Socialism is not the answer but do socialists know that?

The reality is that you have to be kidding yourself if you think your standard issue modern leftist knows that. The video is taken from here. Watch it for yourself. If you understand why socialism is not the answer, then it is hard to fathom that people in bulk numbers can really be this insane, but they are.

So let me continue with this. I have been sent an article from a friend in New Zealand – Why Call it “Socialism”? – which opens in the following way.

I’ve been coming around to the belief that most modern arguments over “socialism” are a waste of time, because the content of the term has become so nebulous. When you drill down a bit, a lot of “socialists” are really just saying that they would like to have government play a more active role in providing various benefits to workers and the poor, along with additional environmental protection.

Socialism is thus, as he sees it, nothing more than an unfocused desire for better social welfare and a more egalitarian society. Well, maybe, but pay attention to the video. It is beyond ignorance and beyond stupidity. We are truly looking at a cult of some kind, but it is a cult that encompasses near half of the population. This was my reply to my friend.

Thank you for that. Very interesting, and yet, and yet…. Socialism is a personal belief system that has no specific definition. Everyone makes up their own version so whenever some actually existing socialist economy is set up and then inevitably fails, everyone else can say that what they did was not what they had meant by socialism, that what was done was not what they had had in mind.

No one any longer describes what they believe in as “socialism” but I know it when I see it. It is ever and always a means to supplant the market through some kind of government direction in which individuals are not made responsible for their own personal welfare. Instead, governments manage and direct major economic entities; there are huge burdens placed on enterprises, through the taxes that are levied, the wages and benefits they are made to provide, and the regulations that they are made to follow; and there are huge amounts of public expenditures, almost inevitably more costly than the economic benefits they provide, that shape the direction in which an economy is made to follow. There are then large efforts to equalise incomes between those who provide more value than they are paid and those who either do not work or who are allowed to receive incomes well above the value added they have personally created. There are other features too, but you get the picture. The incentive structure is completely warped so that economic returns are very badly correlated with economic contribution.

And with every turn of the electoral cycle, we move further in a socialist direction. Scott Morrison is hardly a free-market capitalist, but he is well ahead of anyone on the Labor side. Your own PM is a complete economic dunce who will do you in if she is given half a chance. Everyone wants to be Mr, Miss, Ms and Mrs Niceperson. I only wish they had some prior understanding of how economies work before they bought in on it.

There you are. Interesting article, but economists turn out to have no political or philosophical sense whatsoever.

I would be placated to some extent if everyone before they waded in on the need for more regulation and re-distribution first explicitly stated that of course, free market capitalism is the only way to manage an economy so these suggestions are only intended to slightly alter the way we go about things. But no one ever says that. Replacing capitalism with something else is the underlying aim, or so it seems to me. There are so many gadgets around, from computers to widescreen television, that everyone will be easily lulled into disaster as in Venezuela with no way out at the end. And none of it will be mentioned by our media who are more into an apathetic torpor than anyone in Orwell’s time could ever possibly have imagined.

This entry was posted in Politics of the Left. Bookmark the permalink.

55 Responses to Socialism is not the answer but do socialists know that?

  1. RobK

    The machinery for unfettered technocracy is improving all the time. All they want is a chance to make it work.
    China seems to be leading the way.

  2. People don’t understand why socialism has had a resurgence in the last 30 or so years.
    IMHO it was always inevitable because………we now have a critical number of people in positions of power and authority predisposed to re-distributive tendencies. Who are they?
    These people are the young and women. We now have a critical number of women and the young in positions of power and authority.

    There is a less than zero chance that we’ll be able to reverse this trend. Even if we end up like a Venezuela but recover after a generation or so, inevitably we’ll return to re-distributive policies so long as women and the young are in positions of power and authority.

    p.s. “The Young” used to grow up by the time they reached 21 or 25 or so. They had to, they had no choice. These days we keep these people infantalised until well into their 30’s.

  3. RobK

    I think Socialism paves the way for centralised control. Its a sweetener for the masses. No one shall be worse off….because free stuff, redistributed.

  4. RobK

    Im not convinced of the gender and age thing, Baa. I know of plenty of leftist males in their senior years. I do think many believe that technology is the enabling means that will make it a success this time around. Its a power and control thing.

  5. Beachcomber

    The media are not “into an apathetic torpor“. It would be good if they were. But no, having been fully indoctrinated by their education, culminating in journalism degrees, they are very active Green Marxist partisans and propagandists.

  6. @RobK
    There’s always been leftist males Rob, but they were almost always in niche areas like unions and universities.
    Modern leftists are everywhere including supposed right wing organizations (Liberal party for example) and even businesses.
    I was talking more about the resurgence of leftism and why it’s so popular.

  7. Nob

    Good letter/reply Steve.
    I’m liking some of the stuff you write lately.

    I always start from the premise that everyone wants the best for everyone, no matter how stupid they are or how evil the likely outcome of what they propose.

  8. Nob

    Baa humbug, they’re very prevalent in business due to HR, lawfare, compliance and HSE.

    All of the above provide natural homes for parasites who home in on value-adding enterprises.

    They just need to be reminded that without that enterprise they have no money tree.
    Then work out from there.

  9. 132andBush

    Agree with Beachcomber, Steve.
    The media in general are complicit and I’ll cite CAGW as an example. They see it for the world scale wealth redistribution scheme it is and because they consider themselves the “anointed”, with an overt loathing of the west they shove it down our throats at every opportunity.

    The populace is the group in the apathetic torpor.

  10. But what is it that causes Socialism to rise? I always thought that Socialism arose because of poverty and iniquity, people seeking a ‘Fair Go’ as Labor would have it. Or at least that was the perceived catalyst.

    Yet we live in the most prosperous times ever and the poorest of today’s world (Western world) would be considered wealthy in days gone by. So why the urge for self-destruction?

  11. Bruce of Newcastle

    Here’s one for Steve. I especially like the second headline!

    A Laffer Curve the Media Can’t Hit (Steven Hayward, Powerline)

    Keynesianism, like socialism which it goes with, has failed over and over, but if you actually say this you are called a heretic!

  12. Iampeter

    I would be placated to some extent if everyone before they waded in on the need for more regulation and re-distribution first explicitly stated that of course, free market capitalism is the only way to manage an economy

    Yet you just posted approvingly things like:

    China cheats by subsidizing the exports of government-owned “national champions” to crush its free market competitors and dominate global markets.

    So it’s not even clear that YOU believe that capitalism is the only way to manage an economy.
    Tell us again who is it really that is, “beyond ignorance and beyond stupidity?”

  13. Diogenes

    Yet we live in the most prosperous times ever and the poorest of today’s world (Western world) would be considered wealthy in days gone by. So why the urge for self-destruction?

    Envy. We have a lady across the street, mid 40s, who has been on a DSP for the last 6 years. She has been paid to go to TAFE to do art courses, her 22 year old ‘musician’ son (never worked since leaving school, was on DSP for depression for 2 years, and wouldn’t even mow the lawn in case it ‘damaged’ his hands. Her 80 year old neighbours are getting a very small (@ $5 per week, but it gives them access to discounts & other benefits) part pension, and are mostly living on the proceeds of their investments, and money put aside after they downsized.

    The bludger was whingeing to Mrs D that it wasn’t ‘fair’, that her neighbours could get a gardener/handyman in every week to do yard work and perform maintenance.

  14. Envy

    But there are so many who are quite well off wanting Socialism.

  15. Alan

    “standard issue modern leftist” 🙂 … Maybe it is “a cult of some kind”.
    Populated by those most prone to “Feelz before Realz”? Baa?
    Bemused absolutely. Yet even “complete breakdown” is seemingly not enough.
    Failure of this magnitude must occur by dystopian design.

  16. Has anyone heard the word ‘socialistic’? Leftie friends of mine use this word to describe their views. They seem to be too squeamish to say socialism. ‘Socialistic’ seems to imply somewhat socialism, or something. Then they get angry when you try and get them to define this without using the ‘s’ word.

  17. Entropy

    But there are so many who are quite well off wanting Socialism

    There is always someone smarter/fitter/better looking/ richer than the next person.
    But socialism is also seen as a great way to show you care by getting someone else to do and pay for the caring.

  18. Entropy

    a lot of “socialists” are really just saying that they would like to have government play a more active role in providing various benefits to workers and the poor, along with additional environmental protection.

    It is no accident that when the communists in the late eighties/early nineties imploded they baled into environmental movements. See Rhiannon, Lee for an example.

  19. Phill

    Best explanation I ever found….

  20. Percy Popinjay

    Socialism is communism in a pair of clown shoes.

    There is a less than zero chance that we’ll be able to reverse this trend.

    The “education system” churning out multiple generations of appallingly ignorant illiterate innumerate anti-scientific ahistorical imbeciles is the sole reason.

    Those who nothing of history are condemned to relive it, hence the appeal of socialism.

  21. Tel

    There’s a high level definition of Socialism that doesn’t require fine details and can consistently be applied. If government has unlimited power and government claims that it is necessary to sacrifice some individuals for the “common good” then you are looking as some form of socialism. That is to say, government has both the power to act in this way, and the self-justification to do so.

    On the other hand, if government power is limited and they are either unwilling or unable to sacrifice individuals for the “common good” then you have at least some type of liberty there.

    After that we can argue over details, and how much of each is happening (usually we see a mix of the two). For example, forcibly taking from the rich and giving to the poor means some part of the wealthy person’s life has been sacrificed but presumably not their entire life. On the other hand, if the wealthy person voluntarily gave to charity then there is no conflict so government power is not deployed in that situation. The issue only comes into question when the individual wants to do one thing and it gets decided “for the common good” that this individual should do a different thing.

    Generally speaking, people using “common good” as a justification, will never be able to explain how they know, because you cannot ask questions to “society” and get an answer, any better than you can ask questions to “God” and get an answer. Hence, what really happens in Socialism is you get a kind of Feudal fiefdom like North Korea where some powerful person takes control and a social hierarchy gets build under that … so there’s many structural variations on the way that hierarchy fits together: Fascism, Corporatism, Communism, etc. Other common features of Socialism are the various weaponized emotions used as control mechanisms:

    * Weaponized politeness becomes political correctness, silence dissenting voices, blasphemy laws, etc.
    * Weaponized envy becomes Marxism, constant demands for more equality, soak the rich, etc.
    * Weaponized compassion becomes the welfare state … which ultimately feeds on itself by trapping one group of people in poverty and trapping another group in the rat race treadmill of working to get ahead only to die of a thousand cuts.
    * Weaponized fraternity becomes identity politics … classic divide and conquer disguised as helping the underprivileged but really it becomes the victim totem pole and central planning of who gets what privilege.

  22. Tel

    The “education system” churning out multiple generations of appallingly ignorant illiterate innumerate anti-scientific ahistorical imbeciles is the sole reason.

    There’s unmistakable signs of the Long March through the institutions and education is part of that, but it’s in other institutions as well. Hard to say where it started from, probably tertiary humanities departments, then journalism, then corporate HR. Anyway, it’s gotten into a lot of stuff, also popular culture, etc. Remember that our schools were designed by the Prussian state in the 18th century for the purpose of turning out more soldiers … they have simply been redeployed by modern cultural marxists for the purpose of making their political activists which then can use to break down the traditional imperial states.

  23. Bruce of Newcastle

    The “education system” churning out multiple generations of appallingly ignorant illiterate innumerate anti-scientific ahistorical imbeciles is the sole reason.

    Here’s another one.

    Professor accused of ‘hostile learning environment’ for assigning male authors (31 May, via BCF)

    A 22-year old female University of Utah student reported her business professor to campus administrators for, among other things, assigning too many historical texts written by influential male economists of the past.

    “I understand the importance of studying the work of those before us and the importance of context,” wrote the student in a complaint to the university’s bias reporting system, where she labeled the professor’s transgressions “derogatory,” “degrading,” and “intimidating,” thereby causing a “hostile learning environment.”

    Because there are just so many female economists of the level of Hayek and Say.

  24. Lilliana

    The “education system” churning out multiple generations of appallingly ignorant illiterate innumerate anti-scientific ahistorical imbeciles is the sole reason.

    Sums up the situation perfectly. Cultural Marxists, seeing that revolution didn’t work, are playing the long game. It’s death by a thousand cuts.

  25. Muddy

    People WANT to be deluded. They seek it, and when found, embrace it.
    Why? What individual needs are being met when the functionality of a belief system is irrelevant to the believers?
    Serious question.

  26. Roger

    The “education system” churning out multiple generations of appallingly ignorant illiterate innumerate anti-scientific ahistorical imbeciles is the sole reason.

    Liberty Quote

    One of the most important features of the later stages of capitalist civilization is the vigorous expansion of the educational apparatus and particularly of the facilities for higher education.

    — Joseph Schumpeter

    The revolutionary ‘Generation of ’68’ seized the opportunity afforded by this expansion to capture a foothold in higher education and expanded their influence on society from there.

    The fall of Communism in eastern Europe barely checked their progress.

  27. Muddy

    Education v. Schooling.
    They are NOT the same.
    See Taylor Gatto et. al.

  28. Dr Fred Lenin

    I noticed in the Euro elections thatv in Germany the globalists did well in WestvGermany and the right wing anti globalists did well in East Germanty,that of core would ave nothing to do ith the fact that East Germans was ruled by incompatent socialist puppets of the Soviet fascist communists ,who were also socialist globalists ,their paty song was the Internationale wasnt it ? Workers of the World zunite and all that crap . Bet you there are lots of Venezulans bitterly regrettting letting the socialist fascist globalists tke power

  29. Cynic of Ayr

    Personally, I don’t believe that socialism is any of those things.
    Socialism is nothing more than some people without power trying to convince the people with power (voting power) to give them absolute power.
    Once this is achieved, those with the now government power given to them by those with the voting power, proceed to enrich themselves enormously at the expense of those with the voting power.
    Why do not those with voting power correct the situation? Because, by that time, the voting power has been removed by government power.
    I can’t think of any socialist leader of government who is poor. Dead, maybe, but not poor.

  30. JB of Sydney/Shanghai

    “To get rich is glorious” a quote by Deng Xiaoping, after the end of the Cultural Revolution

    Not much of the socialist rubbish which is so popular in Australia to be seen in China.

    Too much enthusiasm for the words of Deng Xiaoping.

  31. Muddy

    Here’s a strategy:
    Start a political party (or online movement) that not only embraces socialist philosophies, but expands them to an absurd degree. Push the envelope. Make the foundational claim that ‘average’ socialism is not enough; that traditional socialism is too conservative, and those who advocate it are not trying hard enough (they’re dinosaurs).
    Advocate (for example): voting rights for ten year olds (if they can have their gender ‘reassigned’ at that age, surely they deserve to vote?) … What else?

  32. Mark M

    A LAFFER CURVE THE MEDIA CAN’T HIT
    The White House has announced that President Trump will award the Presidential Medal of Freedom to Arthur Laffer, one of the principal pioneers of supply-side economics.

    “The so-called “mainstream” of the economics profession will never forgive Laffer (and his precursors and collaborators such as Robert Mundell and Jude Wanniski) for the temerity of suggesting that maybe cutting taxes is a good idea, and moreover, for being persuasive about it.”

    https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2019/06/a-laffer-curve-the-media-cant-hit.php

  33. Muddy

    Thanks, Bruce. I just watched a few selected snippets of that. She’s an engaging speaker, and I think is very much onto something about the intersection of culture and politics.

  34. max

    “People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both.”
    Benjamin Franklin

    Socialism is belief that Government can protect you from:

    Responsibility
    Natural disasters
    Competitions
    Help you with sickness old age

    Basically to look after you from cradle to grave

  35. Percy Popinjay

    “To get rich is glorious” a quote by Deng Xiaoping

    Another interesting comment from the same apparatchik:

    “It doesn’t matter if a cat is black or white, as long as it catches mice.”

    Ah, those inscrutable orientals.

  36. Percy Popinjay

    aaaarrrggh!

    Those who know nothing of history are condemned to relive it, FFS.

  37. Fang

    And lefty’s don’t understand why Americas gun culture is so strong! They, in the long march through the institutions, has to at some point confront the consertives/right that don’t want big goverment (Socialist/Marxist) controlling their lives!
    The American experiment gives thoses individuals some power to defend them selves from tyranny! And anyone who saids that the USA will never have a tyrannical government, has rocks in their heads! (Democrats?)
    The second amendment has and will keep America, as the last hold out of democracy in Western World.

  38. karabar

    The problem is that memories are short.
    If your mate in New Zealand is less that 40, he would not remember that day in 1984 when David Lange awoke to realise that he had won election, but simultaneously the contry’s credit card had been cancelled.
    Several years of “think big” with government striding over individual with heaps of borrowed money had brought the entire nation to its knees.
    Fortunately, Roger Douglas had the courage and the stamina, and the country had a sufficiently small and flexible population, that Rogernomics was able to get the national train back on the rails.
    You could suggest to your mate that he read some history from those times, starting with “Unfinished Business” (https://www.goodreads.com/author/list/327884.Roger_Douglas) and then continuing with the other 57 books that Douglas authored.

  39. Dr Fred Lenin

    Socialism you dont elevate the lowest group ,you drag the upper group down to the level o the lowest its much easier ,you dont need ability to do that so socialits can do it as they always lack ability .
    Look at Venezuela as thy dragand starve the middle class down to starving oeasant level where are the Australian communists who wanted to invite chavez here to show our ommos how to do it traitors , collaborators ,filth .

  40. Iampeter

    Envy
    But there are so many who are quite well off wanting Socialism.

    Yea, it’s not envy. It’s altruism.
    So many well off and intelligent people support socialism because they believe that self sacrifice is the moral.
    Until people realize that self interest is moral, socialism will continue to be attempted.

    But to start arguing for self interest as the moral, requires going against two thousand years of Christian morality. Even atheists aren’t prepared to do that.

    So, socialism isn’t going anywhere.

  41. duncanm

    Iampeter
    #3033501, posted on June 3, 2019 at 4:36 pm
    So many well off and intelligent people support socialism because they believe that self sacrifice is the moral.

    bullshit. They don’t believe they will have to sacrifice anything.

    Sacrificing is for others.

  42. “Personals” Advertisement in the Pravda Times
    Socialist Lady with knife & fork would like to meet capitalist Gentleman with roast beef

  43. Rob MW

    Western democracies slide into Socialism is as inventible as night follows day. Politicians base electoral platforms and policy are targeted at accumulating the most votes and when they’ve run out of conventional governance ideas they shift to unconventional ideas by targeting single issue social justice shrills for electoral support which always shifts what would otherwise be the center to the left which, over time, creates a new political center, and on it gradually goes. The vision of Democracy, lacking in Common Law through political adultery, is at its very core, the foundation stone that eventually ends in Socialism. Each election is simply a jump to the left.

    The only way back from Socialism is when there’s nothing left on the shelves.

  44. Nob

    Try again:

    CHINA TODAY. TOMORROW, THE WORLD?
    In China’s shiny new ‘Smart Cities’, citizens can scarcely cross the road or buy an orange without the Party knowing, and posting a satirical online comment about President Xi’s Winnie-the-Pooh-like features can land you in jail.
    A generation after the tanks rolled into Tiananmen Square, China’s autocratic leaders are using powerful new technologies to create the largest and most effective surveillance state the world has ever seen.
    This is a journey into a land where Big Brother has acquired a whole new set of toys with which to control and cajole — ‘harmonise’ — the masses. It is also a warning against Western complacency. Beijing is already finding eager buyers for its ‘Operating System for Dictators’ — in Africa and Asia, Russia and the Middle East. And with China’s corporate giants — all ultimately under Party control — being offered a place at the heart of Europe’s vital infrastructure, it is time we paid attention.

    https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B07RFS5KBJ/ref=rdr_kindle_ext_tmb

  45. Muddy

    Using history to argue against socialism is pointless, given that history has been discredited, and is now only an anvil on which to hammer selected ideals.

  46. max

    It remained for someone to organize the dream of socialism and to present it in logical and cogent form. The man who first and most successfully performed this task predates the Christ by some 400 years.

    It is to Plato we must look for the first and most profound delineation of the collectivist dream.

    His dialogues are a treasure of amusing egg-headedness. But his “Republic,” the very core of his aim and purpose in life, sums up the man. Of this work Will Durant in his “Story of Philosophy” says,

    Here we shall find his metaphysics, his theology, his ethics, his psychology, his pedagogy, his politics, his theory of art. Here we shall find problems reeking with modernity and contemporary savor: communism and socialism, feminism and birth-control and eugenics, Nietzschean problems of morality and aristocracy, Rousseauian problems of return to nature and libertarian education, Bergsonian élan vital and Freudian psychoanalysis—everything is here.

    Emerson, in his essay on Plato, gives the warmest praise. “Plato is philosophy, and philosophy Plato.” He even borrows the words of Omar in praise of the Koran and says of Plato’s “Republic,” “Burn the libraries, for their value is in this book.”

    He divides all of humanity into three classes—the gold, the silver and the brass.

    The brass are those who are motivated by desire. And desire, says the Greek sage, is seated in the loins. Men of brass are those who seek to satisfy themselves with money and with manufacture. These are the least useful personages in society, he declares,

    Men of silver, Plato says, are motivated not so much by lust and desire as by emotion. Their center is in the heart, their medium is blood. These men care not what they fight for, because what they want is victory. They are unburdened with scruples. They make the finest soldiers. The warrior class is far above the merchant class in Plato’s book. And here he sets the stage for all recorded history thus far which in the main has been a recitation of wars and conquests, with moral certainty awarded to the strongest troops.
    And then the men of gold. These are rare, says Plato, and all the more valuable because of scarcity. These are the intellects, the men of mind and genius; in short, these are the philosophers.

    A government by aristocrats is what Plato wants. And this, he says, is the true republic. Alexander Hamilton thought so, too, at the founding of this nation. But though all the American founding fathers were not convinced of these philosophic claims to political ascendency, it is doubtless true that most of them were convinced, as was this great Greek, that democracy is a snare and a delusion.
    We see in Plato the emergence of the socialist super-state, albeit run by gentle and kindly men of wisdom.

    https://fee.org/resources/this-bread-is-mine/#link-11

  47. Iampeter

    It is to Plato we must look for the first and most profound delineation of the collectivist dream.

    Yes, all bad ideas in the West originate with Plato, but that includes Christianity.
    Plato’s mysticism gave us Christianity and Christian altruism gave us communism.

    We can forgive Plato since he was one of the first to use his brain to figure anything out, but there can be no such forgiveness for modern men.

    For example, there is no excuse for not being able to see the obvious connections between religion and communism. Only the immorality of evasion and dishonesty can explain it.

  48. Notafan

    Were Marx and Engels Christians?

  49. Bruce

    Socialism, like its current ‘Best Friend Forever’, Islam, is a DEATH CULT.

    The standard response is that “true” socialism has never been tried.

    Well, actually it has. There was the German experiment wit “national’ socialism and the “bigger” project undertaken by their soviet “international socialist” cousins.

    Cambodia; 1975 to 1979 is a stellar example. See also: Albania; 1944 to 1985ish.

    These examples, of course, do not fit the “narrative” / “standard true view” of the self-declared “opinion shapers” of their LSM and the “chattering class”, thus they are to be “memory-holed” or rewritten..

  50. Tel

    Yes, all bad ideas in the West originate with Plato, but that includes Christianity.
    Plato’s mysticism gave us Christianity and Christian altruism gave us communism.

    Gosh! I never knew that Christ was Greek. That explains his obsession with lamb.

  51. max

    Arthur E. Morgan has done a study (“How Inca Socialism Came to North America,” published in 1946) in which he conjectures that socialism flowered first in Peru, and that Raphael Hythloday, the leading figure of More’s “Utopia,” was actually a real person and not a fictional character. According to Morgan, Raphael’s Utopia was in fact Peru and the story related to More an honest recitation of fact. Morgan suggests that the Incas discovered socialism, transmitted it to Raphael, who transmitted it to More, who transmitted it to many, including Edward Bellamy, whose romance is our next point of reference. That there is similarity between the Inca civilization, More’s “Utopia” and other collectivist ideas to follow is unquestioned. It is also true that the Incas’ Peruvian political format, which developed between the years 1100 and 1540 in South America, is similar to Plato’s conception.

    We do not know from where the Inca rulers came. We only know that a system of absolute socialism was established which has been listed by Louis Baudin and Lewis Spence as being a socialist masterpiece. Baudin gives us “L’Empire Socialiste des Inka,” and Spence in his “Myths of Mexico and Peru” shows us the connection between the Platonic master plan and the Peruvian reality.

    “The Inca was the direct representative of the sun upon earth” (man of gold?), “the head of a socio-religious edifice intricate and highly organized. This colossal bureaucracy had ramifications into the very homes of the people. The Inca was represented in the provinces by governors of the blood royal. Officials were placed above ten thousand families, a thousand families, and even ten families, upon the principle that the rays of the sun enter everywhere, and therefore the light of the Inca must penetrate to every comer of the empire.” (Could these blood-royal princes be men of silver?)

    “There was no such thing as personal freedom. Every man, woman and child was numbered, branded, and under surveillance as much as were the llamas in the royal herds. Individual effort or enterprise was unheard of. Some writers have stated that a system of state socialism obtained in Peru. If so, then state surveillance in Central Russia might also be branded as socialism.” (!!)

    “A man’s life was planned for him by the authorities from the age of five years and even the woman whom he was to marry was selected for him by the government officials. The age at which the people should marry was fixed at not earlier than twenty-four years for a man and eighteen for a woman. Colored ribbons worn around the head indicated the place of a person’s birth or the province to which he belonged.”

    There are parallels between the Incas’ savagely maintained equality and Plato’s “Republic,” but who wishes to attest that the Inca people are ancient Greeks or Egyptians who, knowing Platonic theory, threaded their way across the misty fastness of a possible Atlantis to Peru, there to act out the theory? It is possible, of course. But it is at least as possible and surely more believable that socialism is one of these persistent myth forms such as creation myths, hero myths, rain and thunder myths, etc., which seem to bear such close resemblance to each other, and yet spring from totally dissimilar soils to blossom and flourish amid people entirely unrelated and disassociated.

    https://fee.org/resources/this-bread-is-mine/#link-12

  52. max

    mayday mayday, this bad Christians did in in South America too.

Comments are closed.