1. Skip to navigation
  2. Skip to content
  3. Skip to sidebar
Source link: http://archive.mises.org/15187/about-socialism-and-socialists/

About Socialism and Socialists

December 31, 2010 by

In every country the socialists have become office seekers, aiming to get hold of the reins of government by parliamentary methods, and for no other purpose than to enjoy the prerogatives and perquisites of office. FULL ARTICLE by Frank Chodorov

{ 73 comments }

Olav Dirkmaat December 31, 2010 at 10:52 am

“In Europe, those of the socialistic persuasion still maintain their allegiance to the name, since there the word “liberal” still retains its original meaning, as defining one who would remove laws, not proliferate them”

This is, unfortunately, no longer the case.

Robert December 31, 2010 at 12:38 pm

So, to summarize the author’s points:

1. Social democrats have won the policy argument, and all of the author’s dogmatic rhetoric has been rejected by the people he sought to persuade.

2. The implementation of the welfare state has been correlated with an explosion of wealth such as the world has never seen, which, he attributes, without evidence, to “capitalism.”

3. He hates socialists, and has hated them ever since he was a child.

4. He believes this petty resentment marks him as a superior being, inherently freedom-loving from birth, whilst socialists are born to be slavery-loving underhumans. (I wonder why his career as a heckler failed to impact the public mind? Surely his smug assertion of genetic superiority won him converts!)

Dave M December 31, 2010 at 10:08 pm

This “explosion of wealth” you talk about might have something to do with modern industrial manufacturing and cheap rapid transportation of goods rather than socialism.

Soonerliberty January 1, 2011 at 11:21 am

Yes, because the socialist republics of East Europe and Asia were exploding with wealth.

Seattle January 1, 2011 at 5:36 pm

2. The implementation of the welfare state has been correlated with an explosion of wealth such as the world has never seen, which, he attributes, without evidence, to “capitalism.”

There’s a possibility you haven’t considered: It’s not the welfare state which allows a wealthy society to exist, but a wealthy society which allows the welfare state. A subsistence society can’t afford to have a 50% income tax. Wealth has to come before the state, the host before the parasite.

Dave M January 1, 2011 at 6:56 pm

Exactly.

Ralph January 1, 2011 at 11:14 pm

I hear you. I have met more than a few from this genre. In this day and age they still expect deference.
I know one man in particular who is the worst kind of Tory. Due to inherited wealth he has not done a day’s work in his 60 odd years. He despises the working class and brands a lazy anyone who is unemployed or disabled. As if that is not bad enough he is a racist of the worst kind and, whilst being completely bereft of compassion claims to be a man of God. He would be the ideal candidate for the Tea Party. They, having the same protectionist policies gangs of chimpanzees, have named themselves appropriately.

Wingnut January 2, 2011 at 9:35 am

Ralph, I see those type OFTEN OFTEN OFTEN. All men are created equal? Hardly. They are created at the class level (pyramid level) of their parents… at the time of birth. They are born at the same contacts, same cronies, same opportunities, same social standing, same class, same good name/reputation, same blockades, same everything… as anyone else born at that layer of the “new world order” (AmWay = American Way, ya know?). Yep, I see the the BS4L’s (born set-for-life) who don’t even know what “job” mean and are merciless and emotionally inert. Mighty disgusting, eh? Have faith that the meek shall inherit, though. Don’t let go of humility. Don’t give-in to resent and jealousy. Just fix the system that allows tug-o-warring… by eliminating money and ownership. Remove the tools of the tug-o-warrers. Its very parental, in a way. When two kids fought over something, we, as parents, take the tugged-over thing away from BOTH, right? Government OF the (wiser/more-loving) people.

brad January 2, 2011 at 11:22 am

i see, and so we shall place a man who contains all the intelligence of God at the head of a council, charged with the mission to appropriate all the wealth which was accumulated under one family name and distribute that wealth to the masses. and this man shall have the power to discern what is fair and what is not, right?
all men are created equal, those born into riches have lost it all while those whose parents could not afford the best of colleges or universities have gone on to be heads of state or more importantly, great heads of corporations. the world which you envision with the aforementioned omnipotence would (and are) in fact be the creator of class warfare and your oh so lamented BS4L. no good has ever come from jealousy or theft, something which you seem to wholeheartedly embrace.

i think paris hilton is a moron who blows her money on stupidity but it is her money. should she go broke in 15 years, who am i to care.

Chu-hua Zhu January 2, 2011 at 6:35 am
Peter Surda January 2, 2011 at 7:04 am

The picture has got it all wrong. That’s not a picture of a troll, that’s a picture of an Orc. This is a troll.

billwald December 31, 2010 at 12:42 pm

“In every country the socialists have become office seekers, aiming to get hold of the reins of government by parliamentary methods, and for no other purpose than to enjoy the prerogatives and perquisites of office.”

And right wingers don’t? Anyone who wants to president of the USA is, at the least, crazy. Anyone who thinks he can fix the world mess either thinks he is a god or is getting direct orders from God. The US might be better off if we let the Mafia run the country. Better an honest thief than a crazy dreamer.

AIK December 31, 2010 at 4:57 pm

I don’t think anyone here would argue with you about this. “Right wingers” are fascists and “left wingers” are socialists; both are crazy statists. This article just happens to be focused on socialists that’s all.

Dagnytg January 1, 2011 at 12:06 am

To add some clarity…socialism is an economic system.

Both fascists and communists embrace it. There is no left or right wing bias when it comes to socialism. In the U.S., both the left and the right are guilty of its implementation.

Ralph January 1, 2011 at 11:33 pm

Who are you trying to kid? Socialism/communism is left wing and fascism is right wing. The line between the two is very clear cut. I have noticed, however, that the far right of the Rpublican Party and the ‘Tea Party’ try to tell us that the far right is ‘full bodied Conservativism’. This is total nonsense. The far right is fascism. The far right is socialism/communism.
Parties such as the Democratic Party and UK’s Labour Party are not socialist; they are socially reformative. Also, nowhere in the world, is there a Communist country. Apparently communist countries are practising state capitalism whereby, unlike in frre enterprise capitalism, all capital is controlled by the state.
Fascist states do, however, exist. A classic example of this would have been apartheid South Africa. Currently, Israel’s treatment of it’s Arab citizens is a good example of fascism. They treat them in the same way as Hitler treated them.

Chu-hua Zhu January 2, 2011 at 6:38 am

Liberals aren’t socialists, that’s true. Because Socialism means state ownership of the means of production, i.e. the abolition of the capital market. However, both Nazism and Communism are socialist, because they both nationalize the means of production – either openly, or through all-round controls. Even Marxists like Guenther Reimann could tell you this.

There are differences between the left and the right. They’re just not differences that matter to libertarians. Variations on evil nonsense.

AntiCapitalist January 2, 2011 at 10:33 pm

“Because Socialism means state ownership of the means of production, i.e. the abolition of the capital market. ”

Socialism does not mean state ownership of the means of production. Nor does “abolition of the capital market” mean state ownership. There were no “capital markets” in early human societies, and yet there was no government either. You should study anthropology instead of sounding like an idiot. In fact, pre-civilization lasted for thousands of years and without the cooperation that was inherent in the tribes human kind would not have even developed.

I guess Libertarians believe that when man invented fire the government of ancient civilization, which didn’t exist, protected the property of the inventor so no one could use his inventions without paying him LOL.

(In a way, you can see that socialism is responsible for the survival of the human race. Capitalism is nothing more than moving humans away from their natural instincts – democratic control of production. That’s why capitalism causes so many problems.)

Your discredited Mises nonsense about “prices” being needed to dictate resources is refuted by the fact that state/private hybrids produced at a far greater rate than the free-market ever did or even could. The vast majority of research is developed at Universities even though there is nothing stopping the “free-market” from competing with them. The free-market is worthless, so it’s not used for serious things.

“However, both Nazism and Communism are socialist, because they both nationalize the means of production…”

You are an utter moron. Are you that same moron here on Mises forums named “Vicky” who claims to be an Asian woman but who has been outed as a white male? That’s the funnest example of Libertarian trolling I’ve seen since Libertarian lawyer John Lott claimed to be a single mother with three kids arguing for lax gun control on Usenet LOL.

The Nazis and the fascists DENATIONALIZED most industries. You can read this in the Nazi roots of privatization. In fact, it wasn’t Libertarians that first came up with the idea that privatization leads to political freedom (political freedom = economic freedom as Friedman argued), but the Nazis.

Furthermore, they broke the central bank. Hitler even said that he was a capitalist and that capitalists had “worked their way to the top” through their “hard work.” (I can post the quotes if you want.)

I recommend reading Rise and Fall of the Third Reich; in it, you will learn that the Nazi Charter of Labor gave corporations complete control over the means of production.

“There are differences between the left and the right. They’re just not differences that matter to libertarians. Variations on evil nonsense….”

That’s because you’re a moron and don’t understand how political scientists define “left-wing” and “right-wing.”

“Left-wing” means public control of the resources. It means democratic decision making over resources. It means that no community ever inherently has the right to violate someone’s right to exercise their democratic right (hence, left-wing is traditionally anti-war, anti-violence – and left-wingers understand you can’t force people into democracy).

“Right-wing” means clinging to the old order (constant references to the “founders” by Libertarians is evidence they’re right-wing). “Right-wing” means respecting “human nature.” Right-wing means favoring the “natural order” of things, being against mere theory, self-serving “freedoms” (in the way Libertarians want the government to protect them while not giving anything back to society, for example; or the way that Libertarians want the government to protect what they steal from the workers; or the way that Libertarians want the government to hand them over all the resources in society and claim that it’s somehow “fair”), and so on.

Here’s the problem with the right: none of this is capable of being articulated into something that explains how society should be run. Natural rights? Natural order? Self-ownership? The organic society? Emergent order? Right-wingers use these to justify their preferences for monarchies, “natural aristocracies” (Burke), landed dictatorships, corporate ascendancy, and so on.

One of the tenants of fascism – besides the anti-democracy, anti-socialism, anti-liberal, pro-racism, pro-property, anti-Semitic beliefs that they share with Libertarians – is that, like Libertarianism, it does not have a clear doctrinal base. The justifications are always changing, just like with Libertarianism (Libertarianism is based on law, libertarianism is based on natural rights, libertarianism is based on emergent order, etc.). This gave fascists the ability to implement an “ends justify the means” philosophy – much like Libertarians, because they cannot justify their despotic system with facts and evidence.

Of course, one of the principles of any good despotic system is that it’s erratic, boiling down to a “might makes right” view of the world. Such is the position of free-marketeers, who, ultimately, are aligned with fascists, such as Hoppe, Block, et al., in their belief that “property ownership” gives people the right to implement any form of laws they want to, regardless of how they actually gathered the property. Capitalist property (where people own land by first come, first serve, and also by trading their labor for the right to live on said land) is ‘might makes right,’ in contrast to usage based rights. (Usage based rights means that you are a part of the community and your possessions are based on your needs and contributions.) The “private protection agency system” is the ultimate might makes right view – those who could not afford to hire such a protection agency would ultimately have all their property – and hence all their rights, since rights = property in Libertarian thinking – taken away from them. Hence, man’s only recourse to survival is the might he has over his land, and if a more powerful player could take it away from him, the land would belong to him, until somebody even more powerful than he could take it.

That is anarcho-capitalism. Anarcho-capitalism = might makes right. They hate the state only because the state still gives some protection to minorities and workers. That is the only problem they have with the state, not its protection of property.

To quote a great man, however, this is the exact belief system we need to move away from:

” It has been said of the world’s history hitherto that might makes right. It is for us and for our time to reverse the maxim, and to say that right makes might. ” –Abraham Lincoln

In other words, we should do what’s right, instead of what the powerful tell us what is right solely by their use of force.

Bala January 2, 2011 at 11:00 pm

“Socialism does not mean state ownership of the means of production. Nor does “abolition of the capital market” mean state ownership”

ROFLMFAO

Please define “Socialism” before you pontificate on what it is not and praise it to the high heavens. Please also define “Capitalism” before you continue ranting against its “evils”.

brad January 2, 2011 at 11:27 am

i think its safe to say that the left/right paradigm is equally ruinous. both embrace damaging ideologies. there are those even in the tea party who favour trade barriers, an obvious error should one of these people care to pick up a textbook.
what needs to happen is the removal of these ideologies in favour of freedom.

IAin December 31, 2010 at 5:15 pm

Robert-

2. Are you insane?

Sione January 1, 2011 at 1:53 pm

He’s not completely insane, merely a common idiot. Nevertheless, despite possessing but limited intelligence he does retain sufficient sanity to know he’s dishonest. Then again, to be a socialist (which robert is) it is necessary to be dishonest.

Sione

Anticapitalist January 2, 2011 at 2:34 am

Wow, what a profound analysis from Sione. Too bad this moron Sione was unable to refute any of Robert’s points.

The fact is the vast majority of industries in industrialized countries come from the state-sector and public research, not from the market order idiotic fascists like Sione prefer.

Bala January 2, 2011 at 3:13 am

ROFLMAO….

Please define the terms “points” and “refute” before you claim that Robert made any “points” or that Sione had any responsibility to “refute” them. Just saying that it is not worth everyone’s while to “refute” crap. Some people prefer to just call it crap. They consider anything more as a waste of precious time. We all have limited life-spans, you see.

Anticapitalist January 2, 2011 at 3:24 am

Yes, it is a waste of people’s time to deal with idiotic philosophical twaddle. That is why no one takes Austrian economics seriously except the handful of idiots here at the Mises Institute.

Anticapitalist January 2, 2011 at 3:28 am

So Austrians would apparently prefer to just call any real political analysis “crap” than offer up any empirical evidence or any real economic reason as to WHY it is crap. Of course, explaining why things happen is part of science, you see, and Austrians are of course opposed to the scientific methodology. It all is starting to make sense now. Austrians = idiots not worth the time of day.

Bala January 2, 2011 at 4:02 am

So go away. Why waste your precious time engaging us idiots?

Walt D. January 2, 2011 at 11:09 pm

“Communist Rhetoric and Propaganda” = CRAP. Robert’s points are self-refuting.

Chu-hua Zhu January 2, 2011 at 6:39 am
Dave M January 2, 2011 at 11:46 am

“majority of industries in industrialized countries come from the state-sector” What utter nonsense! I will grant that, as an industry reaches maturity, it contrives to be subsidized by the public purse ie the auto sector or nuclear power. That is due to the socialist/fascist mentality of most governments.

AntiCapitalist January 2, 2011 at 7:33 pm

It’s not “utter nonsense.” 90% of industries come from the state sector or had tremendous help from the state sector. The “free-market” period of the US never existed. So, if the private/public hybrid = socialism, then 90% of human invention is from socialism.

Chu-hua Zhu January 2, 2011 at 8:18 pm

You should learn economics. Trying to use historical data to prove an economic theory = ass backwards.

brad January 2, 2011 at 12:02 pm

well here goes to roberts “points”
1) as was pointed out by mr chodorov, the socialistic mindset is such that when done incrementally the people become accustomed to receiving things for “free”, thereby enabling a mindset of “entitled to their entitlements”. it is an awful hard sell to tell people to live within their means when someone else is offering gifts. so to summarize, the social democrats have won, not by the content of their argument but by the complacency of an anesthetized people.
2) it is most difficult to take things away from a person who does not have a thing in the first place, ergo it must be created first. with that said, welfareism could only be “successfully” implemented if, as karl marx said were adequate “surplus value” in a given society to spread around. only capital accumulation could create such “surplus” which quite simply makes mince meat of this backward thinking.
3) only thinking people with a modicum of logic agree with this statement. all others need only to bury their heads in the sand for the remainder of their ignorant existence.
4) actually chodorovs statements and beliefs preclude the idea that he is superior. people who believe in free enterprise and markets and natural rights indirectly admit that they as human beings are inferior to the grand laws of providence and therefore do not set out to change them. those who seek to attain high office with bold visions for society do so because it is they who have the mistaken belief in their own superiority.

i must admit that Bala was right, it truly is a waste of time to debate such obvious tripe but its sunday and i have nothing to do. one thing i will say though in response to your criticism of austrian economics. the goal of science is to prove a theory as being irrefutable and if there is one thing common regarding humanity it is that it is predictably unpredictable. no other school of economics or praxeological study takes into account this most greatest uncertainty, preferring rather to group individuals into a graph and chart their progress and identify future trends. if your keynesian or marxist ideology proved infallible we should be enjoying a boom at this moment. too bad that austrians saw this coming years ago. ask yourself which is the correct “science”.

Walt D. December 31, 2010 at 9:20 pm

“1. Social democrats have won the policy argument, and all of the author’s dogmatic rhetoric has been rejected by the people he sought to persuade.”
You have to admit that Goebbels, the Gestapo, and the SS were very persuasive – like Lurch in the Addams Family.

“2. The implementation of the welfare state has been correlated with an explosion of wealth such as the world has never seen, which, he attributes, without evidence, to “capitalism.””
This explains why the people in Cuba are rich and the people in Hong Kong and Singapore are poverty stricken. Also, has he not noticed how people’s standard of living in the US has shot through the roof in the last two years under Obamunism?
“3. He hates socialists, and has hated them ever since he was a child.”
Perhaps he fails to see the positive side of Hitler. (perhaps he should read “Springtime for Hitler”)
(Socialists , while naturally misanthropic, seem to like animals – Hitler used to like dogs.)
“4. He believes this petty resentment marks him as a superior being, inherently freedom-loving from birth, whilst socialists are born to be slavery-loving underhumans. (I wonder why his career as a heckler failed to impact the public mind? Surely his smug assertion of genetic superiority won him converts!)”
Socialists do love slavery – forcing people to work for nothing under the threat of violence is slavery. Welfare recipients are the new slave owners.

AntiCapitalist January 2, 2011 at 3:43 am

“You have to admit that Goebbels, the Gestapo, and the SS were very persuasive – like Lurch in the Addams Family.”

The Nazis were capitalists. They were more capitalistic than the US.

“This explains why the people in Cuba are rich and the people in Hong Kong and Singapore are poverty stricken. Also, has he not noticed how people’s standard of living in the US has shot through the roof in the last two years under Obamunism?.”

Hong Kong and Singapore did NOT build their way up through the free-market, but through price fixing, government protected cartels, and so on.

Obama is not a communist, and is nowhere near a communist. He really even has less state intervention into the economy than the Reagan administration, the members of which bragged about being the most protectionist post-war presidency.

“Perhaps he fails to see the positive side of Hitler. (perhaps he should read “Springtime for Hitler”)”

Hitler was a capitalist.

“(Socialists , while naturally misanthropic, seem to like animals – Hitler used to like dogs.)”"

Logical fallacy – unrepresentative sample. Also, the person in question was a capitalist. So, apparently capitalists like dogs. (Hitler probably believed 2 + 2 = 4, I guess all people who believe this are Nazis as well.)

” Socialists do love slavery – forcing people to work for nothing under the threat of violence is slavery. ”

Again, you confuse capitalism for socialism (this seems to be a common theme for you). Capitalists threaten people with violence by claiming that people must work for them for nothing by unjustly holding onto property that they themselves didn’t earn. The idiots at the Mises Institute want to take it even farther than that, believing that this unjustified property gives them the right to make slaves out of anybody who wants to use it – and of course have the government protect such property.

What tyrannical, collectivist nonsense.

“Welfare recipients are the new slave owners.”

Welcome to the thinking of right-wing idiots. The poor = the slave owners; rather than the rich capitalists who unjustly control all the wealth or the lackeys that serve them in the government.

The Kid Salami January 2, 2011 at 4:37 am

As you were asked elsewhere, please define the terms “capitalism” and “socialism” and then maybe a discussion might follow from this and we might be able to use your definitions to see if what you see makes sense.

Tea Party Austrian January 2, 2011 at 9:24 am

“Socialists , while naturally misanthropic, seem to like animals – Hitler used to like dogs.”

So true. Could it be that animals are so much more complacent about being ‘saved’ from themselves by socialists of either the right or the left?

Chu-hua Zhu January 2, 2011 at 7:11 pm

Animals don’t do the things that bother Socialistas, like have jobs, want to keep their own money, try to kill you when you fence them into your grand ‘experiment’.

guard January 3, 2011 at 10:24 am

I’ve noticed that people’s love of animals is inversely proportional to their actual (not just talk) love for other people. I wonder what this is about.

Wingnut December 31, 2010 at 9:42 pm

Hi

We ALL see the pyramid scheme symbol on the back of the USA one dollar bill. We ALL see the servitude infestation in capitalism. We ALL see the “pay up or lose your wellbeing” Chicago mob-like felony extortion widespread within capitalism. We ALL see the “join or starve” felony extortion done to the 18 year olds… by this ugly competer’s church called capitalism. We ALL see how forcing competer’s religions onto 18 year olds, and/or LURING them into it with bling-dangling and promises of empowerments… kills membership in the cooperator’s church (Christianity/socialism). We ALL understand that AmWay (American Way) (New World Order) got “the exclusive” (legal tender) on the TYPE of survival coupons (money) accepted in supply depots (stores) and leverages 18 year olds into the organization via that felony activity. (It puts AmWay-coupon slaving requirements called price tags… on all the survival goods). We ALL understand how sure-to-collapse farmyard pyramids work… from our childhoods. Upper 1/3 are “heads in the clouds” while the kids on the bottom ALWAYS GET HURT from the weight of the world’s knees in their backs. And, we ALL see how such systems are illegal, immoral, and just plain sick.

We American Christian socialists are patiently awaiting the natural fall of the pyramid-o-servitude, or the busting of the free marketeers felony… by the USA Dept of Justice. We Christians are VERY CLOSE to issuing a cease and desist order until the servitude and inequality goes away… which means it turns into a commune. Commune is a word we LOVE when used in the word “community”… but its one the caps HATE when used in the word “commune-ism”. Go fig. PROGRAMMED!!

Do a Google IMAGE SEARCH for ‘pyramid of capitalist’ to see a full color picture made way back in 1911, when capitalism was first discovered to be a con/sham instigated by the Free Masons/Illuminati. Folks sure bought into the thing… hook, line, and sinker just the same. The caps didn’t even check if a string was attached! Now THAT’S easy fishing, eh?

Time to level the felony pyramid scheme called capitalism. Abolish economies and ownershipism worldwide, and hurry. Economies just cause rat-racing, and rat-racing causes felony pyramiding. BUST IT, America! Look to the USA military supply/survival system… (and the USA public library system) for socialism and morals done right. Equal, owner-less, money-less, bill-less, timecard-less, and concerned with growth of value-criteria OTHER THAN money-value. Quit doing monetary discrimination immediately, and make it illegal. There are MANY measurement criteria of “value”… not just dollars. Try morals, efficiency, discrimination-levels, repairability, etc etc. Economies are cancerous tumors, and to cheer for their growth… is just insane. Profiting causes inflation, so if caps LIKE inflation, and if they LIKE a terrible time in afterlife when they meet the planet’s ORIGINAL OWNER before caps tried to squat it all with ownershipism, then keep it up with the felony pyramiding. I dare you. While us Christians are finally bulldozing that pyramid scheme back to level, lets make servitude and “join or starve” (get a job or die) illegal in the USA, and lets level the architecture seen in USA courtrooms, too. Right now, USA courtrooms are church simulators or “fear chambers”, by special design. Sick.

Isn’t that back-of-the-dollar pyramid… a Columbian freemason symbol? And WHERE is the USA gov located? District of Columbia? (Not even part of the USA!) How much more blatant can ya get? The “Fed” runs a pyramid scheme called the free marketeers. If you’re using the “federal reserve note” certificates, or using no-other-living-thing-on-the-planet entitles of ownership, you’re bought into a servitude/slavery con/sham… called capitalism. Pyramiding 101.

Larry “Wingnut” Wendlandt
MaStars – Mothers Against Stuff That Ain’t Right
(anti-capitalism-ists)
Bessemer MI USA

A Liberal in Lakeview January 2, 2011 at 8:33 am

Somewhere in Michigan there is a church with a naked bolt that awaits its wingnut to be seated and fastened down.

Since the third century Christianity has always served simultaneously those who supported the social order and those who wished to overthrow it. . . . It is the same today: Christianity fights both for and against Socialism.

-Ludwig von Mises, in Socialism, p. 378

Wingnut January 2, 2011 at 9:25 am

Well, Ludwig was wrong on that. There are REAL Christians who believe in love thy neighbor and being your brother’s (and sister’s) keeper… and there’s former Christians who have turned capitalist… who have forsaken their Christianity and now do bill thy neighbor and put up fencing between you and he, and do us-vs-them wars with those “them”.

Cute play on my name, but put your mind on the subject of forcing 18 yr olds to join a competer’s organization… OR ELSE. Concentrate on WHY only ONE organization can print legal tender survival coupons. Concentrate on “pay up or lose your house/wellbeing” extortion seen widespread these days. Concentrate on the pyramid scheme called capitalism… with its flagrant “get a leg up” policies… which are certainly FAR from love thy neighbor. GET ON SUBJECT and cut the personal bashing, huh? Address the issues presented, or shut up, please.

TRUE socialism is NOT an economic system. TRUE socialism (used in communes and PROPERLY working commune-ities) (public libraries) is the act of NOT using economies (money, orders, and ownership). In a commune, you don’t work FOR others… only WITH others. Shut your yap long enough to notice the widespread servitude in capitalism. Time to wakey wakey, young basher. There’s no trolling going on here. There’s some blatant attempts to wake the conned, though. Own up to pyramiding… to the worship of green paper false idols called money and entitles of ownership. The Earth creators, who made all Earth materials and never said ANY of it could be squatted, owned, or sold… are watching you closely. Time to own up to the symbolism of the Great Pyramids out in the planet’s sandbox. This is a giant classroom to teach you “get ahead” rat-racing pyramid climbers… to learn the detriment of racing/competing. HURRY UP!!! Competing is NOT healthy and never was. Only cooperating is healthy… but NOT cooperating with an 18-yr-olds-are-forced-to-join competer’s church. Shake off the con, kids.

nate-m January 2, 2011 at 9:55 am

Capitalism is a term that encompasses what happens, economically, when individuals are allowed to freely associate with one another.

How compassionate people are to one another is completely unrelated and there is no fundamental conflict between Christianity and capitalism.

Libertarian jerry January 1, 2011 at 2:06 am

What the Blog critics of Mr.Chodorov’s article are practicing is Cultural Marxism. One of the Cultural Marxist tactics is not to have a rational debate on the pros and cons of a subject,but to instead, talk gibberish and throw dirt at the individual they disagree with. The fact that Socialism is a gutter philosophy, on the wrong side of history and that it bankrupts both spiritually and financially every nation,including America,where it has been tried is beyond question,at least to fair minded people. Using “Capitalism” as a straw man as Marx did only serves the purpose of denigrating a free market economy. History has shown that Free Market economies always outperform Socialist economies by providing higher standards of living and more liberty for more people. Certainly Free Markets are not perfect,but no system is. Socialism and Socialists try to sell Their collectivism as a” better way” and the “wave of the future.” In reality nothing could be further from the truth.

Sione January 1, 2011 at 2:00 pm

Libertarian jerry

I agree with you.

Did you notice that excellent example of gibberish by Wingnut? It’s the sort of socialist mumbo-jumbo Frank Chodorov was referring to in his article.

Sione

Anticapitalist January 2, 2011 at 3:33 am

Wow. Another brilliant analysis from two idiots – “Libertarian Jerry” and the classic moron “Sione.”

Socialism “bankrupts” people morally and “spiritually” (what does this mean?) – no evidence provided of course. This must be the Austrian “logical analysis” we’ve heard so much about.

Bala January 2, 2011 at 4:08 am

Define the following.

1. Capitalism, since you identify yourself as “Anticapitalist”
2. Socialism, since you seem to have problems with the objections to it out here
3. Morals and Morality, since you are unable to see how socialism morally bankrupts a society
4. Spiritual, since you are unable to see how socialism spiritual bankrupts a society

Once you do that, we can get on with the logical analysis.

Chu-hua Zhu January 2, 2011 at 6:43 am

Their blatant idiot-trolling reminds me of a saying of the great Sudha R. Shenoy, “Socialists are what machine guns and walls were made for!”

AntiCapitalist January 2, 2011 at 6:18 pm

And yet more proof Austrian “economists” are really fascists.

So anybody who disagrees with you is a socialist and must be executed?

What a sickening ideology.

Chu-hua Zhu January 2, 2011 at 7:09 pm

Lol, it was a joke. Also, Fascists hardly killed any people. Nazis killed a bunch, but they were socialists. Commies killed a lot more people than…anyone in human history.

Bala January 2, 2011 at 7:22 pm

No! No! No! It means that if you are a Socialist and end up at the wrong end of the State’s machine gun with your back to the wall, you deserve being in that state waiting to be shot. The gun wielders will be your fellow-socialists, not any of us Austrian “economists”. We prefer to let idiots be.

Chu-hua Zhu January 2, 2011 at 8:16 pm

Also true – I should say it was ‘tongue in cheek’. Socialists are asking for it.
OMG STALIN PURGED THE PARTY!
Durrrrr.

Chu-hua Zhu January 2, 2011 at 8:23 pm

Also, it reminds me of three (supposedly Chinese) curses which are great for socialists, in increasing degrees of severity:
1. May you live in interesting times.
2. May you come to the attention of the authorities.
3. May you get what you wish for.

Walt D. January 2, 2011 at 10:48 pm

Fascism is a more efficient system than socialism.
At least Mussolini was able to get the trains to run on time.
After last weeks snow storm in New York, Obama and his running dog Bloomberg could not get the trains to run at all, never mind on time.

Chu-hua Zhu January 2, 2011 at 11:44 pm

Fascism was better, because it was a hampered market economy. I.e., an actual economy, which is impossible under socialism.

integral January 3, 2011 at 5:33 am

Except Mussolini didn’t make the trains run on time. Most of the improvements to italian railways came almost directly after WW1, before Mussolini came to power.

Anticapitalist January 2, 2011 at 3:16 am

The capitalist class = the parasitic class. Capitalists are lazy people who, when they’re not sucking dead labor directly through surplus value, are receiving the benefits of state-funded research and university funded research. Just look at the funders of the Mises Institute and Austrian economics like the Koch Bros. They not only receive enormous support from the US government, but are ripping off workers around the world. Every dollar of profit they make costs the people in third world countries hundreds of dollars per person through their tax dollars.

Capitalists are dumb – Bill Gates is not the best programmer, yet he is the richest programmer, even though all he did was buy software from other people. Most capitalists don’t even do that much – they’re just interested in making money in finance or through speculation and so on. None of this is needed and it wastes enormous human potential and talent.

Look at Jeffrey Tucker, Bob Murphy, Hans-Hermann Hoppe, Lew Rockwell, and the other lazy bums here at the Mises Institute who offer nothing to society but their warped Randian morality and mythical natural rights nonsense that have been dubunked by all serious intellectuals. They’re lazy as well.

A Liberal in Lakeview January 2, 2011 at 7:52 am

Look at Jeffrey Tucker, Bob Murphy, Hans-Hermann Hoppe, Lew Rockwell, and the other lazy bums here at the Mises Institute who offer nothing to society but their warped Randian morality

Murphy and Rockwell are Christians, not Randians. There’s a vast chasm between the two ways of thought, as you would know if you’d done your homework. Now, for an example of Randian thought, why don’t you go read, say, Stephen Hicks’ book Explaining Postmodernism. It reads like a biography of you. Hicks, a professor of philosphy, is a Randian, and he’s seen fit to make your biography available for free so that everyone might come to know yourself. See also David Gordon’s review, available at this website.

As for your heated rhetoric, “offer nothing to society”, why don’t you just admit what you really mean by it?

Look at Jeffrey Tucker, Bob Murphy, Hans-Hermann Hoppe, Lew Rockwell, and other lazy bums here at the Mises Institute who offer me, Anticapitalist, nothing but painful claims to which I cannot reply without a flurry of abuse that makes it obvious that I harbor a sense of entitlement to the benefits that I can accrue through labor provided by others without me actually having to pay for it! Tucker et al. refuse to provide labor as I see fit, and so I am driven insane with bitterness and resentment at not getting what I want.

AntiCapitalist January 2, 2011 at 6:38 pm

“Murphy and Rockwell are Christians, not Randians.”

Yes, but they have that same view of human nature which is that humans are ultimately greedy and thus we need to design systems to accommodate this view – which supposedly benefits society. Keynes wrote about this type of capitalism as making absolutely no sense, and he has been proven correct by recent history.

“There’s a vast chasm between the two ways of thought, as you would know if you’d done your homework.”

One is a religious ideology and the other is a political ideology. They’re not even in the same realm, so one can hold stupid religious beliefs and stupid political beliefs at the same time and not be contradictory.

In this case, Rockwell and Murphy are religious fundamentalists while at the same time holding onto Christian fundamentalism as well. It actually makes perfect sense: if you’re a nut in your religious philosophy you’ll probably be a nut in moral philosophy as well.

“, Stephen Hicks’ book Explaining Postmodernism. It reads like a biography of you….”

I’ve never met Stephen Hicks nor have I heard of him. I’ve never met you either, so this is more of your deluded right-wing fantasies than it is a serious analysis of me. You’re unable to refute my points so you resort to this kind of nonsense. It really shows just how detached from reality right-wing idiots like you really are.

“anticapitalist, nothing but painful claims to which I cannot reply without a flurry of abuse …

I actually did reply to the nonsense posted here. You idiots, as usual, were unable to refute my points, so you started trolling.

As for my “abuse” – keep in mind that the only way to reply to ad-hominem attacks is with ad-hominem attacks.

It seems Libertarians can dish it out but they can’t take it.

“…a sense of entitlement to the benefits that I can accrue through labor provided by others without me actually having to pay for it!…”

This is what capitalists do all the time when they take publicly funded research and use things built by the government for their own benefit.

Capitalists, of course, also receive far more protection from the government than I do since they control the vast majority of wealth and stocks – which of course are protected by the government.

It seems by the Libertarians’ own standards, capitalists are the biggest leeches. Of course, being idiots, Libertarians can’t see such gaping holes in their philosophy.

Capitalists also steal resources from the workers who come up with all of the ideas in the companies and create all of the products in the first place. The capitalist is merely the lazy, idle “owner” of the land who gets to appropriate these inventions and the hard work of others – many of whom developed the modern wonders of society cooperatively. Some capitalists have now even admitted that they do this, and that the system, in order to be fair, needs to have progressive taxation and so on to offset these affects.

So, there you have it. Economists understand that capitalism is unfair. Social scientists understand the economy is unfair. The public understands the economy is unfair. And even capitalists themselves have admitted capitalism is unfair (Gates, the ex-VP of GE said this one, Buffet, and so on).

The only people who don’t understand this are the Libertarian house slaves who worship the capitalists – little idiots like Jeffrey Tucker.

“Tucker et al. refuse to provide labor as I see fit…”

Well, that sounds like a challenge Jeffrey Tucker. Your little idiots cannot refute me, so they’re asking you to do it for them.

Will Jeffrey Tucker show his face and debate me? Only time will tell.

nate-m January 2, 2011 at 7:10 pm

“”Keynes wrote about this type of capitalism as making absolutely no sense, and he has been proven correct by recent history””

The only thing that recent history has proved was that governments that follow his advice on economics are doomed to failure and will mismanage the economy.

“”Capitalists, of course, also receive far more protection from the government than I do since they control the vast majority of wealth and stocks – which of course are protected by the government.””

You about 40 years behind the curve here even on socialism and it shows.

The modern socialist state is happy to let the so-called “capitalists” run the details of their companies while the government ultimately controls them through regulation and taxes. Regulation of the stock market and the protections that government provides to large corporations is part of this. After all this is how now “communist” China has decided is the best way to manage things. It has long been the modus operandi of modern socialist movements ever since Maxism and similar communist thinking was proven to be a thorough and inevitable failure by every state that tried to adopt that sort of governmental model.

If you had paid any attention to this site and gave a little bit of effort into understanding what is being advocated you realized that the majority of people here abhor such interventionist regulation.

Some even have a term for it called “Corporatism” in order to distance it from the free market capitalism that is being advocated.

This is why people tried to get you to define your terms, which you refuse to do.

I’ve tried to have discussion like this with socialist or communist folks in the past and it is mostly useless

Why?

Because they refuse to accept that “socialism” means a lot of different things except the very specific future and governmental model that they believe in. They not only define it very narrowly to be their own specific political ideology they will most often refuse to disclose what that specific thing is. (I suspect it is to avoid having their ideology picked to pieces. Or they don’t really understand it themselves)

And then “capitalism” is defined so broadly that it means everything from merchantalism (think East India Company) and colonialism from the days of the British empire to slave labor camps in Nazi Germany to modern day governmental bailouts of the banks and auto industry.

Libertarian jerry January 2, 2011 at 8:13 am

It seems that “anti-Capitalist” might be a “plant” to challenge liberty lovers. With that said,if you argue with an idiot,pretty soon people won’t be able to tell who the real idiot is.

nate-m January 2, 2011 at 9:42 am

Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

This Anticapitalist is a troll. The more you respond the more he wins. He is not interested in any rational debate or argument and will change his colors to suit any circumstances in a attempt to get people irritated. The point is not to win or look good. He makes himself feel better by making other people look stupid (to himself).

And that is being _very_ generous. Trolls are usually 15 year old boys with nothing better to do or mentally damaged adults with stunted maturity levels.

The only other possibility (which is worse) is that the person really is what he is portraying himself to be, and in that case he is really just intentionally blind to reality and is going to be impossible to reason with until he figures out on his own why his assumptions are fundamentally wrong. Which is unlikely.

You can tell that by statements like ‘Nazis were capitalists’. In his eyes Nazis are bad and capitalists are bad so Nazis were capitalists. The logic does not extend very far beyond that. It takes about 15 minutes of research in Nazi propaganda to realize that they accused the communists of being fall guys for capitalists and that the capitalist system was closely associated with Zionism. They were just socialists of a different colour.

A Liberal in Lakeview January 2, 2011 at 9:59 am

Ah, yes, Lj. Sometimes the plant spreads like kudzu.

Internetluft kann frei machen, but not necessarily, as Wingnut is eager to suggest with his SHOUTING.

Sione January 3, 2011 at 12:34 pm

Could it be that “Anticapitalist” is Robert in a dress?

Sione

Dave M January 2, 2011 at 11:52 am

It is becoming apparent that the LvM institute is percieved as a threat to the socialist/welfare state supporters by the increasing number of them on this site. Perhaps over time they will convert.

brad January 2, 2011 at 12:15 pm

@ dave m,
not likely if they all think like dumbass a few posts up.i agree with you though that the “outrageous” thought being offered at LvMI has caught on quite severely and is systematically damaging the beliefs held by these followers of marx and keynes.

AntiCapitalist January 2, 2011 at 9:24 pm

“Dumbass” isn’t a word. The thing is that you guys are actually worse than fascists, but you’re such idiots you can barely even tie your own shoes. Hence, your not as big of “threat” to the human race as you think you are.

Matthew Swaringen January 2, 2011 at 9:34 pm

What is or isn’t a word is a matter of convention and conventions change. Dumbass is colloquial, deal with it. I’d like to hear the logic behind “worse than fascists.” I’m not expecting much given the rest of your post.

Walt D. January 3, 2011 at 12:15 am

There is some very good educational material on this site. Since you appear not to know what fascism is, other than a puerile epithet to describe a philosophy you do not like, I suggest you read here; http://mises.org/daily/2903 “What is Fascism?” by John T Flynn. If you have any open mind, you will no doubt see history repeating itself with Mussolini replaced by Obama. Since you do not understand why the NAZI’s were socialists, I suggest you read here. http://mises.org/daily/1937 “Why Nazism Was Socialism and Why Socialism Is Totalitarian” by George Reisman. If you still think the content of this site is worthless, look through the archives and see that the NASDAQ collapse that “nobody say coming” was predicted here; that the housing bubble that “nobody saw coming’ was predicted here; that the Anthopological Global Warming Scam that everyone was saying “was established science” was debunked here years before Climategate. You may also want to take note that nobody on this site is predicting any economic boom – in fact many are waiting for the collapse of the dollar “fiat currency”.
Most people here think QE2 will fail.

Walt D. January 2, 2011 at 3:23 pm

“The Nazis were capitalists. They were more capitalistic than the US.”
NAZI – Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei. My German must be rusty – I did not know that
sozialistische translates as capitalist. What next – are you going to tell me that Mussolini was not a fascist?
” but through price fixing, government protected cartels, and so on.”
This sounds like socialism.
“Obama is not a communist, and is nowhere near a communist. He really even has less state intervention into the economy than the Reagan administration”
If you read the history of Mussolini, you would conclude that Obama is a fascist – nationalizing healthcare, nationalizing the banks, nationalizing GM – Oh I forgot Mussolini was not a fascist.
Socialists have the same philosophy as the ghetto punk. They think they have the right to decide whose property they can steal. Socialism is an economic hate crime.

integral January 3, 2011 at 5:39 am

Michael Parenti makes a strong case regarding why nazis weren’t socialist. (Ie, they didn’t actually support, and mostly directly opposed socialist movements, they colluded with big financial, ie capitalist, powers like heavy industry and collected large donations from them.)
In other words, the nazis were enemies of the worker class and the ally of the capitalist/factory-owner class.
He appears to accuse them of supporting “capitalists” and thus “being” capitalist but his description certainly comes more off as corporatism/cartelism or mercantilism.

Raimondas January 3, 2011 at 11:51 am

Definition: Socialism: ”from everyone by capability, to everyone by needs”- Karl Marx.
Capitalism: “from everyone by skills, to everyone by results”- Raimondas.

For example: under socialism: ZIS (Zavod Imeni Stalina)-soviet Rolls Royce and “dacha” (soviet suburban mansion) to anticapitalist, gulag in Siberia for zuckerberg.

Under capitalism: Ford Taurus for zuckerberg, senior public bus communication to anticapitalist.

Raimondas January 2, 2011 at 8:58 pm

“Communism is lie, terrorism; robbery, parasitism” as it put Francoise Thom professor of Sorbonne.

Walt D. January 3, 2011 at 12:52 pm

There are basically two types of model for socialism – the Nazi model and the Bolshevic model.
You may want to read :
“Why Nazism Was Socialism and Why Socialism Is Totalitarian” by George Reisman. You can find it here:
http://mises.org/daily/1937

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: