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

Into the Wild: An Economics Lesson

The Keynesian mantra, in its implications, has its roots in destruction rather than truth: “In the long run, we’re all dead.” If this is your guiding principle, we are destined to differ on matters of principle and timeline. While it is true that our fates intersect in death, that does not mean that we ought to condemn our heirs to that view: the view that our work on this planet ought only to serve ourselves, and that we ought only to bear in mind the consequences within our own lifetimes. The Keynesians, of course, prefer their outlook, as it serves their interests; it has the further benefit of appealing to other selfish people who have little interest in the future to which they'll ultimately condemn their heirs. After all, they'll be long gone by then. So, in the Keynesian view, the longterm prospects for the common currency, social stability, and personal liberty are not just irrelevant but inconvenient. In their view, regardless of the consequences, those in charge tod

America's Civil War: Not "Civil" and Not About Slavery

Virtually the entirety of South and Central America, as well as European powers Britain, Spain and France, peacefully abolished slavery — without war — in the first sixty years of the nineteenth century. Why, then, did the United States enter into a bloody war that cost over half of the nation’s wealth, at least 800,000 lives and many hundreds of thousands more in casualties? The answer: the War Between the States was not about slavery. It was a war of invasion to further empower the central government and to reject state sovereignty, nullification of unconstitutional laws, and the states’ rights to secession. It was a war that would cripple the South and witness the federal debt skyrocket from $65 million in 1860 to $2.7 billion in 1865, whose annual interest alone would prove twice as expensive as the entire federal budget from 1860. It was a war whose total cost, including pensions and the burial of veterans, was an estimated $12 billion. Likewise, it was a war that would

There's Always Another Tax: The Tragedy of the Public Park

In the San Francisco Bay Area, many residents work tirelessly throughout the year to pay tens of thousands of dollars in annual property taxes. In addition to this, they are charged an extra 10 percent on all expenses through local sales taxes. It doesn't stop there. In addition to their massive federal tax bill, the busy state of California capitalizes on the opportunity to seize another 10 percent through their own sizable state income taxes. But guess what! It doesn't stop there. No, no, no, no. In California, there's always another tax. After all of these taxes, which have all the while been reported to cover every nook and cranny of the utopian vision, the Bay Area resident is left to face yet an additional tax at the grocery store, this time on soda. The visionaries within government, and those who champion its warmhearted intentions, label this one the "soda tax," which unbelievably includes Gatorade, the preferred beverage of athletes

Paradocracy

Search This Blog