moonbattery logo

Mar 18 2017

Ben Shapiro Explains Why Socialism Is Never a Good Idea

We are told that socialism is a really good idea, it just hasn’t been implemented properly. Actually, socialism is a terrible idea, which is why it cannot be implemented in any way that is just, efficient, or even tolerable. Ben Shapiro gets it:

On a tip from Torcer.



18 Responses to “Ben Shapiro Explains Why Socialism Is Never a Good Idea”

  1. shpongl3 says:

    Best line right at the end, “they’re operating in unicorn land with gumdrop rainbows and fairy skies.”

  2. Mr. Freemarket says:

    https://amac.us/why-socialism-doesnt-work-as-learned-by-a-waiter/

    “I had a topic in mind for today’s piece, and was set on writing about it when my roommate came home from his new job as a server. Our subsequent conversation blew me away because despite my roommate’s ardent support of Democrats, and Bernie Sanders specifically, he made an inadvertent argument against socialism.

    I sat on our big red couch in awe as he said the following (not exact wording):

    The job is really nice. The only annoying thing about it is that our tips are pooled. It kind of makes you wanna work less hard because you’re not getting your tips directly.”

  3. Mr. Freemarket says:

    http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/27861/

    Professor travels the globe…eventually figures out that socialism doesn’t work.

    Some folks are slow learners….

    ““I gradually became disenchanted with Marxism by visiting many of the countries that had tried to shape their societies to conform to its doctrines. I was disillusioned by the realities I saw in … socialist countries – the USSR, Eastern Europe, China, Cuba, etc,” Stauder told The College Fix via email.

    “I came to recognize that socialism doesn’t work, and that its ‘revolutionary’ imposition inevitably leads to cruelty, injustice and the loss of freedom,” the professor continued.

    “I could see the same pattern in the many failed left-wing revolutions of Latin America and elsewhere. By combining actual travel with the historical study of socialism and revolution, I succeeded in disabusing myself of the utopian notions that fatally attract people to leftist ideas.”

  4. Cecil Henry says:

    Yes, but socialism is still pursued and demanded because lots of people want to be that other guy– the one who works less, but gets the surreptitious benefits of another’s work.

    ITs always imagined that it will be the other guy that will pay, and that government will do the dirty work of actually stealing it with ‘taxation’ to allow you to benefit.

    Its theft, coercion and parasitism disguised as equality and ‘caring’

  5. Mike_W20 says:

    You have to watch this Anthony Cumia guy.
    Yeah, skip over Alex Jones; but watch Cumia in the last half of this clip; I reckon Alex was so intrigued by what Cumia had to say, Alex just forgot to interrupt.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pI5tiZ-qr5A

  6. Diogenes71 says:

    What an epiphany? Yet he did not realize the importance of what he was saying.

  7. J K Brown says:

    First, what is the best the socialists, in their writings, can offer us? What do the most optimistic of them say? That our subsistence will be guaranteed, while we work; that some of us, the best of us, may earn a surplus above what is actually necessary for our subsistence; and that surplus, like a good child, we may “keep to spend.” We may not use it to better our condition, we may not, if a fisherman, buy another boat with it, if a farmer, another field ; we may not invest it, or use it productively ; but we can spend it like the good child, on candy — on something we consume, or waste it, or throw it away.

    Could not the African slave do as much? In fact, is not this whole position exactly that of the negro slave? He, too, was guaranteed his sustenance; he, too, was allowed to keep and spend the extra money he made by working overtime; but he was not allowed to better his condition, to engage in trade, to invest it, to change his lot in life. Precisely what makes a slave is that he is allowed no use of productive capital to make wealth on his own account. The only difference is that under socialism, I may not be compelled to labor (I don’t even know as to that — socialists differ on the point), actually compelled, by the lash, or any other force than hunger. And the only other difference is that the negro slave was under the orders of one man, while the subject of socialism will be under the orders of a committee of ward heelers. You will say, the slave could not choose his master, but we shall elect the ward politician. So we do now. Will that help much? Suppose the man with a grievance didn’t vote for him?
    –Socialism; a speech delivered in Faneuil hall, February 7th, 1903, by Frederic J. Stimson

  8. Torcer says:

    Socialism’s Rising Popularity Threatens America’s Future http://bit.ly/2nAjqwA

    WATCH: Liberals Love Socialism But These Venezuelans Should Scare Them http://bit.ly/2nJJHYg

  9. Torcer says:

    Keep in mind that the fundamental ideas of Socialism date back at least 500 years.

    500 years of lies, murder and oppression, not to mention outright failure.

    In the paperback copy of ‘The Communist manifesto’ there was an additional essay written in 1949 to commemorate the 100the anniversary of that screed written from a Marxist monthly:

    The Communist Manifesto after 100 years
    The first theoretical expression of a genuinely socialist position came in Thomas More’s Utopia, written in the early years of the 16th Century — in other words, at the very threshold of what we call the modern period. But Utopia was the work of an individual genius and not the reflection of a social movement. It was not until the English Civil War, in the middle of the 17th Century, that socialism first began to assume the shape of a social movement.

    Gerrard Winstanley (born 1609, died sometime after 1660) was probably the greatest socialist thinker that the English-speaking countries have yet produced, and the Digger movement which he led was certainly the first practical expression of socialism. But it lasted only a very short time, and the same was true of the movement led by Babeuf during the French Revolution a century and a half later. Meanwhile, quite a number of writers had formulated views of a more or less definitely socialist character.

    But it was not until the 19th Century that socialism became an important public issue and socialists began to play a significant role in the political life of the most advanced European countries.

    The Utopian socialists (Owen, Fourier, St. Simon) were key figures in this period of emergence; and the Chartist movement in Britain, which flourished during the late 1880s and early 1840s…
    http://archive.monthlyreview.org/index.php/mr/article/view/MR-001-04-1949-08_2/0

    This is referencing the book ‘Utopia’ published in 1516:

    Definition of utopia
    noun An imagined place or state of things in which everything is perfect:
    ‘misplaced faith in political utopias has led to ruin’
    Origin Mid 16th century: based on Greek ou not + topos place; the word was first used in the book “Utopia” (1516) by Sir Thomas More.
    https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/utopia

  10. Mr. Freemarket says:

    Exactly. Why get up early in the morning, risking life and limb to follow a life of crime stealing from others when you can get the government to do it for you, and others will provide public approval?

  11. Bodhisattva says:

    Indeed as this thread suggests, socialists use, as an excuse for THE FACT that ALL ATTEMPTS to implement pure SOCIALISM (i.e. unless it’s essentially sham socialism wholly supported by capitalism) are miserable failures, claims that “Well they just didn’t do it right” but then they go on to “do it wrong” too and inevitably they fail as well.

    Alternately they claim that socialism needs modern technology (a side benefit of capitalism, it turns out) to succeed and the fact it wasn’t previously available as the excuse for all past failures of socialism, even when it WAS available.

    The failure of socialism is simple. And here’s where I may surprise you. In a perfect world socialism does make sense – people putting the good of others before their own good. We all want to believe we can and will do that. But the simple fact is all SANE humans understand two important facts that doom socialism to failure, no matter how superior it seems to be in the theoretical universe.

    1) Before you can be in a position to help others, you must first help yourself reach that position – and doing so is what socialism brands as “evil” and “selfish”.

    2) Socialism removes the incentive to excel, since it actually punishes those who work harder by taking away more of the results of their efforts the harder they try to do better. On the contrary it rewards those who realize that letting others work harder with a bigger piece of the resulting larger pie (their share doesn’t change but the pie is bigger so the net result is more to them even when they didn’t increase their own efforts to produce it) when they just sit back and do as little as possible and they still get what some arbitrary authority deems to be “their share”, which does not diminish despite the fact they personally failed to do the best they could, as noted.

  12. 762x51 says:

    While I appreciate Shapiro and the work he does, it seems a little like explaining why starting a fire on your living room floor is bad. I mean, you may not like the carpet, but what about that flat screen TV or your family photos?

  13. 762x51 says:

    Not just America’s future.

    Progressives love to point to European socialism which has largely been in place since WWII, ludicrous when you consider the effort put into defeating the German National Socialist Party. That socialism, which is now collapsing under the weight of millions of additional freeloaders, has “succeeded” for the time since 1945 only because American capitalism subsidized it. American taxpayers paid to defend western Europe from the Soviet Union, rebuilt their countries, kept the sea lanes open, armed, trained and equipped their military’s, bought their exports, etc. Without all that, they would have collapsed decades ago, which would have been for their own good.

  14. 762x51 says:

    “Some folks are slow learners….”

    Marxists have the shallowest learning curve in history.

  15. Katherinegquinn says:

    Google is paying 97$ per hour! Work for few hours & have longer with friends and family! !da125c:
    On tuesday I got a great new Land Rover Range Rover from having earned $8752 this last four weeks.. Its the most-financialy rewarding I’ve had.. It sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive yourself if you don’t check it
    !da125c:
    ➽➽
    ➽➽;➽➽ http://GoogleFinancialCashJobs415DirectSelfGetPaid$97/Hour ★★★✫★★★✫★★★✫★★★✫★★★✫★★★✫★★★✫★★★✫★★★✫★★★✫★★★✫★★★✫★★★✫::::::!da125c:….,…..

  16. Torcer says:

    Sometimes it quite amusing to hear of the excuses those the nation’s Socialist Left will issue for the failure of their base ideology in the USSR, Cuba, North Korea, Venezuela… to the point of outright denying they were.are actually Socialist.

    State Capitalism – Why the USSR Wasn’t Socialist – Amy Leather …
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J0NmhFO31Y8

Alibi3col theme by Themocracy