Progressives, Wheels And Darwin
Why isn't there a single example of a successful 'People's Paradise'? How is it that the best of intentioned revolutionaries was never able to produce a functional society? Why is it that societies that espouse economic equality and predicated on well meaning ideals, either secular or religious, have proved to be abject failures?
Socialists mistakenly believe that a collective 'unity' of beliefs, thoughts and ideologies empower a society. Their strength, they believe, are in the numbers of those who share their ideologies. Socialists believe that they have every right to design a society based on what they believe is in the best interest of that society. They also believe that an unwillingness to conform to their ideals, poses a threat, and quite possibly, a danger.
Capitalism, as Dr Sanity points out, is predicated on the diversity of beliefs, thoughts and ideologies.
For example, the socialist state takes a dim view of anyone or group that might demand lower taxes, changes in the state welfare benefits, or demands any kind of accountability, because less of burden on the individual and less control of the individual by the state, might empower that individual. In the socialist state, any kind of individualism and real self expression, empowered or otherwise, represents a threat to the state.
Last year, millions of Frenchmen turned out to protest an employers right to fire them from their jobs- even if their job performance was sub par. They demanded that the French government protect them from being held accountable to their employers. There are business owners in France that are afraid to initiate the complex procedures for firing employees, out the fear of retribution and violence.
Despite the leftist of stated disdain for capitalism and materialism, we have noted that
For today’s leftist, it is about ‘the color of one’s skin’ and not the ‘content of character. It is about image and not substance. The deliberate obfuscation continues and the blurring of reality continues. As the left indicts America as self absorbed and drunk with materialistic inclinations, they ignore yet another truth
...the most self absorbed and materialistic regimes are the leaders of the most tyrannical regimes in Africa and the Arab world, where greed, corruption, excess and deceit are the defining adjectives of those regimes. Those levels of greed, excess, corruption and self serving attitudes rival the most fanatical religious extremists in their tenacious expressions by citizens of all strata in those countries- and these are the leaders the left reveres.
Of course, progressives naturally see themselves as forward thinking. They believe their way of viewing the world is an improvement over the 'old way'- hard work for greater personal gain, for example.
(it is interesting to note how 'progressives' have aligned themselves with Hollywood- the most narcissistic and self centered group of people on the planet. They are also among the most removed from the real world, believing themselves to be a kind of aristocracy, entitled to material things others would have to pay for. There is much truth to the old saying. 'You are known by the company you keep.' The 'progressives' have made clear their attachment to the phony aristocracy of Hollywood trumps the relationship they might have with the rest of us, 'the little people.')
Of course, the 'progressives' cannot and will not acknowledge the truth that the greatest philosophers and thinkers were free to think and present their cases to the population. It is the progressives, that want to present their own versions of history, religion and ideologies, without having to explain or defend themselves. Disagree with them and the wrath of the State will come down on you.
It is clear that many 'progressives' are actually regressive. The 'my way or the highway' kind of thinking is devolutionary, as if any and all disagreements are always invalid. The vitriol and visceral hatred of the current administration is a good example. No difference of opinion will be tolerated. Disagree and the well oiled machine of personal destruction comes out. The shameful display of that truth was evident during the confirmation hearings of Samuel Alito.
Tens, if not hundreds of millions have died because of 'My way or the highway' ideologies. Disagree with the powers that be or want to be, and there are calls of, 'Death to…! Disagree loud enough and you are marked for death. We all got a taste of that as the cartoon riots unfolded. That was a clear case of 'my way or the highway' unleashed on democratic societies.
'My way or the highway' is a nothing more than a regression to a more barbaric time, when disputes, disagreements and different ideas were settled only when blood was spilled. That was an earlier incarnation of 'my way or the highway.'
Of course, mankind evolved and political expression advanced when societies came to tolerate those with different ideas and beliefs. We advanced because we allowed each of us the freedom the opportunity to achieve whatever it was we were capable of in any endeavor we chose. No one told us what to do, what to think or what to invent. In free societies, possibilities were open to all, irrespective of their political persuasion.
The Soviets produced engineers by the millions. They built the world's largest hotel, the Rossiya, in Moscow, meant to be showcase of Soviet superiority. When you get up close and inside, it is hard to miss the walls that are crooked and floors that are uneven. It is true the Russians led early on in the space race. It is also true that many tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, died over the years because money that was spent on the space race was diverted from providing food to Soviet citizens. That malaise infected Communist eastern Europe. Once a net exporter of grain, Poland reached a point where she could barely feed herself. To put that in perspective, at one time, Poland grew more grain than France or Canada.
The Judeo-Christian ethic is just that- an ethic, an ideology that was to serve as the basis and foundation upon which a free nation might be built. The Judeo-Christian ethic is not an endorsement of religion- it is an endorsement of ideas, not the least of which is the validity and importance of freedom. That Judeo-Christian ethic serves as a definition of freedom. That ideas contained in those ethics have come to define theg boundaries of our freedom and our obligations to out society. We have been blessed with freedom and democracy as a way of life.
It is also true that free societies not only exist, but they prosper and progress as well. If there were no free societies and democracies, our world would look exactly like much of the Islamic world today- torn apart by internal strife and political mayhem, with almost a billion people languishing in a netherworld, where their only purpose is to serve the needs and whims of a regime that cares nothing for them and attaches no value to their life.
For the most part, progressives do not want to acknowledge that there is not a single example of a regimes they have endorsed that has not resorted to murder, oppression and repression. There are some regimes are authoritarian, caring only about controlling behavior. There are other regimes are totalitarian, seeking to control not only behavior, but thought as well. The only regime ever supported by the left (only to be later abandoned) that made a success of itself was Israel.
Real freedom represents the highest political and ethical expression and aspirations of the human condition.
After witnessing the spectacular and bloody imposition and failures of socialism, one can only conclude that ideology has has proved to be a monumental failure on the scale of political evolution. Socialism cannot be made to adapt to the real world environment that places freedom atop the evolutionary that scale, because socialism refuses to adapt and acknowledge that people are best served when free to choose for themselves.
Far too many progressives have not adapted to the reality that accelerating freedom is the destiny of mankind. We are meant to be free choose, free to believe, and free to express themselves in any way they see fit, free of interference.
Far too many progressives are still debating the merits of the wheel.