Posts in "Socialism"

Eric Sharp. ETF's picture
By Eric Sharp at 10:53AM

Lessons From the Ever-Independent Orwell

Orwell BBC

It is an uncommonly known fact that Eric Blair, better known by the pen name of George Orwell, was a socialist. This is seems astonishing in light of his extensive literature that seems to tear apart the myth of the socialist paradise.

But you see that is precisely the point -- though a socialist, Orwell never hesitated to burn bridges if he thought that his movement was going astray. His most famous works, Animal Farm and 1984, are his refutations of what he called the "stupid cult of Russia" and totalitarian socialism. As a democratic-socialist, Orwell detested the Marxist Bolsheviks, and the rest of the "cult of Russia" and the larger part of the left during his time detested him. History has shown Orwell to be quite correct, and his opponents "led into the Marsh" most ironically by Lenin himself.

So what is the point? What bearing does this have for the modern Liberty movement? Orwell teaches us an important lesson about individualism and mass movements. We should never be afraid to speak truth to power -- even at the risk of offending and enraging our friends and allies.


Read more here
Zak Slayback's picture
By Zak Slayback at 8:49AM

What do Tetris and Communism have in common? Everything. Kind of.

I recently stumbled across one of the greatest pieces of creative genius on YouTube that I've ever seen. Ever.

The British Artists Dan Woods and Donald Newholm, "Pig With The Face of a Boy" are collectively known as "the world's best neo-post-post-music hall anti-folk band." And by George, they are. 


Read more here
Seth Mann's picture
By Seth Mann at 8:10PM

"Resist Socialist Slavery"

While driving today I passed an older man who was wearing a veteran hat holding up a sign that said "RESIST SOCIALIST SLAVERY" in front of a jewelry store which has a Gadsen Flag flying from its flagpole.

I snapped a picture of the scene with my iPhone. Here it is:

resistsocialistslavery

Elliot Engstrom's picture
By Elliot Engstrom at 6:13AM

Is there a positive side to communitarianism?

I have a new article at Rethinking the State -- which now has several new authors including Nathan Fox-Helser, Andrew Butler, and Paul Monroe -- about the positive aspects of communitarian systems.  I know that some people at YAL are pretty hardcore individualists and/or Objectivists, so I'd love to hear your take on the idea.  I write:

...I have to admit that one of the key flaws I see in communitarian political philosophies is not so much the non-cohesive nature of the doctrines themselves, but rather the level at which they are prescribed.  If communitarianism was only applied at the local level, could it really survive without an element of voluntarism?  I feel that capitalist leaning nation-states are begging the question in saying that ideologies like socialism don't work, because they are assuming that they must be applied at the nation-state level.

This involves the idea that the strictness of economic laws tends to lessen as they move further away from large-scale application, so anti-communitarian claims like the lack of an adequate price mechanism and lack of adequate information tends to become less of a problem for local communities because the nature of economic communication changes as the distance between actors closes.  It also involves the idea put forth by such philosophers as David Hume that human beings are naturally sociable creatures, and a communitarian system at the local level would be able to use this sociability to its advantage.

Read the rest here.

Matt Cockerill's picture
By Matt Cockerill at 5:22PM

Re: Capitalism Without Guilt

Mikayla, I think libertarians justifiably have many disagreements with Ayn Rand. (her famous denunciation of us as "ippes of de racht") was particularly short-sighted) However, her principled argument that -- despite the common cry of American humanities professors -- socialism wasn't "too good for people" but rather, people were "too good for socialism" is the sort of argument we have to take to to our fellow young people.

Let's unapologetically reject the notion of universal health care's humanitarianism. After all, can it really be said that Barack Obama's spending of other people's money is"compassionate"? Money acquired, no less, on the threat of violence?

Authentic generosity has nothing to do with the IRS. It involves individuals voluntarily sacrificing some of their wealth to help other individuals. This is the sort of behavior we need to encourage, rather than promoting more government programs.  In addition to the immorality  of initiatory violence and the economic consequences of massive state interventions, state programs like "health care reform" discourage personal altruism. After all, if somebody's already being paid  to help the government fulfill its "duty" to "care" for us from cradle to grave, why should he personally help?

Elliot Engstrom's picture
By Elliot Engstrom at 3:46PM

Statism ≠ Socialism

More often than I can even remember, I have heard Barack Obama and his policies referred to as socialist.  This demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of what we are up against in terms of attempting to reform our current government.  We do not live in a socialist country -- we live in a statist one.  Obama is not pushing for equality across the board, he is pushing for centralization of power in the hands of the state, via large proxi corporations to maintain the guise of "free market capitalism."  While this has some similarity with socialist ideals, they are not the same thing (not to mention that referring to Obama as a "socialist" is an ad hominem attack, and would be the equivalent of referring to a libertarian as an "anarchist" without putting forth an argument.)

From Dictionary.com:

Socialism - a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.

Statism - the principle or policy of concentrating extensive economic, political, and related controls in the state at the cost of individual liberty.

Which one sounds more like our Barack Obama to you?


Read more here
Jihan Huq's picture
By Jihan Huq at 9:31PM

Chavez Says Military to Control Prices

.Martial law anyone?

Venezuela's uber socialist president, Hugo Chavez, has said that the Venezuelan military will control consumer prices. Since the Venezuelan currency has devalued, Chavez said, "I want the national guard in the streets, with the people, to fight speculation." He event went further and called pre-pricing a form of robbery.

Chavez has encouraged citizens to publically renounce businesses which increase their prices and threatened to appropriate businesses that do. The government would transfer the businesses to the workers, Chavez said. He is running for reelection this year.

This is what happens when a president/dictator/elected leader does not understand the fundamentals of the economy (not to mention liberty).  Unfortunately, I don't think we are too far behind.

Aaron Ricks's picture
By Aaron Ricks at 3:51PM

Ron Paul on Larry King Tonight!

Tune into Larry King on CNN tonight at 9 pm ET for a health care reform debate. Ron Paul will be squaring off against the congressman with what seems to have dozens of marbles jammed in his mouth, the loveable Barney Frank.

This should be a wonderful show.

health

Bonnie Kristian's picture
By Bonnie Kristian at 7:21AM

Some Anti-War Comments from the Left...the Far Left

Before everyone becomes concerned about my sources, yes, I am aware that I am quoting an article from the World Socialist Web Site, which is "Published by the International Committee of the Fourth International (ICFI)."  However, I've run across stuff from these guys repeatedly on Twitter, and though I severely disagree with their economic plans, they seem to be pretty committed to principled opposition to war. 

Today there's a great article on Obama's continuation of the aggression of his predecessor, dubbed an expression of the "Obama Doctrine":

The Obama doctrine incorporates all of the essentials of the Bush doctrine—preemptive war and the assertion of the right of the United States, as the world’s “sole military superpower,” to launch military aggression unilaterally as it sees fit. Obama’s contribution is to argue openly for the junking of existing international rules of war and the recognition of what was previously defined as aggressive war as a legitimate instrument of foreign policy....

“Peace requires responsibility,” said Obama. “Peace requires sacrifice.” In short, peace requires war, whether those forced to die and to pay for it like it or not.

Read the rest of this analysis here.  Though the final paragraph ends with a call for opposition to capitalism, the persistent holding of Obama's feet to the fire where public opinion, his campaign promises, and even basic honesty are concerned make this well worth the read.

Seth Mann's picture
By Seth Mann at 1:55PM

Howard Dean: Debate between Capitalism and Socialism Is Over

This is yet another example of how much the liberty movement must do to educate the blind.

Thanks to both Breitbart.tv and Naked Empire News, here's a nice little video of Howard Dean in Paris, France on April 5, 2009.  He rightly declares capitalism to be part of human nature (the evil side no doubt) and then says the other side is communitarianism.  He goes on to elucidate the virtues of "The Permanent Campaign" both in politics and in terms of policy.  He ends with the hopeful message of America becoming more like the "European model."  YeeeeeeeeeeeeHaaaaaaaaaaaaaw!