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

Trump Victorious in 2024 Presidential Election

As of this hour, former President and now President-elect Donald Trump has secured his second term as the forty-seventh President of the United States. Trump’s victory comes after winning key battleground states Wisconsin, Michigan, Nevada, Arizona, Pennsylvania, and Georgia.  As for the popular vote, Trump was victorious there as well, winning by a one-and-a-half-percent margin. Despite these results, it’s evident that there remains a significant social and political problem in the United States, where politically-motivated violence, social unrest, crime and general instability have become rampant over the years since the death of George Floyd.  However, I’d say the fact that it was even this close is ominous for the years ahead. This was as clear as it gets for an election, that the incumbents (both Biden and Harris) are wholly unfit for any office, that they present a real and present danger where they’re allowed within twelve thousand miles of a school zone, let alone any...
Post a Comment
Read more

Failure by Design

In the case for liberty, there is certainly some tolerance for error or failure, as it is generally suffered by the individual and not brought upon anyone by design . Wherever anyone seeks to empower government, however, one must be reasonably certain of the designs, the logic and the costs, and he must be equally honest about the unknowns as with the foreseeable consequences; after all, there is no margin for error where those designs are administered by the barrel of a gun.  One must necessarily remember that government is a monopoly on force and coercion, that force and coercion serve together as the modifying distinction between government and enterprise. It is a kind of force and coercion not by spirit or intention of written law but in accordance with the letter and understanding of the enforcers in their own time, in their own limited judgment and impaired conscience. As opposed to a state of liberty, where mistakes, failures and crimes are unavoidable in the face of human f...
Post a Comment
Read more

From BC to AD to AI

Artificial intelligence is bound not only to render the ordinary human being boring by comparison, and in many cases practically unnecessary, but to dispose human beings to hostility toward each other where any dares pose a question or raise a concern instead of taking it up with a chatbot (or AI interface); such a course of action eventually assuming such a regular place in human affairs as to stand in entirely for human discourse and daily interaction.  This is not only a very real possibility when considering the future course of human ‘civilization’; it is more than likely imminent or already upon us.  It is left to be seen just what this will look like, just how this will play out, just what tolerance the species (and even beyond) has for such extremes which this technology is to bring about. Likewise, it remains to be seen whether a heavily-indebted society facing never-ending and unavoidable taxes (i.e. taxes on property) can even be expected to retrain and retool for t...
Post a Comment
Read more