Violent Socialists

But I repeat myself.  Spending most of the article sarching in vain for a coherent thought, the author eventually slips in her take on the UK riots;

The failure of the markets goes hand in hand with human blight. Meanwhile, the view is gaining ground that social democracy, with its safety nets, its costly education and health care for all, is unsustainable in the bleak times ahead. The reality is that it is the only solution. After the Great Crash, Britain recalibrated, for a time. Income differentials fell, the welfare state was born and skills and growth increased.

Damn those pesky income differentials– they did it!  She had to hide her editorial in ~1,000 words of mish-mash.  That one paragraph would have sufficed.  See; that their socialist democracy failed to crush productivity overnight in the first half of the 20th century is proof that it is good and that we need much more.

This demonstrates a couple of my old catch phrases;
The socialists are angry because the socialists in power aren’t socialist enough.
When socialism fails, freedom is to blame, and the answer is more socialism.

When the Teaparty holds a peaceful rally, advocating liberty and denouncing tyranny, leaving the rally site cleaner than they found it, they are guilty of inciting violence.  When socialists riot, loot and burn, calling for revolution, it is because of the income differential– we should listen to them because they represent our future.

Meanwhile in the U.S., our Republican Party leaders, thinking themselves the oh-so-much-more-clever-than-thou pragmatists, are busy trying to figure out what it is they should pretend to believe during the upcoming election season, figuring out how to please this group, gingerly, without overly offending that group, taking polls, doing market analysis, organizing think tanks and hiring image consultants (in other words; there isn’t a shred of seriousness or principle amongst the whole lot of them).


5 thoughts on “Violent Socialists

  1. Wait’ll the socialist’s clients find out that their enablers REALLY HAVE run out of other people’s money.

  2. That’s pretty much what’s going on, but they haven’t fully realized it yet. Right now they’re taking to the streets over miniscule cuts, or in some cases mere reductions in the rate of growth. Same as in Madison, WI early this year. Wait’ll the cuts actually get real. If they’re burning and looting now, what will the communists do then?

    “Top Down, Bottom Up, Inside Out.” That’s the gig. They’ve been talking about it for years, and all that time we were stupid enough to think it was about compassion for the less fortunate.

  3. Let’s look at Merrie Olde Englande. After the Great Crash, some 80 years ago, England was still supported by the economic rape of it’s Colonies, so it could experiment with Socialism and not really pay a price. Thirty years later, in the late ’50s, most of the Colony Money was gone, and England, having also just borne the huge cost of a war for it’s survival, went into a deep recession/depression (I lived there during this time). When the post-war boom finally arrived for England, some 25 years after the end of WW2, they used the boom money, not to pay down their debt, but to enact more Socialism. They are paying the price for that now. The riots are a mere reflection of history. Somewhere over there they must have a statue with an inscription, “Give us your tired, your poor, your huddled masses, AND WE’LL KEEP THEM THAT WAY WITH OUR SOCIAL STRUCTURE.”


    …and use them as our army– pawns in our fight for “social justice”.

    Yeah; gotta get that “income differential” down. Say; weren’t the “Levelers” of the mid 1600s saying the same thing during the British Civil War? So over there they have the caste system, and then they have democratic socialism. That’s about it, isn’t it? Do any of them ever talk about liberty as a possible alternative, or do they not know what it means? If you try to talk about it, do they stick their fingers in their ears and shout, “La la la la la…I can’t hear you! La la la la…”?

  5. “The failure of the markets”

    The markets only fail AFTER the big, clumsy, arrogant thumb of the state mashes down on the scale, imposing a socialist “market failure”.

Comments are closed.