Ammo For Sale

« « Gun Porn | Home | Where Great Britain Used To Be » »

Communism

In effect

Posted in uncategorized on May 4th, 2017 by SayUncle | RSS 2.0 |

2 Responses to “Communism”

  1. mikee Says:
    May 5th, 2017 at 11:36 am

    Protest marches simply give a competent totalitarian state the ability to identify counterrevolutionaries for later arrest. Otherwise one must depend upon more individual denunciations to the authorities by family, friends, coworkers, informants, and others. Those reeducation camps, prison farms & factories, gulags and killing fields didn’t fill themselves, you know.

    Here’s hoping the Maduro totalitarian state is as incompetent in this as it appears to be in everything other than filling the pockets of el jefe.

  2. JK Brown Says:
    May 5th, 2017 at 6:12 pm

    It’s the socialism that’s causing the problem, not the communism. It doesn’t really matter whether it is the International socialism (that was rebadged Communism for marketing purposes), national socialism or democratic socialism.

    Ultimately, it is feudalism, by committee, propagated by Party rather than progeny.

    That Communism is essentially negative, confined to the prohibition that one shall not have more than another. Socialism is positive and aggressive, declaring that each man shall have enough.

    It purposes to introduce new forces into society and industry; to put a stop to the idleness, the waste of resources, the misdirection of force, inseparable, in some large proportion of instances, from individual initiative; and to drive the whole mass forward in the direction determined by the intelligence of its better half.

    –Walker, F.A., ‘Socialism’, Scribner’s Magazine 1887

    Here is an explanation of the best the socialists offer, have ever offered:

    Socialism; a speech delivered in Faneuil hall, February 7th, 1903, by Frederic J. Stimson

    First, what is the best the socialists, in their writings, can offer us? What do the most optimistic of them say? That our subsistence will be guaranteed, while we work; that some of us, the best of us, may earn a surplus above what is actually necessary for our subsistence; and that surplus, like a good child, we may “keep to spend.” We may not use it to better our condition, we may not, if a fisherman, buy another boat with it, if a farmer, another field ; we may not invest it, or use it productively ; but we can spend it like the good child, on candy � on something we consume, or waste it, or throw it away.

    Could not the African slave do as much? In fact, is not this whole position exactly that of the negro slave? He, too, was guaranteed his sustenance; he, too, was allowed to keep and spend the extra money he made by working overtime; but he was not allowed to better his condition, to engage in trade, to invest it, to change his lot in life. Precisely what makes a slave is that he is allowed no use of productive capital to make wealth on his own account. The only difference is that under socialism, I may not be compelled to labor (I don’t even know as to that � socialists differ on the point), actually compelled, by the lash, or any other force than hunger. And the only other difference is that the negro slave was under the orders of one man, while the subject of socialism will be under the orders of a committee of ward heelers. You will say, the slave could not choose his master, but we shall elect the ward politician. So we do now. Will that help much? Suppose the man with a grievance didn’t vote for him?

Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.

Uncle Pays the Bills

Find Local
Gun Shops & Shooting Ranges


bisonAd

Categories

Archives