You Choose

Spartacus is currently reading a wonderful book by Jonah Goldberg called Suicide of the West.  Highly, very highly, recommended.  And it is rather topical at the moment with the on going discussion of the teaching of Western Civilisation in Australian universities.

However, in his book Goldberg makes an interest contrast.  He describes capitalism as a system which makes everyone richer, but some richer faster than others (inequality).   He then describes socialism as a system that makes everyone poor, but equally poor (equality).

So Australians.  There is a choice to be made at the next election so don’t be confused.  The choice seems not to be how much inequality we can tolerate so that every boat is lifted but rather how much poorer do we want to be so that we can say there is less inequality.

You choose.

And if this sounds like Australia’s climate policy where we are making everyone poorer, not to impact climate, but to say we are doing something, this is probably not a coincidence.

Follow I Am Spartacus on Twitter at @Ey_am_Spartacus
Subscribe to the Sparta-Blog at eyamspartacus.wordpress.com

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

22 Responses to You Choose

  1. Bruce of Newcastle

    The Green-Progressive religion promotes asceticism, except for their priests who use private jets to get around the planet.

    Hypocrisy of the Day: Former Sierra Club Chief Carl Pope (12 June)

  2. mh

    So Australians. There is a choice to be made at the next election

    Oh goody.

  3. Boambee John

    He then describes socialism as a system that makes everyone poor, but equally poor (equality).

    Not really. Under socialism, a self selected few do well (the Nomenklatura), while everyone else becomes equally poor.

  4. Mother Lode

    So Australians. There is a choice to be made at the next election so don’t be confused.

    Sorry, but you will need to make a case far more compelling than demonstrating the truth.

    You have to make it a bribe: “You will get more and get to do less. Other people will make up the difference.”

  5. Tim Neilson

    There is a choice to be made at the next election so don’t be confused.

    Unfortunately, with full compulsory preferential voting in the HoR, you will really only get to choose which franchise of the cartel inserts the pineapple.

  6. Kneel

    “Unfortunately, with full compulsory preferential voting in the HoR, you will really only get to choose which franchise of the cartel inserts the pineapple.”

    Yep – not even a choice of lubricant any more. It’s too expensive and is made from fossil fuels, so you get none now.

  7. Roger

    He then describes socialism as a system that makes everyone poor, but equally poor (equality).

    Not really. Under socialism, a self selected few do well (the Nomenklatura), while everyone else becomes equally poor.

    The richest woman in Venezuela is Hugo Chavez’s daughter, Maria.

    Estimated net worth: $4.2bn.

    Most of it held in US banks, of course.

    How she managed to acquire such a fortune by her mid-30s is a mystery.

  8. Bruce of Newcastle

    Unfortunately, with full compulsory preferential voting in the HoR, you will really only get to choose which franchise of the cartel inserts the pineapple.

    You can choose to vote informal rather than allow your preference to flow to a major party in the HoR. In the Senate you can vote 12 below the line and exhaust.

    I will be doing this until one or other of the major parties ditches their climate lies.

  9. Cynic of Ayr

    I tend to disagree. My belief:
    He describes capitalism as a system which makes everyone richer, but some richer faster than others (inequality). OK, fair enough. Emphasis on the some.
    He then describes socialism as a system that makes everyone poor, but equally poor (equality).
    I differ. It should be:
    He then describes socialism as a system that makes most people poor, but a few very, very rich (supposed equality).
    Who, in the upper echelons of a socialist/communist country is poor?
    Arafat? (Perhaps not communist, but what the hell is it?) Putin? Gorbachev? All previous office holders in Russia? All present and past leaders in China? Maduro? (Anyone think Maduro is poor?) Castro? Anyone think Fidel Castro is on the bone of his arse? OK, he’s dead, but before that.) Little Rocket Man? You can tell he’s poor. Look at his weight. Poor bastard is starving!
    No, not everyone is poor in a Socialist country. Far from it.
    BTW, it’s not much different in Capitalist countries like Australia. No recent Australian Prime Minister retires poor. Hawke didn’t even own his own home when he went into Parliament. In a few years he was a millionaire. Gillard was a salaried lawyer, and now has recently bought a house for some millions. Keating became a millionaire after a career in Parliament for most of his later working life. We paid Whitlam a pension for more years than he worked for us. Think about that! He was paid longer in retirement than for the time he worked.
    So, is Goldberg correct in these two statement? I don’t think so.
    As is often said, Capitalism and Democracies is really a shit system, it’s just better then Socialism.

  10. Roger

    I will be doing this until one or other of the major parties ditches their climate lies.

    If enough voters did this the major parties would fell a hit in electoral funding.

    One way to get their attention.

  11. Tintarella di Luna

    Unfortunately, with full compulsory preferential voting in the HoR, you will really only get to choose which franchise of the cartel inserts the pineapple.

    Ouch!

  12. struth

    BTW, it’s not much different in Capitalist countries like Australia.

    By the way, when is the official name change going to take place?
    Australia is already a socialist shithole.

    It’s not communist, because the government doesn’t own the means of production , but it sure as hell controls it.
    I would argue that many recognised socialist countries actually have less regulation placed on the citizens themselves.

  13. Habib

    What choice? Both partners in the diarchy are equally addled socialists, the marketing ploy that one’s not quite as bad as the other doesn’t wash. Howard tried it on the weekend, had I been there I would’ve openly mocked the poisonous dwarf.

  14. manalive

    … Treaties have been signed, commitments made and governments around the world are taking action … whether people like it or not, we are moving towards a carbon constrained future …. (Josh Frydenberg).
    I’m taking James Allan’s advice.
    I’m retired and Shorten’s policies will negatively affect me but it’s more important that both major parties be reminded who is the boss.

  15. Habib

    … Treaties have been signed, commitments made and governments around the world are taking action … whether people like it or not, we are moving towards a carbon constrained future …. (Josh Frydenberg).

    Doesn’t take much for the Hun in him to rear it’s square head, does it? Ve haf ways of making you pay a bomb to live in the half-dark. Oddly enough another German who liked telling people what to do didn’t give a fuck about treaties. The proles did wind up living without power and pretty much everything else including their existence due to policy.

  16. manalive

    Doesn’t take much for the Hun in him to rear it’s square head …

    That’s a pretty tasteless remark considering as Hungarian J3ws Frydenberg’s family were interned before fleeing the German Nazis and their Hungarian agents.

  17. struth

    … whether people like it or not,

    This and the ABC vote being ignored is torch and pitchfork rebellion stuff.
    They should be pulled screaming out of our democratic institutions and burned at the stake.
    However, this is Australia, and guess what, it’s full of immigrants that can’t speak English, wouldn’t know what democracy was if they fell over it and ……………Australians.

  18. Louis

    Actually he’s wrong. Socialism doesn’t make everyone equally poor! Everywhere where it has been implemented it always results in a very small but wealthy class.

  19. Tim Neilson

    You can choose to vote informal rather than allow your preference to flow to a major party in the HoR.

    That’s true, Bruce, and your tactic may be the least bad one available under the current system, but the problem is that by doing it we’ve got 0.000 recurring to infinity chance of actually getting someone we want into the HoR. That is, by doing it you’re not actually getting a vote at all. We can’t even try for a 0.00001% chance of putting our real preferred candidate into the HoR without a 99.99999 % chance of our preferences flowing to one franchise of the cartel or the other.

  20. Senile Old Guy

    Hard to see the HoR improving in the short term. A sensible group of Independents in the Senate is the only very, very slight hope.

  21. BorisG

    Actually he’s wrong. Socialism doesn’t make everyone equally poor! Everywhere where it has been implemented it always results in a very small but wealthy class.

    Actually, the privileged class (nomenklatura) is fabulously wealthy only by comparison with proles. Then there is really tiny group of really wealthy people, but again their material wealth is small compared to rich people in capitalist systems.

    As Michail Voslensky observed, the nomenklatura’s main privilege is power, while wealth is secondary.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.