► Show Top 10 Hot Links

Posts Tagged ‘Capitalism’

David Thompson: On Feminism, Socialism & Liberal Hypocricy

by Bunk Five Hawks X ( 111 Comments › )
Filed under Links, Political Correctness, Politics, Progressives, Socialism at June 19th, 2014 - 7:00 pm

The following words and links are not my own, but those of David Thompson on 9 June 2014. Permission to repost requested. Meanwhile, here’s the source link.

Christina Hoff Sommers on feminist scholarship:

The problem with a lot of research on women is not so much that the authors make mistakes — we all make mistakes — the problem is that the mistakes are impervious to criticism.

For a flavour of that imperviousness and some feminist reactions to being corrected, see also this.

Glenn Reynolds on unsustainable ideologies:

I’m reminded of what Robert Heinlein said about hippies: “Hippydom is not itself a culture (as the hippies seem to think) as it has no economic foundation; it can exist only as a parasitic excrescence to the ‘square’ culture.” So too with the academic humanities, which have largely squandered the moral and intellectual capital they once possessed by adopting the roles of adversaries to, rather than preservers of, the larger culture. This, too, turns out not to be sustainable.

That adversarial role-play has been discussed here many times, along with its descent into psychodrama.

And Ed Driscoll discovers there are no socialists in divorce court:

Michael Moore, who has spent his entire career attacking capitalism, wealth, and Wall Street, is suddenly very protective concerning the capital, wealth and investments he has amassed over the years. As Christian Toto writes at Big Hollywood, “Far-left filmmaker Michael Moore is divorcing his wife, and the looming court battle looks ugly already.” Christian links to this Smoking Gun report, which notes that “the couple’s combined assets are likely worth tens of millions of dollars,” including “multiple substantial residences and multiple companies.”

But America’s most outspoken socialist, being an outspoken socialist, deserves nine properties, including an agreeable Upper West Side apartment valued at $1.27 million and, naturally, a mansion. This, remember, is a self-described multimillionaire who told the world, quite boldly, “Capitalism did nothing for me.”

 

Putin condemns Socialism and nationalization of industries

by Phantom Ace ( 6 Comments › )
Filed under Communism, Economy, Headlines, Hipsters, Marxism, Progressives, Russia at December 27th, 2013 - 12:21 am

If in 1989 someone would tell me that in 2013 Russia would be Pro-Capitalist and the US Pro-Marxist, I would have laughed. Sadly, we are now living with this paradox. Russian President Vladimir Putin had an exchange with an elderly Russian lady who was pining for the days of the old Soviet system. Putin then goes on to state the role of Government is not to nationalize businesses.

President Putin prefers a free market and capitalism over socialism. It must be true. Otherwise the Communist US government and western media would favor Putin. Instead they brand him as a tyrant or dictator. They try often in making him look like them when he is not a Communist. Khrushchev’s 1959 prediction came true and now most US citizens do not know they are in the USSR on American soil. The universe has changed and the other side of the world is free as Putin prefers capitalism over socialism.

Yes, President Vladimir Putin has been weaning Russia from socialism to capitalism ever since he used oil revenues to pay off the debt owed to the IMF and others. He has been promoting fewer taxes for small businesses and a conservative approach to economics and society. Half the governors have been fired in Russia for corruption and he even threatened a governor to improve dental care. He has helped the largest country in the world out of darkness and there is still more to be done. Yet, he has found the time and energy to lead the world by its hand towards peace and economic prosperity which the US has helped to destroy.

“the task of the state doesn’t consist in nationalizing those companies…

we should use the money which we get as taxes from them to develop the country”

The world has definitely changed when you have Pravda calling the US Communist. Both Nixon and Khrushchev turned out to be correct that the US would one day be Communist and Russia Capitalist.

The world is turned upside down!

A Blueprint for a Romney victory

by Phantom Ace ( 50 Comments › )
Filed under Barack Obama, Business, Communism, Economy, Elections 2012, Fascism, Mitt Romney, Progressives, Regulation, Socialism, taxation at July 10th, 2012 - 11:30 am

I did a post discussing that Mitt Romney should attack Obama the cultural symbol. Although some dismissed my post, Rush Limbaugh made the same exact points I made in yesterday’s post. This post is about another angle Romney should use against the pop icon.

Romney is running on the economy. One item he should bring up is that he will support Free Markets, not Crony Capitalism. Big Businesses and Free Markets are not always in synch. In many places of the world, big companies support Socialist governments. One reason for this is that the regulatory structure of a Progressive regime inhibit small businesses from forming. This reduces competition and leads to monopoly by one comp-any that can absorb the costs of Socialism. Obama has favored Big Businesses since many of them supported his rise. This has lead to a system of crony capitalism that hurts entrepreneurship. Romney should stress, he is for Free Markets and not favoring big businesses over small businesses.

A recent New York Times op-ed by Bill Scher, “How Liberals Win,” must be commended for its honesty. Scher presents a compelling historical narrative of how Democrats are happy to ally themselves with big business in a Faustian pact to foster anti-market policies. From Franklin Roosevelt’s National Recovery Act, which promoted the cartelization of industry, to President Barack Obama’s Affordable Care Act, which bought off big pharmaceutical companies by suppressing free trade in the drug market, Scher describes how Democrats have promoted crony capitalism to foster their liberal agenda. They are pro-business—at least certain businesses—but fundamentally anti-market.

This is exactly the opposite of what most Americans want. According to a survey conducted as part of the Financial Trust Index, which I codirect, only 19 percent of Americans reject the free-market system. But 51 percent are suspicious of the excessive power of big business. In other words, they are pro-market, but not necessarily pro-business, especially when business is large and politically powerful.

In fact, by inverting Scher’s argument, one can see that a pro-market, but not pro-big-business, platform would be a winner for Republicans. From Tea Party supporters to Republican-leaning independents, a vast majority of potential Republican voters already hold these positions. The party establishment lags behind, partly for ideological reasons and partly for financial ones.

[….]

For all of these reasons, Romney is eminently qualified to make the pro-market case. But his campaign, at least up to now, has lacked vision and followed in George W. Bush’s footsteps. Romney’s pragmatic, technocratic approach reassures people but fails to excite them. The Republican base is thus far uninspired, and independent voters fear a Bush repeat. Romney must differentiate himself from both Bush and Obama, rallying the Republican base while also attracting independents. Pledging a better future for America by defending the American free-market system against a Southern European–style crony capitalism is the perfect way to do it. It’s time for Romney to pick up this flag.

Crony Capitalism is just Socialism with the face of big business. Romney should make it clear he will not favor any type of business over another. His administration will support only the concept of a free market.

What Jesus Would Not Do

by 1389AD ( 95 Comments › )
Filed under Canada, Christianity, Economy at October 20th, 2011 - 11:30 am

VanGrungy sent me the following link to an article in the Toronto Sun by Warren Kinsella.

WWJD? Join hands with the Occupiers

I will not excerpt the article here because I consider it too blasphemous to repeat. But I have to rebut it somehow.

No way would Jesus ever have joined any kind of a mob.

Moreover, the Nazis, Communists, jihadis, and other anti-Christians who populate the “occupy” movement have made a career out of rejecting Jesus and everything that He stands for.

It is true that Jesus exhorted each of us, as individuals, to help the poor. But Jesus NEVER said that Caesar or Caesar’s officials should tax anybody to give that money to the poor. HUGE difference.

Kinsella’s assertion that “Jesus was no capitalist” is meaningless, in that the concept of capitalism did not exist in the ancient world. At present, the word “capitalist” has devolved into a slur that leftists hurl at their political enemies.

In the parable of the servants and the talents, Jesus made it clear that investing one’s assets (whatever those might be) in a prudent and productive manner is the right thing to do. Yes, I know, Rush Limbaugh used to joke about it, but all of our talents are on loan from God, and it behooves us to use them well, both out of respect for God, and so that we will have some surplus to use for helping others. There are good reasons why sloth is counted as one of the seven deadly sins.

It is always a bit dangerous to try to guess what Jesus would do, but I will give it a try; may He forgive me if I am wrong. I think that Jesus would have advised the “occupy” mobs to bathe, comb their hair, and put on clean clothes; to stop spewing hatred and envy; to serve others instead of demanding more for themselves; and to thank their Creator for the many advantages that they already have enjoyed.

– 1389AD