society, it's much easier to rationalize. So you get a free pho', or an EBT card, so what? Someone else is paying, and you have zero connection to that guy, and may even enjoy the idea of sticking it to him. You're not only not bonded to him, you may be anti-bonded to him, so there's no motivation whatever to take others into account.
The problem is that what works for four people likely won't for forty
and damn sure won't for four hundred. Families are bonded by love and
dedication to each other, forces that are much weaker in a tribe and
non-existent in a nation. Socialism can only work within groups that
have that level of bond to each other.
It's even worse in a "diverse" society. Socialism can kinda semi-work in a close-knit, homogeneous society, as Sweden used to be. Taking more than your share means doing one of your (distant) kin out of his share, and guilt/social pressure/blood ties kick in to make you at least consider the impact on others.
But in a "diverse" society, it's much easier to rationalize. So you get a free pho', or an EBT card, so what? Someone else is paying, and you have zero connection to that guy, and may even enjoy the idea of sticking it to him. You're not only not bonded to him, you may be anti-bonded to him, so there's no motivation whatever to take others into account.
Posted by: Jay Guevara at December 13, 2014 12:21 PM (oKE6c)
155
Part of the Snowden leaks were top secret military agreements with Sweden -- going back to 1954.
Cold War treaty confirms Sweden was not neutral www.thelocal.se/20131209/secret-cold-war-treaty-confirms-sweden-was-never-neutral via @TheLocalSweden
Cold War treaty confirms Sweden was not neutral www.thelocal.se/20131209/secret-cold-war-treaty-confirms-sweden-was-never-neutral via @TheLocalSweden
Posted by: Costanza Defense at December 13, 2014 12:21 PM (ZPrif)
Posted by: speedster1 at December 13, 2014 12:22 PM (C0wzD)
Posted by: Dennis the Constitutional Peasant at December 13, 2014 12:22 PM (4HYng)
158
that comment was my haughty americanism on display.
Vettes ! Mustangs!
well yes we once had iron as a commodity .
and sorry Ikea , do they do down cushions? maybe they can be redeemed if they do.
Vettes ! Mustangs!
well yes we once had iron as a commodity .
and sorry Ikea , do they do down cushions? maybe they can be redeemed if they do.
Posted by: willow at December 13, 2014 12:23 PM (nqBYe)
159
Well their Finnish cousins are kind of like man sized nuclear weapons...
Posted by: Sven S Blade a.k.a. El Assassin@sven10077 at December 13, 2014 12:16 PM (/4AZU)
past experience indicates that Sisu has an operational life of three months, one week and five days.
To stand up and declaim that Sweden had no dependence on NATO or the US funding its defense is like claiming that ARCO is pricing its gasoline independent of world oil costs.
Posted by: Sven S Blade a.k.a. El Assassin@sven10077 at December 13, 2014 12:16 PM (/4AZU)
past experience indicates that Sisu has an operational life of three months, one week and five days.
To stand up and declaim that Sweden had no dependence on NATO or the US funding its defense is like claiming that ARCO is pricing its gasoline independent of world oil costs.
Posted by: Kindltot at December 13, 2014 12:23 PM (t//F+)
160
Sweden's military numbers 40,000 including a large number of reserves, which is less than the US Coast Guard. I think they might be counting on some outside help in a serious scrap.
Posted by: fairweatherbill bucking the wind at December 13, 2014 12:23 PM (WFDo3)
161
The left LOVES headstart, not because it employs more unionized teachers
or provides free daycare to welfare cases, but because it gets the
government into the lives of children sooner in an impressionable
setting.
The irony is that Headstart actually increased the performance gap between blacks and everyone else. Whites and Asians availed themselves of Headstart too, and pushed their kids. Blacks, not so much. It's almost as if there's some other factor in play.
or provides free daycare to welfare cases, but because it gets the
government into the lives of children sooner in an impressionable
setting.
The irony is that Headstart actually increased the performance gap between blacks and everyone else. Whites and Asians availed themselves of Headstart too, and pushed their kids. Blacks, not so much. It's almost as if there's some other factor in play.
Posted by: Jay Guevara at December 13, 2014 12:23 PM (oKE6c)
162
America put nuclear subs off Sweden's coast in the 60s -- with Sweden's blessing.
Posted by: Costanza Defense at December 13, 2014 12:24 PM (ZPrif)
Posted by: fluffy at December 13, 2014 12:25 PM (Ua6T/)
164
"...Socialism can only work within groups that
have that level of bond to each other..."
That's what we tried telling UVA President Sullivan and all it got us was suspended and accused.
In that order.
have that level of bond to each other..."
That's what we tried telling UVA President Sullivan and all it got us was suspended and accused.
In that order.
Posted by: The men of Phi Kappa Psi at December 13, 2014 12:25 PM (4HYng)
165
Never trust a Scandi.
Posted by: garrett at December 13, 2014 12:25 PM (z7cqv)
166
I can throw pretty damn hard, even at my age, and I don't remember anyone teaching me.
You had seen pro's on TV right? That's all it takes.
You had seen pro's on TV right? That's all it takes.
Posted by: DaveA at December 13, 2014 12:26 PM (DL2i+)
Posted by: Cicero Kaboom! Kid at December 13, 2014 12:26 PM (uSAVP)
168
However, the suggestion that the United States funded the defense of
Sweden during the Cold War is fundamentally absurd. Another flawed
fundamental concept.
Really? Well, if you want to look at the data, go here:
http://portal.sipri.org/publications/pages/expenditures/country-search
Since 1971(as far back as the data goes), Sweden has always spent less than 3% of it's GDP on defense each year. If you think that was enough to have prevented the Soviet Union from gobbling Sweden up like a Canapé at Michael Moore's buffet, you're crazy.
Sweden during the Cold War is fundamentally absurd. Another flawed
fundamental concept.
Really? Well, if you want to look at the data, go here:
http://portal.sipri.org/publications/pages/expenditures/country-search
Since 1971(as far back as the data goes), Sweden has always spent less than 3% of it's GDP on defense each year. If you think that was enough to have prevented the Soviet Union from gobbling Sweden up like a Canapé at Michael Moore's buffet, you're crazy.
Posted by: Weirddave at December 13, 2014 12:26 PM (KAmzK)
169
RioBravo, have you read what the Soviet warplans were for the Baltic basin and how little of shit they gave for the Swedish "investments"?
Posted by: Jean at December 13, 2014 12:27 PM (TETYm)
170
The argument that it was American defense guarantees
that allowed Sweden to spend on socialist goodies still ignores the
level of Swedish defense preparations.
Posted by: RioBravo at December 13, 2014 12:18 PM (z27Ny)
The Swedes are relatively hard-nosed, and have gone toe-to-toe with the Soviet submarines in their waters. Sweden's a small country (pop. ca. 12 million, IIRC), and so can't be expected to fund a huge defense establishment, but like Finland, they'd probably give a pretty good account of themselves in a scrap.
that allowed Sweden to spend on socialist goodies still ignores the
level of Swedish defense preparations.
Posted by: RioBravo at December 13, 2014 12:18 PM (z27Ny)
The Swedes are relatively hard-nosed, and have gone toe-to-toe with the Soviet submarines in their waters. Sweden's a small country (pop. ca. 12 million, IIRC), and so can't be expected to fund a huge defense establishment, but like Finland, they'd probably give a pretty good account of themselves in a scrap.
Posted by: Jay Guevara at December 13, 2014 12:27 PM (oKE6c)
171
165 Posted by: garrett at December 13, 2014 12:25 PM (z7cqv)
Förtroende är en överskattad råvara ändå, det räcker med att göra affärer.
Förtroende är en överskattad råvara ändå, det räcker med att göra affärer.
Posted by: Sven S Blade a.k.a. El Assassin@sven10077 at December 13, 2014 12:27 PM (/4AZU)
172
if all it takes is a little education to learn how to throw, then that speaks volumes about TFG.
Posted by: fairweatherbill bucking the wind at December 13, 2014 12:27 PM (WFDo3)
173
Also as far as Scandi 'successful' socialism, remember that they have oil to pay for a lot of it, and use to be homogeneous societies where everyone was similar with similar wants, needs, desires, and cultural mores.
Posted by: BlueFalcon in Boston at December 13, 2014 12:28 PM (A1Dcl)
Posted by: DaveA at December 13, 2014 12:29 PM (DL2i+)
175
141 To suggest that the American security shield allowed their socialist economy to function as it otherwise would not is stupid. And unsupportable by historic facts.
The family parallel applies yet again. Dad and/or Mom work so with the money from your paper route you can buy Sweetarts and GI Joes (Sweden) and you still have a roof over your head and dinner to eat (protection). Once you no longer can rely on Mom and Dad for support (U.S. Defense), your money goes first for food and shelter (your own maintenainence, upkeep and protection).
The family parallel applies yet again. Dad and/or Mom work so with the money from your paper route you can buy Sweetarts and GI Joes (Sweden) and you still have a roof over your head and dinner to eat (protection). Once you no longer can rely on Mom and Dad for support (U.S. Defense), your money goes first for food and shelter (your own maintenainence, upkeep and protection).
Posted by: T at December 13, 2014 12:29 PM (ry+UY)
176
And how about a big F you to Rousseau, who provided the intellectual underpinnings to modern socialism with his "noble savage" crap? He posited that man was intrinsically good, and only became corrupted by society. The leftists went one better, and said if we changed society, we'd change human nature, and make New Socialist Man.
Pull the other one, it plays Jingle Bells.
Btw, in his personal life Rousseau was every bit the swine you'd expect.
Pull the other one, it plays Jingle Bells.
Btw, in his personal life Rousseau was every bit the swine you'd expect.
Posted by: Jay Guevara at December 13, 2014 12:30 PM (oKE6c)
177
Old joke...
How can you tell a level headed Swede?
The snoose oozes out of both corners of his mouth.
How can you tell a level headed Swede?
The snoose oozes out of both corners of his mouth.
Posted by: fairweatherbill bucking the wind at December 13, 2014 12:30 PM (WFDo3)
178
Family. Yup. Ive argued to liberals that the only place that socialism works is the family. And it works because the "haves" have intimate relationship with the have-nots. They love them more than they love themselves. IT'S VOLUNTARY. Socialism does NOT work in society because that intimate relationship does not exist between total strangers.
Family. Yup. Ive argued to liberals that the only place that socialism works is the family. And it works because the "haves" have intimate relationship with the have-nots. They love them more than they love themselves. IT'S VOLUNTARY. Socialism does NOT work in society because that intimate relationship does not exist between total strangers.
Posted by: fixerupper at December 13, 2014 12:30 PM (xrURQ)
179
The secret defense agreements that Sweden had with America throughout the Cold War have only recently become public.
That's likely one reason Sweden might join NATO in the near-ish future. Now the Swedes know that they never were really neutral - that they had officially joined defense alliances the whole time -- it just had been kept secret.
Bit of a jolt to the Swedish self___ of neutrality. Sure, they knew at some level they were dependent on America for defense. But they didn't know-know. There was never anything official.
That's likely one reason Sweden might join NATO in the near-ish future. Now the Swedes know that they never were really neutral - that they had officially joined defense alliances the whole time -- it just had been kept secret.
Bit of a jolt to the Swedish self___ of neutrality. Sure, they knew at some level they were dependent on America for defense. But they didn't know-know. There was never anything official.
Posted by: Costanza Defense at December 13, 2014 12:31 PM (ZPrif)
180
Nood football
Posted by: Y-not on the phone at December 13, 2014 12:31 PM (9BRsg)
181
Posted by: Sven S Blade a.k.a. El Assassin@sven10077 at December 13, 2014 12:27 PM (/4AZU)
Great, now we're gonna catch the Black Diamonds from that dirty Iceback, Sven.
Great, now we're gonna catch the Black Diamonds from that dirty Iceback, Sven.
Posted by: garrett at December 13, 2014 12:31 PM (VqrGU)
182
if all it takes is a little education to learn how to throw, then that speaks volumes about TFG.
Posted by: fairweatherbill bucking the wind at December 13, 2014 12:27 PM (WFDo3)
He don't throw too good, but he's very good at catching.
Posted by: fairweatherbill bucking the wind at December 13, 2014 12:27 PM (WFDo3)
He don't throw too good, but he's very good at catching.
Posted by: Reggie Love at December 13, 2014 12:31 PM (8Fl6F)
183
Having endured the Saab snottiness for a couple of decades, I am amused to see the occasional example still motoring around. The last gasp was when they re-badged a Subaru as a Saab. When encountering an owner, I ask them if their car is actually a Subaru.
I worked with a fellow who drove a Saab..., they like to quote 'safety', 'Swedish design', blah, blah. I always referred to his car as a Squab. At first he would correct me, until he figured out that I was poking fun.
I worked with a fellow who drove a Saab..., they like to quote 'safety', 'Swedish design', blah, blah. I always referred to his car as a Squab. At first he would correct me, until he figured out that I was poking fun.
Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at December 13, 2014 12:31 PM (vPh3W)
184
Mike Hammer - Amen. The left fights home schooling and school choice so hard because they can't stomach the thought of letting those little young impressionable minds escaping their education plantation. The same drones who scream Pro-Choice! are very, very allergic to choice in the mainstream.
Posted by: Cheri at December 13, 2014 12:32 PM (ZFPMM)
185
181 Posted by: garrett at December 13, 2014 12:31 PM (VqrGU)
Black Diamonds are a gift from Odin...or Pixy's Hamsters...your choice kameraden...
183 Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at December 13, 2014 12:31 PM (vPh3W)
I have a soft spot for the classic 900 turbo...
Black Diamonds are a gift from Odin...or Pixy's Hamsters...your choice kameraden...
183 Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at December 13, 2014 12:31 PM (vPh3W)
I have a soft spot for the classic 900 turbo...
Posted by: Sven S Blade a.k.a. El Assassin@sven10077 at December 13, 2014 12:33 PM (/4AZU)
186
Jay, ask yourself why the Swedes were handling the inshore ASW stuff, how they were alerted, and what the hell the Russian skippers were doing in those close waters? Hmmm, whats missing? Why did the Russian fish run and hide in Swedish islands?
Posted by: Jean at December 13, 2014 12:33 PM (TETYm)
Posted by: Kindltot at December 13, 2014 12:33 PM (t//F+)
188
The idea that Sweden was at all capable of defending her worker's paradise vis a vis Ivan sans America is hilarious.
Hell, that's true of all of Europe.
Hell, that's true of all of Europe.
Posted by: Jay Guevara at December 13, 2014 12:35 PM (oKE6c)
189
RioBravo, have you read what the Soviet warplans were for the Baltic basin and how little of shit they gave for the Swedish "investments"?
Posted by: Jean at December 13, 2014 12:27 PM (TETYm)
-----
That still says nothing about the level of Swedish defense investments which were significant (not just defense expenditure but also the cost defense industrial developments) until the era of East/West detente.
I never said that Sweden could have defended itself against the Soviet Union. (There were probably only 7 counties that could have.) What is relevant is the cost of the Swedish defense establishment and the bounds that would place on the pursuit of socialist economic policies.
Posted by: Jean at December 13, 2014 12:27 PM (TETYm)
-----
That still says nothing about the level of Swedish defense investments which were significant (not just defense expenditure but also the cost defense industrial developments) until the era of East/West detente.
I never said that Sweden could have defended itself against the Soviet Union. (There were probably only 7 counties that could have.) What is relevant is the cost of the Swedish defense establishment and the bounds that would place on the pursuit of socialist economic policies.
Posted by: RioBravo at December 13, 2014 12:36 PM (z27Ny)
190
Costanza, it wasn't a very good secret. Everything they had integrated with NATO - radios, refueling, etc. I'm sure the Russians noticed that.
Posted by: Jean at December 13, 2014 12:37 PM (TETYm)
191
Having endured the Saab snottiness for a couple of
decades, I am amused to see the occasional example still motoring
around. The last gasp was when they re-badged a Subaru as a Saab. When
encountering an owner, I ask them if their car is actually a Subaru.
I worked with a fellow who drove a Saab..., they like to quote
'safety', 'Swedish design', blah, blah. I always referred to his car as a
Squab. At first he would correct me, until he figured out that I was
poking fun.
Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at December 13, 2014 12:31 PM (vPh3W)
Saab and Subaru have followed similar trajectories. Their initial offerings in the North American market were quirky, but rugged, and both did well on the rally circuit. And both of them then moved up-market, with bigger and more luxurious cars. And the prices went up, too. and instead of their clientele being car-savvy enthusiasts who could recognize a diamond in the rough, they were being bought by snobs looking for "cachet."
decades, I am amused to see the occasional example still motoring
around. The last gasp was when they re-badged a Subaru as a Saab. When
encountering an owner, I ask them if their car is actually a Subaru.
I worked with a fellow who drove a Saab..., they like to quote
'safety', 'Swedish design', blah, blah. I always referred to his car as a
Squab. At first he would correct me, until he figured out that I was
poking fun.
Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at December 13, 2014 12:31 PM (vPh3W)
Saab and Subaru have followed similar trajectories. Their initial offerings in the North American market were quirky, but rugged, and both did well on the rally circuit. And both of them then moved up-market, with bigger and more luxurious cars. And the prices went up, too. and instead of their clientele being car-savvy enthusiasts who could recognize a diamond in the rough, they were being bought by snobs looking for "cachet."
Posted by: Reggie Love at December 13, 2014 12:38 PM (8Fl6F)
192
A country can not be truly "independent" if that country depends on another country or countries for such a basic need as self defense. In reality there are only about three countries that are capable of independent self defense and they are us, China and Russia. Anytime Russia or China decided they wanted to take Sweden or South Africa or Canada or Bermuda they could do it unless we stepped in.
Independent means independent. National security is the most fundamental responsibility of any country and if you depend on someone else to help or provide that need, you are not independent.
Independent means independent. National security is the most fundamental responsibility of any country and if you depend on someone else to help or provide that need, you are not independent.
Posted by: anchovy at December 13, 2014 12:39 PM (PtVFw)
193
I have a soft spot for the classic 900 turbo...
Posted by: Sven S Blade
-------------
I understand..., I have a soft spot for the Sonnet 2-stroke, but there is no *rational* basis for it.
Most Saab owners are/were because they were making a fashion statement. They would parrot the popular cocktail party stuff about the cars, but they were not really car people. It was all about optics.
Posted by: Sven S Blade
-------------
I understand..., I have a soft spot for the Sonnet 2-stroke, but there is no *rational* basis for it.
Most Saab owners are/were because they were making a fashion statement. They would parrot the popular cocktail party stuff about the cars, but they were not really car people. It was all about optics.
Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at December 13, 2014 12:39 PM (vPh3W)
194
Off, body-man sock.
Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon at December 13, 2014 12:40 PM (8Fl6F)
195
Rio, seven? I'm having a hard time getting beyond three. US, China, maybe England. Everyone else was just trying to slow things down until we got there (Turkey, the Shah, Germany, Sweden, Korea, etc.) I might give Israel some atomic Masada points.
Posted by: Jean at December 13, 2014 12:40 PM (TETYm)
196
193 Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at December 13, 2014 12:39 PM (vPh3W)
for me it was the rally success and the sight lines...
long ago Sven wanted to be a jet jock...
the Saab strikes me as being an automotive F-86...
for me it was the rally success and the sight lines...
long ago Sven wanted to be a jet jock...
the Saab strikes me as being an automotive F-86...
Posted by: Sven S Blade a.k.a. El Assassin@sven10077 at December 13, 2014 12:41 PM (/4AZU)
197
The connection between defense expenditures and welfare benefits is plain to see right here in the U.S. We're cannibalizing our military in order to fund endlessly increasing entitlements.
But now, there is nobody to come to our aid if a war breaks out, and plenty of enemies. This will not end well.
But now, there is nobody to come to our aid if a war breaks out, and plenty of enemies. This will not end well.
Posted by: rickl at December 13, 2014 12:43 PM (sdi6R)
198
Rio, seven? I'm having a hard time getting beyond three. US, China, maybe England. Everyone else was just trying to slow things down until we got there (Turkey, the Shah, Germany, Sweden, Korea, etc.) I might give Israel some atomic Masada points.
Posted by: Jean at December 13, 2014 12:40 PM (TETYm)
-----
I was thinking China and Unites States because of size, population, and nuclear weapons. France, Britain, and Germany because of nuclear weapons (American nukes in Germany's case). India because of size, population, and possibly (depending on time frame) nuclear weapons.
Posted by: Jean at December 13, 2014 12:40 PM (TETYm)
-----
I was thinking China and Unites States because of size, population, and nuclear weapons. France, Britain, and Germany because of nuclear weapons (American nukes in Germany's case). India because of size, population, and possibly (depending on time frame) nuclear weapons.
Posted by: RioBravo at December 13, 2014 12:43 PM (z27Ny)
199
do not make me rethink my saabism.
Posted by: willow at December 13, 2014 12:44 PM (nqBYe)
200
do not make me rethink my saabism.
Posted by: willow at December 13, 2014 12:44 PM (nqBYe)
201
well alright i guess i must now.
Posted by: willow at December 13, 2014 12:45 PM (nqBYe)
202
I'm sure it's terribly unChristian of me, but I can't help but look at the array of horrors that make up the democrat coalition or the weak knees bulk of the GOP and say 'this is not my family, piss off the lot of you.'
Posted by: Methos at December 13, 2014 12:47 PM (A6vWB)
203
the Saab strikes me as being an automotive F-86...
Posted by: Sven
------------
Not a Gripen...?
Frankly I don't like FWD cars, and that was another reason that Saab's didn't appeal to me, rallye successes not withstanding.
The one feature that I actually admired was a true Emergency Brake, i.e., that worked on the front wheels.
Otherwise they were quixotic. When I discovered that the clutch slave-cylinder was machined into the block, I was...., amused.
Posted by: Sven
------------
Not a Gripen...?
Frankly I don't like FWD cars, and that was another reason that Saab's didn't appeal to me, rallye successes not withstanding.
The one feature that I actually admired was a true Emergency Brake, i.e., that worked on the front wheels.
Otherwise they were quixotic. When I discovered that the clutch slave-cylinder was machined into the block, I was...., amused.
Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at December 13, 2014 12:47 PM (vPh3W)
204
now that i've spouted off my angst in a myriad of ways i will go and do as i should with all the kidlets gone and scrub the house.
have a lovely weekend .
have a lovely weekend .
Posted by: willow at December 13, 2014 12:47 PM (nqBYe)
205
Socialism can only work within groups that have that level of bond to each other.
That's not socialism, as it is preached. It's nepotism.
Socialism and altruism, as it is preached, is that everyone surrenders to the group, but is paradoxically liberated from rule by anyone else because the group "rules" itself via the "general will," "will of the people," or some variant thereof.
"Socialism" and "altruism," as it is practiced reverts to top-down hierarchical nepotism -- ironically what avowed socialists say their system when "done properly" is supposed to eliminate.
Nepotism is actually beneficial from an evolutionary point of view, and is likely hardwired in us genetically. If we were all Randian egoists, we'd be dead. By taking risks to defend the group and giving special benefits to members of the group, the rest in the group defend you and give you benefits. You can see this with fraternities, fraternal organizations, and even perhaps the Moron Horde itself.
What made America (and Anglo-sphere more generally) so special was that while we maintain an "us vs. them" attitude, we are open to "them" becoming one of "us," with no restrictions on race or ethnicity. Similarly, America fought for independence to protect their "English rights"... but that special combination of liberty and virtue was not constrained by ethnicity, and was able to transcend such limitations.
That's not socialism, as it is preached. It's nepotism.
Socialism and altruism, as it is preached, is that everyone surrenders to the group, but is paradoxically liberated from rule by anyone else because the group "rules" itself via the "general will," "will of the people," or some variant thereof.
"Socialism" and "altruism," as it is practiced reverts to top-down hierarchical nepotism -- ironically what avowed socialists say their system when "done properly" is supposed to eliminate.
Nepotism is actually beneficial from an evolutionary point of view, and is likely hardwired in us genetically. If we were all Randian egoists, we'd be dead. By taking risks to defend the group and giving special benefits to members of the group, the rest in the group defend you and give you benefits. You can see this with fraternities, fraternal organizations, and even perhaps the Moron Horde itself.
What made America (and Anglo-sphere more generally) so special was that while we maintain an "us vs. them" attitude, we are open to "them" becoming one of "us," with no restrictions on race or ethnicity. Similarly, America fought for independence to protect their "English rights"... but that special combination of liberty and virtue was not constrained by ethnicity, and was able to transcend such limitations.
Posted by: The Political Hat at December 13, 2014 12:48 PM (lN8KC)
Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at December 13, 2014 12:48 PM (vPh3W)
207
203 Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at December 13, 2014 12:47 PM (vPh3W)
My nickname may be Svenska...but comrade I am Yankee...
the Grippen was cool but there are few things sexier than the F-86 and Mig Alley....
My nickname may be Svenska...but comrade I am Yankee...
the Grippen was cool but there are few things sexier than the F-86 and Mig Alley....
Posted by: Sven S Blade a.k.a. El Assassin@sven10077 at December 13, 2014 12:49 PM (/4AZU)
208
Most Saab owners are/were because they were making a fashion statement. They would parrot the popular cocktail party stuff about the cars, but they were not really car people. It was all about optics.
Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at December 13, 2014 12:39 PM (vPh3W)
Totally, there are a few douche nozzles on the wife's side who were exactly that. I never knew anybody who actually owned one until them.
Posted by: Mike Hammer, etc., etc. at December 13, 2014 12:39 PM (vPh3W)
Totally, there are a few douche nozzles on the wife's side who were exactly that. I never knew anybody who actually owned one until them.
Posted by: Berserker-Dragonheads Division at December 13, 2014 12:49 PM (FMbng)
209
I always considered the answer to why socialism is so hard to sweep away to be pretty simple:
I want shit. You have shit. I want it.
Socialism allows me to rationalize this - at encyclopedic length, if I so desire - in a way where I won't be shot or thrown in jail.
Rich socialists? They simply want shit on behalf of other people. The motivation - guilt, power, cynicism - is irrelevant.
I want shit. You have shit. I want it.
Socialism allows me to rationalize this - at encyclopedic length, if I so desire - in a way where I won't be shot or thrown in jail.
Rich socialists? They simply want shit on behalf of other people. The motivation - guilt, power, cynicism - is irrelevant.
Posted by: Tyrone at December 13, 2014 12:49 PM (XXv3i)
210
Their societies are all suffering cancer of the culture. Birthrates are below replacement levels, third world immigrants with worldviews inimical to freedom are flooding their countries with no end in sight, and the native people can't even be arsed to defend what they claim to believe in (for more on this see Steyn, Mark; anything he's written, basically).
So why, given its abject real world failure, does socialism remain a compelling vision to so many people?
-----
The symptoms differ from those of the United States in what fundamental way?
So why, given its abject real world failure, does socialism remain a compelling vision to so many people?
-----
The symptoms differ from those of the United States in what fundamental way?
Posted by: RioBravo at December 13, 2014 12:53 PM (z27Ny)
211
Families aren't tiny pockets of socialism. It's more like survivalism. We temporarily provide for our kids until they can provide for themselves. Think of them as adults-in-training rather than as wards of a socio-political ideology.
Posted by: Brass Bancroft at December 13, 2014 12:57 PM (iyYUA)
212
I never said that Sweden could have defended itself
against the Soviet Union. (There were probably only 7 counties that
could have.) What is relevant is the cost of the Swedish defense
establishment and the bounds that would place on the pursuit of
socialist economic policies.
Posted by: RioBravo at December 13, 2014 12:36 PM (z27Ny)
So, even though this appears to be reversal of what you claimed earlier, and are now talking about GDP%: are you talking about an Aandoran level of investment of national defense, or a Swiss level of national defence?
against the Soviet Union. (There were probably only 7 counties that
could have.) What is relevant is the cost of the Swedish defense
establishment and the bounds that would place on the pursuit of
socialist economic policies.
Posted by: RioBravo at December 13, 2014 12:36 PM (z27Ny)
So, even though this appears to be reversal of what you claimed earlier, and are now talking about GDP%: are you talking about an Aandoran level of investment of national defense, or a Swiss level of national defence?
Posted by: Kindltot at December 13, 2014 12:59 PM (t//F+)
Posted by: Teh Most Interesting Man at December 13, 2014 01:00 PM (Jk/zI)
214
Have you not learned anything from Emperor Obama, and his queens Michelle and Valerie?
Posted by: Teh Most Interesting Man at December 13, 2014 01:02 PM (Jk/zI)
215
So, even though this appears to be reversal of what you claimed earlier, and are now talking about GDP%: are you talking about an Aandoran level of investment of national defense, or a Swiss level of national defence?
Posted by: Kindltot at December 13, 2014 12:59 PM (t//F+)
---
It is not a reversal of what I said. I claimed that Sweden did not forego major investments in defense preparations to allow major spending on social redistribution. I am not talking about Andorra (?) or Switzerland as neither was cited previously.
Posted by: Kindltot at December 13, 2014 12:59 PM (t//F+)
---
It is not a reversal of what I said. I claimed that Sweden did not forego major investments in defense preparations to allow major spending on social redistribution. I am not talking about Andorra (?) or Switzerland as neither was cited previously.
Posted by: RioBravo at December 13, 2014 01:03 PM (z27Ny)
216
It is not a reversal of what I said. I claimed that
Sweden did not forego major investments in defense preparations to allow
major spending on social redistribution. I am not talking about
Andorra (?) or Switzerland as neither was cited previously.
Posted by: RioBravo at December 13, 2014 01:03 PM (z27Ny)
I'm sorry. I misunderstood what your point was.
So, the Swedes, knowing that they were unable to successfully fight of the Soviet army invading their country and could do little more than try to provide a doorstop made out of bodies to delay any invasion, without regard to any support coming from the US or NATO, decided that it was a far better policy to spend government assets on social welfare programs.
Is that a fair summation or am I being needlessly nasty?
Sweden did not forego major investments in defense preparations to allow
major spending on social redistribution. I am not talking about
Andorra (?) or Switzerland as neither was cited previously.
Posted by: RioBravo at December 13, 2014 01:03 PM (z27Ny)
I'm sorry. I misunderstood what your point was.
So, the Swedes, knowing that they were unable to successfully fight of the Soviet army invading their country and could do little more than try to provide a doorstop made out of bodies to delay any invasion, without regard to any support coming from the US or NATO, decided that it was a far better policy to spend government assets on social welfare programs.
Is that a fair summation or am I being needlessly nasty?
Posted by: Kindltot at December 13, 2014 01:16 PM (t//F+)
217
Is that a fair summation or am I being needlessly nasty?
Posted by: Kindltot at December 13, 2014 01:16 PM (t//F+)
----
I don't see your summation as nasty - I see it as ignorant.
Let me rephrase my point so perhaps even you can understand it. Sweden was not able to divert funds to socialist programs because they hid behind an American security shield ('not to mention the big one: they outsourced their defense to us.' from the original post). Sweden did not outsource their defense to the U.S. They bore a major defense burden relative to their wealth and population.
Just the reverse of what you are suggesting my point was: they could not defend themselves against Soviet attack so dropped defense efforts to pay for socialization.
(In reality their relative defense effort and social spending trends rather closely follow a variety of other country's that would not be so commonly considered 'socialist'.)
Posted by: Kindltot at December 13, 2014 01:16 PM (t//F+)
----
I don't see your summation as nasty - I see it as ignorant.
Let me rephrase my point so perhaps even you can understand it. Sweden was not able to divert funds to socialist programs because they hid behind an American security shield ('not to mention the big one: they outsourced their defense to us.' from the original post). Sweden did not outsource their defense to the U.S. They bore a major defense burden relative to their wealth and population.
Just the reverse of what you are suggesting my point was: they could not defend themselves against Soviet attack so dropped defense efforts to pay for socialization.
(In reality their relative defense effort and social spending trends rather closely follow a variety of other country's that would not be so commonly considered 'socialist'.)
Posted by: RioBravo at December 13, 2014 01:32 PM (z27Ny)
218
Great post. Thank you for writing this.
Posted by: adolfo_velasquez at December 13, 2014 01:48 PM (ZufZo)
219
I don't think you have to be taught to throw. If you set a goal for throwing harder and more accurately, and you try different ways to do that (a lot of practice), you'll eventually find a movement that does that.
The idea* of trying something new in small doses to test before applying the techniques permanently everywhere, does not come easily to everyone.
A lot of people seem to think that if it sounds like a good idea, it should immediately be made policy everywhere. Experimentation does not appear to be natural for some humans.
*Not really idea, it should be the way of life. Even rats do it, for crying out loud.
The idea* of trying something new in small doses to test before applying the techniques permanently everywhere, does not come easily to everyone.
A lot of people seem to think that if it sounds like a good idea, it should immediately be made policy everywhere. Experimentation does not appear to be natural for some humans.
*Not really idea, it should be the way of life. Even rats do it, for crying out loud.
Posted by: Stephen Price Blair at December 13, 2014 01:52 PM (J0IP0)
220
And tell me one parent who doesn't feel the ecstatic joy of NO LONGER HAVING TO SUPPORT THE UNGRATEFUL SNOTS that are their loving and loved children.
Yeah, but that might be the rule for when socialism no longer is useful. Who lives better, the ruled or the rulers?
That, it occurs to me, is why Orwell had his pigs try to claim that every luxury they took was a sacrifice.
Yeah, but that might be the rule for when socialism no longer is useful. Who lives better, the ruled or the rulers?
That, it occurs to me, is why Orwell had his pigs try to claim that every luxury they took was a sacrifice.
Posted by: Stephen Price Blair at December 13, 2014 01:55 PM (J0IP0)
221
Sweden did not outsource their defense to the U.S. They bore a major defense burden relative to their wealth and population.
No, they didn't. Under 3% of GDP. I posted the data along with a link upthread, and you keep ignoring it. Why?
No, they didn't. Under 3% of GDP. I posted the data along with a link upthread, and you keep ignoring it. Why?
Posted by: Weirddave at December 13, 2014 02:02 PM (KAmzK)
222
Posted by: RioBravo at December 13, 2014 01:32 PM (z27Ny)
Well, thank you for trying to alleviate my ignorance.
So instead of spending money on defense to secure their country, because under no circumstance would they take into consideration that the US and NATO would intervene, they still spent it on social welfare programs and hoped by not mounting an effective defemse the could escape being killed first?
Do you figure they would have fought kind of near the bitter end, but not as hard as they could have because they had to budget to buy votes too?
Does this mean that Swedish politicians are also more interested in getting re-elected than survival of the state?
Well, thank you for trying to alleviate my ignorance.
So instead of spending money on defense to secure their country, because under no circumstance would they take into consideration that the US and NATO would intervene, they still spent it on social welfare programs and hoped by not mounting an effective defemse the could escape being killed first?
Do you figure they would have fought kind of near the bitter end, but not as hard as they could have because they had to budget to buy votes too?
Does this mean that Swedish politicians are also more interested in getting re-elected than survival of the state?
Posted by: Kindltot at December 13, 2014 02:11 PM (t//F+)
223
If the Scandi trash has to pay for their own national security, will that limit the number of overweight pasty men walking around in Speedo's and man clogs on Florida beaches ?
Posted by: Thin veneer of civility at December 13, 2014 02:20 PM (XzRw1)
224
36 Theoretically as one ages they are expected to understand the true joy of the Yule is in fact in the giving.
Posted by: Sven S Blade a.k.a. El Assassin@sven10077 at December 13, 2014 11:21 AM (/4AZU)
******************************
World of difference between voluntary giving, though, and that which is accomplished by a greater force taking from you.
Giving because you want to, or even because it's expected, has nothing in common with giving because it's government-compelled. If for no other reason than that Love is absent under the force of law. That's where Socializm breaks down.
Posted by: Sven S Blade a.k.a. El Assassin@sven10077 at December 13, 2014 11:21 AM (/4AZU)
******************************
World of difference between voluntary giving, though, and that which is accomplished by a greater force taking from you.
Giving because you want to, or even because it's expected, has nothing in common with giving because it's government-compelled. If for no other reason than that Love is absent under the force of law. That's where Socializm breaks down.
Posted by: Old Age is my Bitch at December 13, 2014 02:36 PM (TqyFL)
225
No, they didn't. Under 3% of GDP. I posted the data along with a link upthread, and you keep ignoring it. Why?
Posted by: Weirddave at December 13, 2014 02:02 PM (KAmzK)
-----
1. I did not see your comment above before.
2. 'Below 3%' of GDP on defense is an interesting definition of 'outsourcing' defense.
3. The Swedish welfare state/socialist system was created long before the Unites States started spending near 3% of GDP on its own defense (1% pre-WWI, 2 % in the '20's, 2-3 % in the 30's.)
Posted by: Weirddave at December 13, 2014 02:02 PM (KAmzK)
-----
1. I did not see your comment above before.
2. 'Below 3%' of GDP on defense is an interesting definition of 'outsourcing' defense.
3. The Swedish welfare state/socialist system was created long before the Unites States started spending near 3% of GDP on its own defense (1% pre-WWI, 2 % in the '20's, 2-3 % in the 30's.)
Posted by: RioBravo at December 13, 2014 02:45 PM (z27Ny)
226
Interesting piece. Couple of comments.
This may explain the extreme hostility to the family by at least one Austrian economist, who said the the moral status of the family was the same as slavery. (One of the many reasons I do not pay much attention to Misesians.) But it does raise the question of why Marxists and some other socialists have been so hostile to the family. (Of course, Marxists say they are hostile only to the "bourgeois" family.)
I suspect another reason people are susceptible to socialist ideas is that businesses are hierarchical in their internal workings and that many businesses prosper economically. So, according to the fallacy of composition, if combine all businesses into one big corporation owned by the state, it too will prosper economically.
This may explain the extreme hostility to the family by at least one Austrian economist, who said the the moral status of the family was the same as slavery. (One of the many reasons I do not pay much attention to Misesians.) But it does raise the question of why Marxists and some other socialists have been so hostile to the family. (Of course, Marxists say they are hostile only to the "bourgeois" family.)
I suspect another reason people are susceptible to socialist ideas is that businesses are hierarchical in their internal workings and that many businesses prosper economically. So, according to the fallacy of composition, if combine all businesses into one big corporation owned by the state, it too will prosper economically.
Posted by: JeffM at December 13, 2014 02:50 PM (r7i2H)
227
Does this mean that Swedish politicians are also more interested in getting re-elected than survival of the state?
Posted by: Kindltot at December 13, 2014 02:11 PM (t//F+)
-----
Sweden could have spent 100% of their GDP on defense and they would not have been able to defeat Russia alone by most calculations (though Finland did a decent job). The point is, they did not 'outsource' their defense to the United States.
Besides, the Swedish welfare state originated long before the U.S. armed forces and alliances were relevant to Swedish defense.
I have not made any comments regarding the motivation of Swedish politicians.
Posted by: Kindltot at December 13, 2014 02:11 PM (t//F+)
-----
Sweden could have spent 100% of their GDP on defense and they would not have been able to defeat Russia alone by most calculations (though Finland did a decent job). The point is, they did not 'outsource' their defense to the United States.
Besides, the Swedish welfare state originated long before the U.S. armed forces and alliances were relevant to Swedish defense.
I have not made any comments regarding the motivation of Swedish politicians.
Posted by: RioBravo at December 13, 2014 02:51 PM (z27Ny)
228
227 RioBravo
Sweden could have spent 100% of their GDP on defense and they would not have been able to defeat Russia alone by most calculations
... actually, by all calculations. The real questions would be 1) How much death and destruction would the Soviets be willing to accept to conquer Sweden, and 2) How many Swedes would they be willing to kill?
(though Finland did a decent job).
The Finns were (and are) clearly very tough fighters, and they gave the early post-purge Soviet Army a bloody nose. In fact, they fought effectively and valiantly until the end of summer, 1944, when the writing on the wall had become apparent.
The point is, they [Sweden] did not 'outsource' their defense to the United States.
Rather than split hairs, face the reality: Yes, Sweden spent money on defense, and had (and may still have, I'll have to check) a large and profitable armaments export industry.
But Sweden also saw the realpolitik at play: If they professed neutrality, and really seemed to live The Neutral Life, and had enough tanks and planes to be convincing, the Soviets would mostly leave them alone ... which is effectively what happened ... and is a form of outsourcing.
227 RioBravo
Sweden could have spent 100% of their GDP on defense and they would not have been able to defeat Russia alone by most calculations
... actually, by all calculations. The real questions would be 1) How much death and destruction would the Soviets be willing to accept to conquer Sweden, and 2) How many Swedes would they be willing to kill?
(though Finland did a decent job).
The Finns were (and are) clearly very tough fighters, and they gave the early post-purge Soviet Army a bloody nose. In fact, they fought effectively and valiantly until the end of summer, 1944, when the writing on the wall had become apparent.
The point is, they [Sweden] did not 'outsource' their defense to the United States.
Rather than split hairs, face the reality: Yes, Sweden spent money on defense, and had (and may still have, I'll have to check) a large and profitable armaments export industry.
But Sweden also saw the realpolitik at play: If they professed neutrality, and really seemed to live The Neutral Life, and had enough tanks and planes to be convincing, the Soviets would mostly leave them alone ... which is effectively what happened ... and is a form of outsourcing.
Posted by: Arbalest at December 13, 2014 04:07 PM (FlRtG)
229
No, they didn't. Under 3% of GDP. I posted the data along with a link upthread, and you keep ignoring it. Why?
Posted by: Weirddave at December 13, 2014 02:02 PM (KAmzK)
-----
SIPRI excludes all 'civil defense' and related spending as though that is irrelevant. That was a big part of the Swedish concept of 'Total Defense'
According to figures from IISS (The Military Balance) the following were the spending %:
1980: 3.4 % *
1995: 2.8 %
2001: 1.9%
From U.S. State Dept., Swedish defense spending to 'GNP' the following are the %:
1970 3.6
1971 3.7
1972 3.7
1973 3.6
1974 3.5
1975 3.4
1976 3.3
1977 3.4
1978 3.4
1979 3.4
Swedish economic performance declined right along with decreased defense expenditures.
Posted by: Weirddave at December 13, 2014 02:02 PM (KAmzK)
-----
SIPRI excludes all 'civil defense' and related spending as though that is irrelevant. That was a big part of the Swedish concept of 'Total Defense'
According to figures from IISS (The Military Balance) the following were the spending %:
1980: 3.4 % *
1995: 2.8 %
2001: 1.9%
From U.S. State Dept., Swedish defense spending to 'GNP' the following are the %:
1970 3.6
1971 3.7
1972 3.7
1973 3.6
1974 3.5
1975 3.4
1976 3.3
1977 3.4
1978 3.4
1979 3.4
Swedish economic performance declined right along with decreased defense expenditures.
Posted by: RioBravo at December 13, 2014 04:16 PM (z27Ny)
230
Escort girls http://regmodels.ru
Posted by: Tina at December 13, 2014 04:19 PM (ykRQL)
231
But Sweden also saw the realpolitik at play: If they professed neutrality, and really seemed to live The Neutral Life, and had enough tanks and planes to be convincing, the Soviets would mostly leave them alone ... which is effectively what happened ... and is a form of outsourcing.
Posted by: Arbalest at December 13, 2014 04:07 PM (FlRtG)
----
That is deterrence via defense rerparation, not outsourcing.
Posted by: Arbalest at December 13, 2014 04:07 PM (FlRtG)
----
That is deterrence via defense rerparation, not outsourcing.
Posted by: RioBravo at December 13, 2014 04:22 PM (z27Ny)
232
That is deterrence via defense rerparation, not outsourcing.
Posted by: RioBravo at December 13, 2014 04:22 PM (z27Ny)
===
defense 'preparation'
Posted by: RioBravo at December 13, 2014 04:22 PM (z27Ny)
===
defense 'preparation'
Posted by: RioBravo at December 13, 2014 04:23 PM (z27Ny)
233
The first thing Socialists do is try to destroy the family.
Posted by: petunia at December 13, 2014 04:36 PM (M1eBo)
234
Because the family gives individuals something to care about... to live and die for... beyond the State.
Posted by: The Mega Independent at December 13, 2014 04:55 PM (QCo5R)
235
Socialism done wrong: Any socialism that has already been tried
Socialism done right: Any socialism that hasn't been done yet
Socialism done wrong: Any socialism that has already been tried
Socialism done right: Any socialism that hasn't been done yet
Posted by: The Mega Independent at December 13, 2014 05:09 PM (QCo5R)
236
Do Atheists believe in heaven on earth?
Posted by: 4straightsides at December 13, 2014 05:16 PM (03HIo)
237
Socialism done wrong: Any socialism that has already been tried
Socialism done right: Any socialism that hasn't been done yet
Posted by: The Mega Independent at December 13, 2014 05:09 PM (QCo5R)
-----
The future is brighter, always.
Interesting Swedish socialist view of the Swedish system.
http://www.socialistworld.net/doc/3752
Interesting to compare the 'socialist' miracle of Sweden in the 50's and 60's to the capitalist good times in the United States during the same years.
Socialism done right: Any socialism that hasn't been done yet
Posted by: The Mega Independent at December 13, 2014 05:09 PM (QCo5R)
-----
The future is brighter, always.
Interesting Swedish socialist view of the Swedish system.
http://www.socialistworld.net/doc/3752
Interesting to compare the 'socialist' miracle of Sweden in the 50's and 60's to the capitalist good times in the United States during the same years.
Posted by: RioBravo at December 13, 2014 05:30 PM (z27Ny)
238
Good post. Doesn't plumb the whole subject, but good. However, your throwing analogy doesn't fly. The throwing reflex is most certainly instinctive or wired in, for boys. Almost all boys will after a certain age exhibit mastery in nothing flat. Almost no girls will ever. Check it out, dude. Still, good post.
Posted by: nebo ortich at December 13, 2014 05:37 PM (VWZrO)
239
Thanks Nebo, but you're actually wrong. Throwing is a learned behavior. In cultures where it isn't common to throw, everybody throws "like girls". I read a fascinating paper on the subject in a college anthropology class.
Posted by: Weirddave at December 13, 2014 07:21 PM (KAmzK)
240
Tenets, please, not tenants. Sorry, had to be said.
Posted by: Gramer nazi at December 13, 2014 07:30 PM (/oOP9)
241
i disagree with your claims. the real very ideological seeds of communism / socialism can be traced directly to the bible itself. look at the teachings of jesus. the meek shall inherit the earth? it is harder for a rich man to pass through the eye of a needle than to make it into the kingdom of heaven? being poor. giving to the poor, administering to the downtrodden and the sick, etc.. jesus kicked the merchants out of the temple grounds because, god forbid, making money is a bad thing. the bible rails against greed and envy, as if anyone who isn't omniscient like god himself could read someone's mind and know they are motivated by greed and love of money. our whole society is filled with these notions that volunteering, "giving back," and self sacrifice is somehow virtuous. all of this is nothing more than altruism, and altruism is the sacrificing of a value for a non value. christianity is informed by the concept of martyring oneself. heck, the disciples were supposed to cast off all their earthly belongings and follow christ. if you want to know why the appeal of communism / socialism is so strong in western societies? look no further than the sermon on the mount. and as for the claims that many people who are NOT practicing christians believe in this leftist garbage, i would assert that anyone who has been born, raised, and lives in a christian nation may not consider themselves to be christian, but they sure do think like one! it is one of the most powerful philosophical legacies in western culture.
Posted by: Mistress O at December 13, 2014 09:39 PM (2/oBD)
242
look, comparing the percentage of GDP that the swedes spend on their military to the percentage of GDP that the US spends is really the wrong measure. The US has an enormous, gigantic GDP in comparison to sweden. sweden is a country of about 10 million people while the US has a population of about 300 million. but not only is our population huge in comparison, our GDP, by all measure, is exponentially even bigger than that in comparison to sweden's. the US's economy was sooo big in comparison to the rest of the world's (up until very recently where china has now been declared to have a bigger economy than the US), that the number 2 economy in the world was Japan, and Japan's economy was half the size of the US economy! the reason why much of the world hasn't had to spend as much on beefing up their military is absolutely because the US would have defended the lot of them, and we're not just talking about western european nations here. the swedes would have had to spend a hell of a lot more percentage of GDP to even come close to what we used to spend on military. it's called the Pax Americana, and despite what many on the left might claim, the world has been a much more peaceful and orderly world because of America. because the US has the largest number of air craft carriers, we have been able to wage war pretty much anywhere on the globe. even now as our military might is being gutted, we are still a formidable military force. our military might has absolutely made it easier for western europe to indulge their large social welfare states.
Posted by: Mistress O at December 13, 2014 09:58 PM (2/oBD)
Processing 0.03, elapsed 0.0358 seconds.
15 queries taking 0.0126 seconds, 251 records returned.
Page size 157 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.8 beta.
MuNuvians
MeeNuvians
Polls! Polls! Polls!
Real Clear Politics
Gallup
Frequently Asked Questions
The (Almost) Complete Paul Anka Integrity Kick
Primary Document: The Audio
Paul Anka Haiku Contest Announcement
Integrity SAT's: Entrance Exam for Paul Anka's Band
AllahPundit's Paul Anka 45's Collection
AnkaPundit: Paul Anka Takes Over the Site for a Weekend (Continues through to Monday's postings)
George Bush Slices Don Rumsfeld Like an F*ckin' Hammer
Paul Anka Haiku Contest Announcement
Integrity SAT's: Entrance Exam for Paul Anka's Band
AllahPundit's Paul Anka 45's Collection
AnkaPundit: Paul Anka Takes Over the Site for a Weekend (Continues through to Monday's postings)
George Bush Slices Don Rumsfeld Like an F*ckin' Hammer
Top Top Tens
Democratic Forays into Erotica
New Shows On Gore's DNC/MTV Network
Nicknames for Potatoes, By People Who Really Hate Potatoes
Star Wars Euphemisms for Self-Abuse
Signs You're at an Iraqi "Wedding Party"
Signs Your Clown Has Gone Bad
Signs That You, Geroge Michael, Should Probably Just Give It Up
Signs of Hip-Hop Influence on John Kerry
NYT Headlines Spinning Bush's Jobs Boom
Things People Are More Likely to Say Than "Did You Hear What Al Franken Said Yesterday?"
Signs that Paul Krugman Has Lost His Frickin' Mind
All-Time Best NBA Players, According to Senator Robert Byrd
Other Bad Things About the Jews, According to the Koran
Signs That David Letterman Just Doesn't Care Anymore
Examples of Bob Kerrey's Insufferable Racial Jackassery
Signs Andy Rooney Is Going Senile
Other Judgments Dick Clarke Made About Condi Rice Based on Her Appearance
Collective Names for Groups of People
John Kerry's Other Vietnam Super-Pets
Cool Things About the XM8 Assault Rifle
Media-Approved Facts About the Democrat Spy
Changes to Make Christianity More "Inclusive"
Secret John Kerry Senatorial Accomplishments
John Edwards Campaign Excuses
John Kerry Pick-Up Lines
Changes Liberal Senator George Michell Will Make at Disney
Torments in Dog-Hell
Greatest Hitjobs
The Ace of Spades HQ Sex-for-Money Skankathon
A D&D Guide to the Democratic Candidates
Margaret Cho: Just Not Funny
More Margaret Cho Abuse
Margaret Cho: Still Not Funny
Iraqi Prisoner Claims He Was Raped... By Woman
Wonkette Announces "Morning Zoo" Format
John Kerry's "Plan" Causes Surrender of Moqtada al-Sadr's Militia
World Muslim Leaders Apologize for Nick Berg's Beheading
Michael Moore Goes on Lunchtime Manhattan Death-Spree
Milestone: Oliver Willis Posts 400th "Fake News Article" Referencing Britney Spears
Liberal Economists Rue a "New Decade of Greed"
Artificial Insouciance: Maureen Dowd's Word Processor Revolts Against Her Numbing Imbecility
Intelligence Officials Eye Blogs for Tips
They Done Found Us Out, Cletus: Intrepid Internet Detective Figures Out Our Master Plan
Shock: Josh Marshall Almost Mentions Sarin Discovery in Iraq
Leather-Clad Biker Freaks Terrorize Australian Town
When Clinton Was President, Torture Was Cool
What Wonkette Means When She Explains What Tina Brown Means
Wonkette's Stand-Up Act
Wankette HQ Gay-Rumors Du Jour
Here's What's Bugging Me: Goose and Slider
My Own Micah Wright Style Confession of Dishonesty
Outraged "Conservatives" React to the FMA
An On-Line Impression of Dennis Miller Having Sex with a Kodiak Bear
The Story the Rightwing Media Refuses to Report!
Our Lunch with David "Glengarry Glen Ross" Mamet
The House of Love: Paul Krugman
A Michael Moore Mystery (TM)
The Dowd-O-Matic!
Liberal Consistency and Other Myths
Kepler's Laws of Liberal Media Bias
John Kerry-- The Splunge! Candidate
"Divisive" Politics & "Attacks on Patriotism" (very long)
The Donkey ("The Raven" parody)
News/Chat