Mediaboss Marketing

|

Posted: Jun 27, 2017 12:01 AM

The thing about old socialist politicians, like Bernie Sanders, 75 and Britain's Jeremy Corbyn, 68, is that they have youth on their side.

Across the pond, the youth vote allowed the British Bernie Sanders to do a lot better than the so-called experts thought he'd do in the recent general election. Here in America, we all know how the millennials went ga-ga for Bernie. He got more millennial votes in the primaries than Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump -- combined.

I recently made a reservation for dinner at a restaurant in a very liberal city in North Carolina -- using only my first name, Bernie -- and the young hostess told me she was hoping it was Sanders who was coming in for dinner. Maybe she was kidding. Maybe not. She had a pleasant smile on her young face the whole time, but a pleasant smile is pretty much obligatory in the South, especially when you're disappointed.

The fact is, a lot of millennials like socialism. A 2016 poll conducted by Harvard University showed that a majority of voters between 18 and 29 -- 51 percent -- rejected capitalism while a third said they supported socialism.

And a 2011 Pew poll of millennials revealed that there was more support for socialism than capitalism. Forty-nine percent had positive views of socialism while only 46 percent had positive views of capitalism.

How could this be? Doesn't everybody know by now that socialism doesn't work? Haven't they heard the famous Margaret Thatcher line, "The trouble with Socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money"?

If they did hear it, they haven't taken it seriously. In a New York Times op-ed, "Why Young Voters Love Old Socialists," Sarah Leonard, a 29-year old editor at the far-left Nation magazine explains: "(W)ithin this generation, things like single-payer health care, public education and free college -- and making the rich pay -- are just common sense."

Of course they are. Until you run out of other people's money.

Let's acknowledge the obvious: Getting free stuff is fun -- mainly because ... it'sfree!So it shouldn't be a shock that young voters fell head over heals for a (democratic) socialist like Bernie Sanders who promised them a "free" college education paid for by those miserable rich people who have too much money anyway.

And just imagine if the Democrats somehow manage to come up with a young, progressive, attractive, even sexy version of the old socialist from Vermont next time around. Republicans -- and more importantly, America -- could be in serious trouble.

But here's where millennials get off easy: No one is calling them out for what a lot of them are -- which is greedy.

Here's how Thomas Sowell, the great thinker from California, put it: "I have never understood why it is 'greed' to want to keep the money you've earned, but not greed to want to take somebody else's money."

So what we have is a greedy generation that feels entitled to all sorts of things, including other people's money. If this is the future, give me the past.

George Bernard Shaw had it right a long, long time ago when he said: "A government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul."

Who knew that Paul was 25 and voted for Bernie?

Memo to millennials: You won't be young forever. And when you get older and have jobs and pay taxes, who do you think is going to pay for all those "free" goodies you once demanded when you were young and -- forgive me -- not-too-smart? The bill for all that "free" stuff -- with interest -- is going to come due at some point, right? And by then the next generation of millennials is also going to want "free" stuff. You'll be paying for that, too.

One more piece of wisdom from Thomas Sowell, wisdom that young voters in the embrace of socialism might want to consider: "If you have been voting for politicians who promise to give you goodies at someone else's expense, then you have no right to complain when they take your money and give it to someone else."

Having second thoughts yet, millennials, about the virtues of socialism?

See original here:
Young Voters for Old Socialists - Townhall

The leader of the 1917 Russian Bolshevik Revolution, Vladimir Lenin, once said, The goal of socialism is communism.

In Karl Marx 6 steps of communism, socialism is step 5. Please dont tell me not to confuse socialism and communism.

Save it for the gullible and the uninformed.

In my observations, therefore in my opinion, unknowingly, some very good, very kind, and very religious Christians have had a hand in Americas moral and social decline by voting for and helping elect Democratic and liberal Republican lawmakers.

The reason, one of the first things socialists/ communists that masquerade as liberals do once theyve gained enough politi-cal influence and power, is to suppress any and all forms of religious and Biblical expression in public.

Their ultimate goal though, is to outlaw, then abolish all forms of religion.

Google and read, Wikipedia: Persecution of Christians in the Soviet Union.

Tens of thousands of the Russian Orthodox Churchs clergy were executed. Millions of Christians were imprisoned or killed all across the USSR as well.

All in the communists efforts to erase religion from Russian culture.

You can think or say that would never happen in America. The facts say otherwise.

Even though America was founded on Judeo/ Christian principles, in 1962, liberal U.S. Supreme Court Justices banned the simplest of prayers in all of Americas public schools.

Today, even a moment of silent prayer is illegal in all public schools.

In its place, prayer in has been replaced with mass killings in schools all across America.

Even little Amish girls in a single room schoolhouse havent been spared.

Who would have ever thought that Christmas Carols or even the music would be banned in some U.S. schools.

In 2014, lesbian mayor Anise Parker attempted to subpoena the sermons of 5 Houston pastors that may have dealt with homosexual or gender identity issues.

At the 2012 DNC, Obamas party says no to God (9/6/2012 Washington Times).

At the 2016 DNC, Democrats heckle preacher during opening prayer (7/26/2016 Fox News).

At the 2016 DNC, Who boos an opening prayer ? Berniacs of 2016, thats who (7/26/2016 Religion News Service).

I could go on and on.

You can believe it or not. But as I stated and tried to explain as briefly as I could in my 6/15/2017 VMS Socialist letter, for all intents and purposes, the Democratic Party is Americas Socialist party.

I would ask anyone who says they believe in God or the Bible to Google and read the following: Communists goals 1963, how many have been fulfilled? and Paul Harveys 1965, If I were the devil transcript.

The list of 45 declared communists goals is from The Naked Communist. A 1958 book written by former FBI agent Cleon Skousen.

Goal #28 on Mr. Skousens list, Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the ground(s) that it violates the principle of separation of church and state .

Paul Harveys, If I were the devil broadcast was a truly remarkable prophecy of what life in America would be like today.

He didnt paint a rosy picture, but an amazingly accurate one.

N. Rodriguez Harlingen

Excerpt from:
'The goal of socialism is communism' - Valley morning Star

Socialism saw its heyday in the 20th century. As it was adapted by a number of countries, itwent through various bastardizations of its message andfaded into relative obscurity. Now it is experiencing a tremendous resurgence in the 21st century due to the growing economic disparity, anger at the establishment and charismatic older socialist politicians like Bernie Sanders in the U.S. and Jeremy Corbyn in the U.K. who gathered massive support from the young. A new wave of socialist thinkers is also beginning to emerge that looks to distance the movement from the historical stigma to formulate a new socialism that speaks to the challenges of today.

What is socialism? In the most basic definition, it is a political and economic system where the means of production and essential resources are owned by the community. Socialism comes in many different forms and has been practiced with great variety around the world.

Jacobin, a magazine thats gained popularity for offering socialist perspectives on political and cultural topics, published a guide on how to redefine socialism for the modern age. In it, the publications editor Bhaskar Sunkara describes socialism as, fundamentally, a way to build the kind of world where people dont take advantage of others for gain but rather for the benefits of cooperation. To Sunkara, socialism is abolishing private ownership of the things we all need and use factories, banks, offices, natural resources, utilities, communication and transportation infrastructure and replacing it with social ownership, thereby undercutting the power of elites to hoard wealth and power.

Private property would not exist, but personal property would remain. The government will not take away your Kenny Loggins records, jokes Sunkara.

An old Russian woman fixing her belongings on a vandalized symbols of the Communism, the Hammer and Sickle, on an avenue of Moscow, on November 1990. At the time of creation, the hammer stood for industrial labourers and the sickle for the peasantry; combined they stood for the worker-peasant alliance for socialism and against reactionary movements and foreign intervention. (Photo credit: ALEXANDER NEMENOV/AFP/Getty Images)

In their guide, the writers and editors of Jacobin also try to dispel some of the confusion related to socialism. In particular, they argue, many people tend to associate any kind of government institution, even the DMV, with socialism. But just because its a part of the government doesnt make it socialist. In fact, an average person has so little say politically due to the stronghold of corporate interests on the government,that any state action will disproportionately benefit capitalist interests at the expense of everything else, writes Chris Maisano in the Jacobins guide.

The journal also offers a defense against the charge that socialism inevitably ends up in authoritarian governments. Joseph M. Schwartz writes how Marxists and European socialists could not anticipate that revolutionary parties would try to create socialism in predominantly agrarian, autocratic societies like Russia and China.

In many ways, one-party Communist states shared more in common with past authoritarian capitalist developmentalist states such as late nineteenth-century Prussia and Japan, and postwar South Korea and Taiwan than with the vision of democratic socialism. These governments prioritized state-led industrialization over democratic rights, particularly those of an independent labor movement, writes Schwartz.

Jacobins prescription for building a more socialist country - mobilize the people through education and direct participation in the government.

Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) (C) addresses a rally with protesters calling for higher wages for federal contract workers in the rain on Capitol Hill November 10, 2015 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

Is Bernie Sanders a socialist?He is the country's most popular active politician according to the polls, but he's not socialist enough, according to the editors of the Jacobin. Noam Chomsky famously called him a decent, honest New Dealer. Sanders himself draws the distinction, calling his politics - democratic socialism. He often refers to Scandinavian countries as models for what he would like the United States to become. Sanderss key themes of reducing economic inequality and the influence of politics in money appeals to a cross-section Americans from the left and the right.

To combat the negative stereotypes of socialism, Sanders invokes the New Deal policies of Franklin Delano Roosevelt that were called socialist like establishing social security and the minimum wage. Sanders also links the way he sees the world to Martin Luther Kings calls for social and economic justice.

To Sanders, education, affordable housing and universal health care are the publics right rather than private commodities that can be used to turn a profit. Still, he has not called for nationalizing any industries, saying specifically I dont believe government should own the means of production.

He defined democratic socialism himself in 2015 as a necessary adjustment in an increasingly unequal society.

Democratic socialism means that we must create an economy that works for all, not just the very wealthy. Democratic socialism means that we must reform a political system in America today which is not only grossly unfair but, in many respects, corrupt., said Sanders, adding In my view, its time we had democratic socialism for working families, not just Wall Street, billionaires and large corporations.

Jeremy Corbyn, Leader of the Labour Party speaks during a campaign rally at Union Chapel Islington on June 7, 2017 in London, United Kingdom. (Photo by Leon Neal/Getty Images)

Is Jeremy Corbyn a socialist? The leader of UKs Labour Party, which won a surprising number of seats against the ruling Conservative Party in recent elections,also identifies as a democratic socialist. Labours 2017 manifesto, titled For the Many, Not the Few includes plans to re-nationalize the rail, postal and water services, abolish college tuition fees, increase the minimum wage and spending on national healthcare, as well as upping the tax on the wealthy. Many of these ideas are certainly more to the left of what's been proposed by Sanders for the U.S.

Corbyns message has energized young voters in particular, with close to 70% of those 18 to 24 supporting Labour. How much more support can these kinds of ideas gain? The latest polls show the partys appeal growing wider still, now 5% ahead of the Tories at 46%. Corbyns personal approval is also high, better than the Prime Minister Theresa Mays.

To consider why the ideas of socialism continue to have followers in our times, lets turn to Albert Einstein. One of the worlds most brilliant thinkers who had seen the effects of socialism in his lifetime, Einstein wrote an essay called Why socialism in 1949 that still resonates in some of its themes.

German-born American physicist Albert Einstein (1879 - 1955) speaking during his Science And Civilization lecture at the Royal Albert Hall, London. (Photo by Keystone/Getty Images)

Einstein critiques capitalism as having a tendency towards becoming an oligarchy where private capital tends to become concentrated in few hands that cannot be effectively checked even by a democratically organized political society. This happens because the capitalists control the main mass media sources (including education) while the members of the government come from political parties that are largely financed or otherwise influenced by private capitalists who, for all practical purposes, separate the electorate from the legislature. As as a result of that, according to Einstein, these representatives do not sufficiently protect the interests of the underprivileged.

Sounds familiar? If similar challenges present themselves almost 70 years later, it is no surprise solutions like socialism come back. Of course, there are now also fears of fascism returning to fashion.

Einstein saw the establishment of a socialist economy with an accompanying educational system thats oriented towards social goals as the only way forward for society.

In such an economy, the means of production are owned by society itself and are utilized in a planned fashion. A planned economy, which adjusts production to the needs of the community, would distribute the work to be done among all those able to work and would guarantee a livelihood to every man, woman, and child. The education of the individual, in addition to promoting his own innate abilities, would attempt to develop in him a sense of responsibility for his fellow men in place of the glorification of power and success in our present society, wrote Einstein.

Einstein did caution, however, perhaps with an eye towards the Soviet Union, that a planned economy might result in the complete enslavement of the individual by the bureaucracy and saw it essential for socialism to resolve the problem of protecting the rights of the individual.

Historical lessons aside, socialism is a rejuvenated force. Polls show that somewhere between 30 to 60% of Democratic voters have a favorable view of its ideas. Over 50% of millennials have a positive opinion of socialism. As automation is sure to put a major portion of the world out of work, the issues around ownership of necessary resources and distribution of wealth are sure to stay vital.

Cover photo: A US-made 1957 Chevrolet Bel Air races past a billboard that reads,'Stronger than ever, Socialism' 14 February near Santa Maria del Mar, Cuba. (Photo credit: ADALBERTO ROQUE/AFP/Getty Images)

Go here to read the rest:
Why Socialism Is Back as a Political Force That Will Only Grow - Big Think

Working out: is everyone equal if some are physically stronger than others? Photograph: Alamy

Whats the link between your exercise regime and how you feel society should be run? To find out, simply answer the following question on a six-point scale.

Approximately how much time per week do you spend lifting weights, in order to build muscle? (a) None (b) less than an hour (c) 1-2 hours (d) 2-3 hours (e) 3-4 hours (f) more than 4 hours.

If you scored 3 or more, then you spend more time than the average person building muscle mass (or, at least, the average person in a recent study conducted at Londons Brunel University). In terms of your views on society, you are more likely than the average person to endorse statements such as: Some groups of people are simply inferior to other groups, or: Its OK if some groups have more of a chance in life than others.

If you scored 2 or less, then you are less likely to endorse these statements, and also more likely to support the idea of redistribution of wealth; that the government should heavily tax the rich to support the poor.

So its fair to say bodybuilders are rarely socialists if so, why? The researchers interpret their findings in terms of what they call the social-bargaining model. Individuals who are physically stronger and therefore more likely to benefit from inequalities in both status and resources are less likely to support movements that seek to level the playing field. Its more likely to be survival of the fittest.

A fully referenced version of this article is at benambridge.com. Order Are You Smarter Than a Chimpanzee? by Ben Ambridge for 11.04 at bookshop.theguardian.com

Original post:
Is there a link between fitness and socialism? Personality quiz - The Guardian

J. Scott Applewhite, Associated Press

Senate Majority leader Mitch McConnell leaves the chamber after announcing the release of the Republicans' healthcare bill which represents the party's long-awaited attempt to scuttle much of President Barack Obama's Affordable Care Act, at the Capitol in Washington, Thursday, June 22, 2017.

In order to understand this issue, it is critical to understand the social and political forces that are in play and to know the facts surrounding the journey that began in 1965. We cannot simply ignore the reality of what has happened over the last half century and have any hope of finding a way back to a health care system that will work for everyone. Almost no one currently involved in this discussion remembers or, in many cases, was even alive when free-market health care actually existed and was operating smoothly at low cost in this country. We seem to have forgotten that the delivery of health care and the offering of health insurance to indemnify against the risk of incurring medical expenses are free enterprise, for-profit businesses, and not government agencies or charitable organizations.

There has been a gradual transformation from an attitude or philosophy of self-reliance and personal responsibility to one of entitlement and reliance on whatever government is willing to provide for political purposes. Another related discussion on what government is constitutionally authorized and economically capable of doing is for another day. We are constantly admonished about our collective need to have compassion and charity for the less fortunate among us. We are shamed into accepting government solutions to provide affordable, quality health care because, as a society, we are failing to make sure there are no poor among us.

This, of course, is nonsense. It is well documented the American people are the most charitable on earth. Websters New Collegiate Dictionary, 1951 edition, defines charity thus: 1. Divine love for man; Act of loving all men as brothers because they are sons of God. 2. Good will to the poor and the suffering; Almsgiving (anything given gratuitously to relieve the poor), etc. I used this dictionary because it pre-dates the plague of political correctness. Charity is an individual virtue, and I can find no example where government fits into any honest definition of charity. Government charity is more accurately described as coercing involuntary contributions from some to distribute to others. This is simply redistribution of wealth through taxation. The irony is that government has succeeded only in creating more poor among us.

Secondly, a truly free society involves risk and inevitably rewards for those who take personal responsibility to become educated and then use the opportunities and resources of a free enterprise system to improve their economic position. In so doing, they also create economic opportunity for others. The governments only responsibility is to ensure a level playing field and to protect against unfair and illegal business practices, not to guarantee success. Inevitably, there will be those who, for whatever personal or societal reasons, do not fare as well and suffer poor economic results. Freedom is hard work that offers unlimited rewards along with the risk of failure. Failure is simply one milestone on everyones road to success. Ask anyone who has succeeded at anything.

A look at socialism will explain why we are struggling with the current system. Socialism, as defined by that same dictionary: A political and economic theory of social organization based on collective or governmental ownership/control, and democratic management of the essential means for the production and distribution of goods. Socialism is a creeping cancer that incrementally contaminates the body of our free-market system, veiled in charity and directly conflicting with free enterprise. Ludwig von Mises, a world-renowned conservative economist, author of the Austrian System of Economics, and founder of the Ludwig von Mises Institute of Economics, said, There is no third system between a market economy and socialism. Mankind has to choose between those two systems unless chaos is considered an alternative.

This is the chaotic canvas that our current health care system is painted on.

Don Ruzicka has 43 years experience as an insurance agent/independent broker and is a pioneer in health insurance medical savings accounts and free-market health plan designs.

Continued here:
Don Ruzicka: Health care's journey from free market to socialism - Deseret News