Seymour Flops
Diamond Member
- Thread starter
- #221
How Progressives may Finally Crash the System, where Democratic Socialists and Liberals Could Not
So far the only people who have been able to end capitalism have been communists, or as I call them revolutionary socialists rather than democratic socialists. They destroyed capitalism in several countries by the sudden and overwhelming use of force. They took over the factories and started operating them in the name of the people as promised. The free market ended.
People who have implemented socialism by slower and less violent means, have not destroyed the free market, AKA capitalism. Since their changes have been gradual, the free market has been able to keep up with the increasing demands of a government that like to play Santa Claus.
The producers looked at new requirements to support non-producers, as just another business expense to be paid for through increased effeciency, increased marketing, and increased prices of goods produced. The capitalists were just as rich, and even richer, which is how we want it. We want capitalists to be rich because we want - "need" - them to stay productive.
So, life went on. We were well off. Not as well off as we would be in an actual free ecomomy, but well off comapared to less free economies, and no error.
But now, we have the progressive wokesters gaining control over the nation's economic policies. This is a much bigger problem even than socialism/liberalism.
Keynesian economics, social and corporate welfare, and liberal labor laws are part of a very flawed economic policy that most nations have adopted to one degree or another. It is bad economic policy but at least it is economic and it is a policy. It is a sincere, if misguided, attempt to make the economy more productive and it is a set if ideas that can actually be articulated and debated.
Even the old-school revolutionary socialists, aka communists, promised, and perhaps even expected, that production would increase once the workers took over the means, and that people would be better off without the owners taking the wealth. They were dead wrong, but that was the intent of their economic policy.
Progressive ideas are not economic and are not articulable policy. People used to accuse socialists of wanting to ruin America's economy, because the measures that they enacted slowed our economy down. Progressive ideas deliberately weaken our production capacity in order to achieve some social aim like stopping the climate from changing or making people socially equal. One is as impossible as the other. Trying to use the economy to stop climate change or eliminate inequality is like trying to get blood from a turnip. But you can cerainly ruin the turnip in the process of trying.
It is pointless to argue with progressives, because they won't listen and they won't know what you're talking about if they do. That everyone should have equal access to produced goods is a given to them, so they don't want to hear why it won't work and will assume you are evil for trying to tell them. That the waters will rise and the sun will burn up any parts of the Earth that stay above the flood is not a fantasy to them. They call it "settled science," and they think the only way to stop it is to make you drive and electric car. Not an exageration.
No one ever built a strong economy by trying to do something else. Opening up the border to invite the third world in through our backdoor will not strengthen the economy, nor is it already vital to the economy. But that doesn't matter to progressives because they are not trying to help our economy. A strong economy means more fossil fuels burned, so why would progressives be unhappy with decreased production?
The further problem from a U.S. economy collapsed by progressive policies is that we will have no place to run to, when it happens. The third world runs to us, but where will we go?
So far the only people who have been able to end capitalism have been communists, or as I call them revolutionary socialists rather than democratic socialists. They destroyed capitalism in several countries by the sudden and overwhelming use of force. They took over the factories and started operating them in the name of the people as promised. The free market ended.
People who have implemented socialism by slower and less violent means, have not destroyed the free market, AKA capitalism. Since their changes have been gradual, the free market has been able to keep up with the increasing demands of a government that like to play Santa Claus.
The producers looked at new requirements to support non-producers, as just another business expense to be paid for through increased effeciency, increased marketing, and increased prices of goods produced. The capitalists were just as rich, and even richer, which is how we want it. We want capitalists to be rich because we want - "need" - them to stay productive.
So, life went on. We were well off. Not as well off as we would be in an actual free ecomomy, but well off comapared to less free economies, and no error.
But now, we have the progressive wokesters gaining control over the nation's economic policies. This is a much bigger problem even than socialism/liberalism.
Keynesian economics, social and corporate welfare, and liberal labor laws are part of a very flawed economic policy that most nations have adopted to one degree or another. It is bad economic policy but at least it is economic and it is a policy. It is a sincere, if misguided, attempt to make the economy more productive and it is a set if ideas that can actually be articulated and debated.
Even the old-school revolutionary socialists, aka communists, promised, and perhaps even expected, that production would increase once the workers took over the means, and that people would be better off without the owners taking the wealth. They were dead wrong, but that was the intent of their economic policy.
Progressive ideas are not economic and are not articulable policy. People used to accuse socialists of wanting to ruin America's economy, because the measures that they enacted slowed our economy down. Progressive ideas deliberately weaken our production capacity in order to achieve some social aim like stopping the climate from changing or making people socially equal. One is as impossible as the other. Trying to use the economy to stop climate change or eliminate inequality is like trying to get blood from a turnip. But you can cerainly ruin the turnip in the process of trying.
It is pointless to argue with progressives, because they won't listen and they won't know what you're talking about if they do. That everyone should have equal access to produced goods is a given to them, so they don't want to hear why it won't work and will assume you are evil for trying to tell them. That the waters will rise and the sun will burn up any parts of the Earth that stay above the flood is not a fantasy to them. They call it "settled science," and they think the only way to stop it is to make you drive and electric car. Not an exageration.
No one ever built a strong economy by trying to do something else. Opening up the border to invite the third world in through our backdoor will not strengthen the economy, nor is it already vital to the economy. But that doesn't matter to progressives because they are not trying to help our economy. A strong economy means more fossil fuels burned, so why would progressives be unhappy with decreased production?
The further problem from a U.S. economy collapsed by progressive policies is that we will have no place to run to, when it happens. The third world runs to us, but where will we go?
