Skip to main content

The Socialist Ideal: A Testimony

The ideal of the socialist is such that when we talk, we say nothing new or offensive, ideally nothing at all, and we keep a strict tally of our syllables and decibels to ensure that there’s sufficient space for the others. 


When we work, we continue only what has already been done, never doing more than we're instructed, and we do it for free without any byproducts or useful product for that matter. 

When we travel, we do it between work and home, with as little spontaneity and style as possible, preferably by bicycle or by foot, or most ideally not at all, so as to avoid offending the planet or encountering another person, who is otherwise known as a victim. 

When we exercise or study, we do it for the benefit of everybody, not for ourselves, and when this serves us an advantage, we offset it by severing a limb, by undergoing a lobotomy, or by pretending to be no different. 

When we compete, we declare everybody a winner, but nobody wins, so we usually avoid competition altogether because it’s uneventful. 

When we save, or under-consume, we redistribute the total of it to erase the excess and start over. 

When we innovate, we remind the innovator that he has nothing to gain from his toil, that his greed is the seed of all evil. 

When we meet people, we select the first person we encounter, so as to avoid offending others who might feel excluded. This is, of course, an anomaly, as most times we just keep our heads down and go about our own business. 

When we make plans, we enter a lottery to randomize the people and the venue, but most plans are already prepared for us, and by now most places and people are identical, so it's really all the same. 

When tomorrow finally arrives, we pretend as if it were yesterday, and it mostly feels the same anyway. 

For the most part, we do as we’re scheduled and we avoid stepping outside of our lanes and leaving our rooms. 

The socialist doesn’t really enjoy change, unless it takes the form of syphoning all of the thrill, creativity and uniqueness out of life. 

After all, how could any of it justify the risk or the victims? 

It's really the least we can do. 

 And we're all fine here, waiting until we achieve the palatable death.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Deal with Tariffs

Over the course of President Trump’s two terms, there has been much talk around the matter of tariffs — taxes on imported goods. However, much of the talk seems to miss the point. After all, for those of us who seek the truth, it’s not really a question of whether tariffs are ‘good’ but whether they are preferable to other kinds of taxes — assuming, of course, that taxes are the rule, as certain as the eventuality of death. First, let’s establish the theory: beyond the generic purpose of revenue generation for the state, the institution of tariffs ordinarily serves to  reduce (or discourage) imports by making them artificially more expensive, while encouraging domestic production by making domestic products more appealing on a relative price basis. In the realm of foreign affairs, tariffs are instituted or threatened in the course of international trade negotiations in order to signal dissatisfaction with existing trade barriers and to push for more favorable trade terms; or in ord...
Post a Comment
Read more

Summarizing the “Separation of Church and State”

There is much confusion surrounding the concept of the “separation of church and state”; much of it likely born out of the steep secular decline in religious affiliation across recent generations, with particular emphasis among atheists and anti-deists.  While many have hastened to leverage this language (“separation of church and state”) in order to condemn or censure religious values — particularly those which are Christian — where they have carried influence in public life (i.e. prayer in schools, teachers covering lessons from the Bible, government representatives appealing to God, coinage bearing the words “In God We Trust”), the truth is that this “separation” was never expected to completely eliminate religious practice or religious sentiment from all matter of public life. In fact, religion was so deeply enmeshed in American life during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries that the French magistrate and prison reformer Gustave de Beaumont, during his nine-month tour of A...
Post a Comment
Read more

Rethinking “Forgiveness”

Forgiveness is often hailed as the ultimate moral virtue — a cleansing of the soul, a sign of spiritual maturity, and the first step toward healing fractured relationships. But in modern discourse, particularly in religious and pop-psychological circles, “forgiveness” has extended beyond the sensible, beyond etiquette, and beyond justice and useful application. The concept of “forgiveness” has been stretched far outside of the realms of that which is easy to “forgive”, that which is merely inconvenient or annoying, or relatively innocuous or insignificant, where “forgiveness” is merely part of tolerating people’s human shortcomings, their mistakes and  their accidents , or extending ‘mercy’ to those who’ve disrespected or “trespassed against us” (and have since offered sincere apologies and the necessary restitution). This reimagined kind of “forgiveness” has taken on a dangerously idealized form ignorant to or dismissive of the laws and limits of human nature and the potential imp...
Post a Comment
Read more