FT Alphaville (registration) | Socialism with trolly characteristics | FT Alphaville FT Alphaville (registration) You could say you owned that watch, or that refrigerator, or that house, or those shares in that mutual fund, but you wouldn't actually have a claim to any of it. |
Read more from the original source:
Socialism with trolly characteristics | FT Alphaville - FT Alphaville (registration)
Jeremy Corbyns socialist policies of state control, high spending, class warfare and punitive taxation have been tried in many countries. We know how these policies turn out and it is always the same: badly.
As a starting point, he appointed a Stalinist as a key advisor, ignored warnings about Trot infiltration of the Labour Party and called for the complete rehabilitation of Leon Trotsky himself.
We should all know what hardline Communism produces: the Soviet Union, Maoist China, North Korea or, at best, Cuba or East Germany. Yet Mr. Corbyn thinks that the same policies that produced repeated catastrophes before will produce a socialist nirvana in the UK. While the Bourbons learnt nothing and forgot nothing, the UK Hard Left seems to have learned nothing at all. Consider some of Mr. Corbyns comrades abroad and the damage they have wrought.
Exhibit Number One is Venezuela under Hugo Chavez. Twenty years ago Venezuela was one of the richest countries in the world. Now it is one of the poorest. Food is scarce, people are starving and inflation is approaching a thousand per cent. Venezuelan agriculture and industry have been all but destroyed and the countrys oil wealth has been wasted. But to quote Corbyn shortly after Chavez died in 2013: Chavez showed us that there is a different and a better way of doing things ... Its called socialism, its called social justice and its something that Venezuela has made a big step towards.
Sorry, Jeremy, but a system that starves the population it serves is not one that promotes social justice and the only big step made by Venezuela recently is towards breakdown, mass starvation and a looming revolution.
Exhibit Number Two is Robert Mugabe in Zimbabwe. At independence in 1980, the Tanzanian President, Julius Nyerere told Mugabe You have inherited a jewel; look after it. Instead Mugabe squandered it and shamelessly too. Run by a self-described socialist, Mugabes regime is a kleptomaniac plutocracy that has mismanaged the country to the point of ruin, produced a hyperinflation of almost 80 billion percent a month by 2008 and destroyed what was left of Zimbabwean civil society. One can add to that enormous human rights abuses and a collapse in public health as the government botched attempts to contain AIDS and other epidemics. Yet the Zimbabwean First Family have accumulated enormous wealth under their dictatorship and Mrs. Mugabe is a notorious shopaholic who is reputed to spend millions on each of her shopping trips.
Example Three is former President Cristina Fernndez de Kirchner in Argentina. Argentina was one of the richest countries in the world in the early 20th century. Decades of economic mismanagement have since reduced it to a third world basket case. Ms. Kirchners own policies were a disastrous interventionist cocktail that left the Argentinian economy in yet another major crisis as she left office. She was however one of the first world leaders to congratulate Mr. Corbyn on his election as Labour leader. She described his election as a triumph of hope and a victory for those putting politics at the service of people and the economy at the service of the well-being of all citizens. She is now facing charges of corruption in office.
What do these examples all have in common? They show how to take a prosperous country blessed with abundant resources and reduce it to destitutionand all in the name of the people. In each case, there is also a massive increase in inequality between the very top and the mass of the population below, the key to which is breathtaking corruption made possible by state control. This is how socialism works in practice.
Nor should we forget that hardcore socialism has been tried in the UK too. We had flying pickets, energy cuts and candlelit diners as the Hard Left in the trade union movement took on the ailing Heath government in 1974. The government then calledand losta who runs Britain election and Labour came to office with a Socialist agenda.
The results? Out-of-control unions, a bloated inefficient public sector and an economic crisis requiring an IMF bailout. This crisis was followed by the winter of discontent, unburied bodies and trash piling up in the streets.
Really. We have seen this movie before. Vote for Corbyns Labour and our past will soon become our future.
***
Kevin Dowd is a Research Fellow at the Independent Institute and is the co-editor of the Independent bookMoney and the Nation State.
Read the original here:
Jeremy Corbyn's Hardcore Socialism Would Render Britain Destitute - The Beacon (blog)
The International Examiner | Opinion: Understand what socialism means for some Asian immigrants The International Examiner It's something we see often here in Seattlecandidates and parties embracing socialism, particularly while riding the very valid and important movements in resistance to Trump. But as socialist themes become popular tropes and codes for ultra-liberal ... |
Go here to see the original:
Opinion: Understand what socialism means for some Asian immigrants - The International Examiner
Communism is one of our top all-time lookups, and user comments suggest thats because it is often used in opaque ways. In some sources, communism is equated with socialism; in others, it is contrasted with democracy and capitalism. Part of this confusion stems from the fact that the word communism has been applied to varying political systems over time. When it was first used in English prose, communism referred to an economic and political theory that advocated the abolition of private property and the common sharing of all resources among a group of people, and it was often used interchangeably with the word socialism by 19th-century writers. The differences between communism and socialism are still debated, but generally English speakers used communism to refer to the political and economic ideologies that find their origin in Karl Marxs theory of revolutionary socialism, which advocates a proletariat overthrow of capitalist structures within a society, societal and communal ownership and governance of the means of production, and the eventual establishment of a classless society. The most well-known expression of Marxs theories is the 20th-century Bolshevism of the U.S.S.R., in which the state, through a single authoritarian party, controls a societys economy and social activities with the goal of realizing Marxs theories.
Communism is often contrasted with capitalism and democracy, though these can be false equivalencies depending on the usage. Capitalism refers to an economic theory in which a societys means of production are held by private individuals or organizations, not the government, and where prices, distribution of goods, and products are determined by a free market. It can be contrasted with the economic theories of communism, though the word communism is used of both political and economic theories. Democracy refers to a system of government in which supreme power is vested in the people and exercised through a system of direct or indirect representation which is decided through periodic free elections. Democracy is contrasted with communism primarily because the 20th-century communism of the U.S.S.R. was characterized by an authoritarian government, whereas the democracy of the 20th-century U.S. was characterized by a representative government.
View post:
Socialism | Definition of Socialism by Merriam-Webster
On Friday the United Kingdom could have Marxist leaders for the first time in our history. It is an unlikely prospect, but inherent to our democracy is the uncertainty that choice represents. Some may think this remarkable after the great partnership of Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan and winning the Cold War.
Polling shows strong support for Jeremy Corbyns Labour Party among young voters. Corbyn (pictured) would choose as his finance minister John McDonnell, who has made his Marxist sympathies clear. Of course the Berlin Wall came down 27 years ago. For those born after it, or who were too young to remember it, the solidarity that Corbyn expressed for a totalitarian Communist regime might seem an obscure historical point.
Instead, some voters are attracted to all the free stuff being promised in Labours manifesto fee child care, free college tuition, more welfare money, more NHS spending and so on. All the state controls to magically provide lower rents, lower prices and higher pay.
There has been a surreal discussion about the level of costings that Labour has offered. For instance, they have proposed increased Corporation Tax. Yet all the evidence is that increasing the Corporation Tax rate would result in reduced Corporation Tax revenue.
That is the reality of the modern, global economy. Unfortunately, it is not a reality that the media or the Conservatives have pushed the electorate to confront. The claim that tax hikes can automatically raise more money has not been greatly scrutinised.
There is an even more fundamental point about Labours entire economic programme. Corbynomics would impoverish the nation. We have seen around the world how hardline socialist measures have been followed by economic collapse. Corbyns election chief Andrew Murray has praised North Korea. That is a country where forced labour and starvation of political weapons of the regime.
There is Venezuela, the model that Corbyn wishes to follow, where socialism has led to food shortages and civil unrest. Zimbabwe shows what happens under widespread nationalisation and hyperinflation. Fidel Castro impoverished and enslaved Cuba. Yet Corbyn called Castro a champion of social justice.
How long would it take for Britain to be ruined under Corbyn? It is not as if the British public finances are in a terribly strong state as it is. The annual deficit has been falling, but more slowly than scheduled. Meanwhile, the National Debt escalates ever more dangerously. Remember this has happened under a Conservative Government which has aimed for prudence, despite the noisy demands for a more indulgent approach.
Imagine if the next government took its feet off the brakes. A binge of state spending and borrowing would threaten bankruptcy. We could face the Greek scenario of cash machines refusing to pay out money and public sector staff being delayed in being paid their salaries.
Still, at least Corbyn has won the praise of Senator Bernie Sanders. I have been very impressed by the campaign that he has been running and I wish him the very best, said Sanders recently. This is hardly surprising but is certainly not reassuring. The two men are alike. Both spout rhetoric about helping the poor. Yet across the globe we can see the appalling poverty caused by the socialist policies they demand.
Originally posted here:
Socialism Always Results in Economic Collapse and the UK Could be Next - Heat Street