Why Socialism Cannot Succeed

Does Socialism work? To find out the answer to this question, all we have to do is visit the nearest Native American reservation. While it is fashionable to blame high unemployMent rates, economic sTAGnation and ill-health on the effects of being a conquered peoples, I maintain that it is due to Native peoples adherence to the socialistic tribal structure, both culturally and economically.

Why Socialism Cannot Succeed

Why Socialism Cannot Succeed

---

Why Socialism Cannot Succeed

Why Socialism Cannot Succeed

I am always amazed with people who advocate socialism as a solution to the problems facing us. I would venture to say that those individuals have never lived or worked in a socialistic society. If they had, they would see that socialism only can work on a very limited and small scale.

In Atlas Shrugged, Ayn Rand tells a story about a motor company in which the credo, "From each according to their ability, to each according to their need", was applied. In this story, it shows how the company deteriorates because people soon learn that the get what they want, they have to prove how needy they are. Each person has to show that "their" need is greater than another's, and those with ability end up working more and more to provide for the "needs" of others. In other words, they were slaves to the "collective".

Aguste Comte, in his Catechisme Positiviste, said that "[the] social point of view cannot tolerate the notion of rights, for such notion rests on individualism. We are born under a load of obligations of every kind, to our predecessors, to our successors, to our contemporaries. After our birth these obligations increase or accumulate, for it is some time before we can return any service.... This ["to live for others"], the definitive formula of human morality, gives a direct sanction exclusively to our instincts of benevolence, the common source of happiness and duty. [Man must serve] Humanity, who we are enTirely."

"The social point of view cannot tolerate the notion of rights." This sentence needs to be burned into our souls.

Altruism also has been defined as, "serving others through placing their interests above one's own."

When the state decides to put altruism into practice the method used is socialism.

I was raised in what Indian's call the "dominant" society of the 1950's and 1960's in a small logging town in Oregon. At one time I asked my father why we did not live by the old reservation around other Indian's and he replied, "I didn't want you kids raised with the belief that somebody owed you something". He also was adamant that we work for whatever luxuries we wanted. At the time, I thought he was just mean and cheap.

The last 16 years I have lived on our small reservation. I have also visited and studied many other reservations in America. Most of them have attempted to use socialism as their economic remedy. If you want to see how socialism works all you have to do is look at Native American reservation's. They still have the highest un-employMent. The poorest health, lowest standard of living and highest death rate pro rated.

What I have observed is people are grateful when some of their needs are being met via a socialistic entity; then people start expecting their needs too be met; and then they start demanding their needs be met. They not only expect what was already given, but demand even more benefits.

Intellectually, socialism sounds wonderful. In reality it creates slaves. Some individuals are slaves by providing the benefits to and for others, and some are slaves to their neediness.

Here is a quote by Frederic Bastiat...... (This was written in the 1840's, about 100 years before FDR. Since the 1940's, most of the problems Mr. Bastiat foresaw have occurred in the U.S.)

"[The socialists declare] that the state owes subsistence, well-being, and education to all its citizens; that it should be generous, charitable, involved in everything, devoted to everybody;...that it should intervene directly to relieve all suffering, satisfy and anticipate all wants, furnish capital to all enterprises, enlightenMent to all minds, balm for all wounds, asylums for all the unfortunate, and even aid to the point of shedding French blood, for all oppressed people on the face of the earth.

Who would not like to see all these benefits flow forth upon the world from the law, as from an inexhaustible source?...But is it possible?...Whence does [the state] draw those resources that it is urged to dispense by way of benefits to individuals? Is it not from the individuals themselves? How, then, can these resources be increased by passing through the hands of a parasitical and voracious intermediary?...

Finally...we shall see the enTire people transformed into petitioners. Landed property, agriculture, industry, commerce, shipping, industrial companies, all will bestir themselves to claim favors from the state. The public treasury will be literally pillaged.

Everyone will have good reasons to prove that legal fraternity should be interpreted in this sense: "Let me have the benefits, and let others pay the costs."

Everyone's effort will be directed toward snatching a scrap of fraternal privilege from the legislature. The suffering classes, although having the greatest claim, will not always have the greatest success." from Journal des Economistes

I have witnessed the harm done by socialism. I have seen it sap the integrity, motivation, honesty, and dreams of individuals. I have seen it create slaves. I have seen its seductive promises induce people to betray family members and friends.

I have seen socialism create the entitlement mentality. I have Watched my sons accept the false premises that we are put on this earth to expend our lives, talents and ability to the "collective".

I have attempted to talk with them. I have tried to explain why they should not accept the fact that they will work over one half of their lives for the benefit of politicians and the government. However, as many of you know who have children, parents do not know much.

It saddens me. I told my oldest son that one of the reasons I sobered up 30 years ago, was because I was not going to be a bum on society or my family. I am not going to sit idly by and let our government institute programs and policies so my children will be slaves to me even "after" I am dead.

This issue is "not" just an interesting debate or intellectual exercise. Socialism kills, not just individuals but all the things that make an individuals life on this earth worthwhile.

Don't believe me?

As I suggested, just do a little research on the conditions on most reservations in this country.

Why Socialism Cannot Succeed

The " Boiled Frog Phenomenon "

The " Boiled Frog Phenomenon "

As (Polard, 2004) Mentioned, If you take a frog and put it in a pot of extremely hot water, it's obvious that frog will jump and try to get out of the water. However, if you put that same frog in a pot of water that is tepid, and turn the heat on very low, that frog will lay there very quietly; and as the water gradually heats up the frog will calmly fall into a state of unconsciousness. and eventually allow itself to be boiled to death.

The " Boiled Frog Phenomenon "

The " Boiled Frog Phenomenon "

---

The " Boiled Frog Phenomenon "

The " Boiled Frog Phenomenon "

Now many of us maybe asking why didn't the frog jump out of the pot. After all, there was no barrier between him and his freedom. Well a big reason why the Frog did not jump is due to the fact his threat sensing capability is generated by unexpected changes, not the slow ones but changes that are gradual. His survival threat was below his abilityto identify those changes.

The inference of the frog metaphor for organizations is that we as a whole should try and identify the threats of our survival at an early sTAGe when we still have time to plan rather than react to that particular threat; which will be too late. Furthermore, we must also learn how to reduce our threshold of change in order to be able to identify smaller changes that are occurring in our environMent.

A perfect example of the Boiling Frog would be our governMent; they continue to ignore continuous threats to our economy survival. Our government tends to react only to sudden changes and situations. If we look back at September 11, 2001 that particular incident was a perfect example of the Boil Frog. According to many, the government had greatunderstanding and knowledge on terror attacks; however they failed to plan ahead and at the same time very careless about information's they had. As a result, disaster strikes which finally leads them to make better changes.

If we dissect the term "The Boil frog Phenomenon" in business situations, it will show how organization are not able to identify slow and gradual threats within the organization and of course react only to sudden changes. By organizations focusing only of the satisfaction of key consumers, they failed to detect the continuous threats that the opposition is putting out there; which could play a huge role in the market dynamics in a short period of time (David, 2007). If we really think about it, we don't have enough proof that key consumers will alwaysstick around when our competitors are putting better products out in the market.

As a result, organizations should react at an early sTAGe when there's still time to plan rather than finding themselves in a difficult situation at a later stage. Organization should try their best to not get caught up in the boil frog phenomenon. In fact, it would be to their advantage if they could try recognizing threats that could be harmful to the organization otherwise the survival for such organization could be extremely difficult in today's very competitive industry.

The " Boiled Frog Phenomenon "

Capitalism, Socialism, or Social Protection?

Capitalism: Economic system where property is owned by individuals. An economic system in which property, businesses, and industry are owned by individual people and not by the governMent.

Capitalism, Socialism, or Social Protection?

Capitalism, Socialism, or Social Protection?

---

Capitalism, Socialism, or Social Protection?

Capitalism, Socialism, or Social Protection?

Socialism: a political moveMent based on principles of socialism, typically advocating an end to private property and to the exploitation of workers.

Let's see: President Obama has been accused of socialistic tendencies, of advocating socialist measures, such as health care insurance for all Americans. According to the above definitions, the president has not proposed to abolish private property of insurance or of any other industry. He has simply tried to make it fAirer and more equitable, more affordable to all citizens. Social Security, for example, is a socialprogram designed to help those who paid into the system during their working years so as to make their reTireMent years less stressful income-wise. For any politician to call Social Security and Medicare to socialist plot to eliminate private property is simply absurd and a good reflection of their profound ignorance. Ask the common man and woman what they think about these social safety nets and they will respond vigorously in favor.

Public education is another target of those who advocate the end of social programs; they want the State to give every parent to voucher so as to choose any private school of their choice. That proposal smacks of socialistic tendencies; use tax Dollars from the rich and give that money to the less fortunate? Wasn't John McCain candidate deriding Obama'ssuggestion to tax rich people and give it to the poor? To spread the wealth as the Republican candidate called it? Isn't the school voucher, favored by many Republicans, precisely that, spreading the wealth?

It's a shame when fire breathing politicians hoping to appear knowledgeable confused social safety nets with socialist politics; or maybe they know the difference but simply act in bad faith. After all, they have hundreds of researchers who are most likely better informed. They even accuse Obama of "Europeanizing" America; would that be so bad? Don't they have a free market society on the Old Continent? Shouldn't we imitate what works for other countries?

Do we really want to return to savage capitalism, to robber barons, and to heartless factory owners who gleefullyexploited children, men, and women in the early 1900 's? Look at the faces of those victims in early photographs and you will thank your stars that you are not living during that period.

No sane American wants to end the free enterprise system; we all saw what happened in the Soviet Union and, nowadays, in Cuba. Even the Chinese communist junta recognized the need to introduce private ownership and a market driven economy. We all accept that savvy individuals can flourish when allowed to invent and invest; but we must also recognize that not all citizens are gifted, whether intellectually or economically. A free market society must establish a safety net for those less able to provide for themselves. It is a profound shame that the most powerful nation on earth allows people to get"kicked out of their homes and thrown, literally, into the streets with their meager possessions. It's a shame when uninsured American citizens lose their savings and their lives due to a severe illness. It's shame to let homeless people freeze to death or starve in the pitiless streets of our rich cities.

It is time to regain our original dream, to make America once again the country of the free, the country of the compassionate, the country of the just. How many politicians are willing to espouse such lofty ideals? Are you, personally, willing to write about it, to work in your community to make it a better place to live and work?

Let me know, my email is at your disposal.

Capitalism, Socialism, or Social Protection?