Conundrum

An email, under the above subject, has been circulating which, from all appearances, presumes to set forth the thinking and ideology of those on the right. On its face, it is nothing more or less than a distortion of reality and a misrepresentation of truths, i.e. political propaganda. I have tried, below, to cast light on the real truth of the matter.

The email is as follows in the large red and blue print. The smaller black print is my response:

Free people are not equal.  Equal people are not free. (Think this one over and over…makes sense!)  Response: Our Constitution tells us all men are (supposedly) equal under the law. Our Bible tells us all men are equal in the eyes of God (that’s what Grace and Forgiveness is about). But, in the “Real World”, we all know everyone is not born equal. We come in all shapes, colors, appearances, and deformations, with all degrees of intelligence, ranging from stupid to brilliant, and personalities derived from a multiple of effects ranging from inheritable genes, family effects, and the environment, both physical and social, including a depressed economy. With this stipulation, I agree.

"A gun is like a parachute.  If you need one, and don't have one, you'll probably never need one again." 

 The definition of the word Conundrum is: something that is puzzling or confusing. 

 Here are six Conundrums of socialism in the United States of America:   

1. America is capitalist and greedy - yet half of the population is subsidized.   Answer: Half the population is subsidized because they have been raped and pillaged for the past thirty five years by our Shadow Government, the Corporatocracy and Power Elite. But please take notice. That same Shadow Government which is doing the raping and pillaging is also being subsidized. Have you not heard of Corporate Welfare? Are you not informed about the growing inequality of income and wealth in this country during the past forty years? Have you not heard of our disappearing middle class?

 2. Half of the population is subsidized - yet they think they are victims.   Answer: They are victims! See above.

 

3. They think they are victims - yet their representatives run the government.   Answer: True! That’s because these so-called representatives are not representing them/us as they are supposed to do. Rather, they are betraying us by selling out to the lobbyists, satchel carriers for the Oligarchy of the Corporatocracy and Power Elite, our Shadow Government, who bribe them with campaign contributions and/or favors. Our representatives even allow their bribers to write some of the laws they are supposed to write themselves. To use an old phrase, follow the money. Our representatives are, in effect, on their payroll.

4. Their representatives run the government - yet the poor keep getting poorer.   Answer: True again. You get that way when you are constantly being robbed by those to whom your representatives have sold out.

 5. The poor keep getting poorer - yet they have things that people in other countries only dream about.   Answer: True again. Don’t you know? Generally speaking, our country has had a higher standard of living than the rest of the world for the past approximately 100 years or more. There has been a difference—a vast difference. America has five percent of the world’s population and 20% of the world’s productivity. Except for the hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of our people living on the streets, our poor are wealthy when compared to the poor in some countries. On the other hand, however, surely you have noticed the decrease in that difference. That is what our growing inequality and our disappearing middle class is all about. Surely you have also heard about the growing increase in standard of living in China and elsewhere in the world. Where do you think that is coming from? An economy is like water. Water seeks its own level; and the increase in living standards there results in a decrease in living standards here. 

6. They have things that people in other countries only dream about - yet they want America to be more like those other countries. 

Answer: Who told you we want to be more like other countries? Where is your source of such erroneous information?  We don’t want America to be more like those other countries. What we want is access to Single Payer Universal Healthcare, i.e. Medicare for everyone.  

 Think about it! And that, my friends, pretty much sums up the USA in the 21st Century.   Makes you wonder who is doing the math.   

Response: Nothing above falls within the definition of a conundrum. The six statements indicated in blue, above, are meant to mislead, to misinform. That’s all they are, and that’s all they’re worth.
 

These three, short sentences tell you a lot about the direction of our current government and cultural environment:   

 1. We are advised to NOT judge ALL Muslims by the actions of a few lunatics, but we are encouraged to judge ALL gun owners by the actions of a few lunatics.  Answer: Once again, we have a misleading statement intended to misinform. The first sentence is true. The second is false. We are not encouraged to judge “All gun owners”. We are asked to control the sale of guns. It’s that simple.

Funny how that works.  And here's another one worth considering…   

 2. Seems we constantly hear about how Social Security is going to run out of money.  But we never hear about welfare or food stamps running out of money!   What's interesting is the first group "worked for" their money, but the second didn't.   Answer: The only way Social Security will run out of money will be because we let it happen. It is not broke as we sit, and it never need be in the future. As to welfare or food stamps running out of money—I certainly hope not; and it will not unless we let it happen. Jesus said, “The poor will always be with us.” He also said, “Feed My sheep”. As to who worked for their money as compared to who did not, you surely do not believe that everybody on welfare and/or food stamps never worked for their money. Also, in the same vein, surely you do not believe everybody who collects or has collected Social Security worked for all they received. Give me a break. Except for those who died prematurely, almost everyone on Social Security has, to some extent, received more than they paid in from the very beginning.

 Think about it.....and Last but not least :   

 3. Why are we cutting benefits for our veterans, no pay raises for our military and cutting our army to a level lower than before WWII, but we are not stopping the payments or benefits to illegal aliens. Answer: I’m not as informed on this matter as on the others, but I’m not aware of any benefits being paid to illegal aliens. Perhaps you can inform us of what those benefits are. Or, is this just another example of misinformation?

 "If you do not take an interest in the affairs of your government, then you are doomed to live under the rule of fools." – Plato Response: Agreed! 

In the mean time, this is Ronald Miller, www.sageobserver.blogspot.com signing off. Email me at mtss86@comcast.net

Socialism

Exacerbated by the candidacy for the presidency of Senator Bernie Sanders who claims to be a Democratic Socialist, the subject of Socialism keeps raising its, some might say ugly, head in the news these days. Unfortunately, in our culture the word Socialism has become a pejorative. Just the sound of the word creates animosity in spite of the fact that most of us don’t really know what Socialism really is. We only know the very thought of it makes us mad. In defense of our position, we may use the words free markets and capitalism; but most of us can’t really provide a good explanation of what these are either. If you don’t believe me, ask around. Ask what these things are; or, even more difficult, see if you can get your answers in writing. In almost every case those whom you question will not be able to answer. They aren’t dumb. Up to now, they just haven’t had the need to know.

So what is Socialism, Capitalism, or a Free Market? For this venue, I believe as simple an explanation as possible will suffice. In short, Socialism (not to be confused with Communism) is a system wherein ownership and management, i.e. governance, of the means of production and related systems, are by the people. Competition is minimal if at all. Capitalism, on the other hand, is a system based on private ownership of the means of production, the creation of goods and services for profit, the accruing of profits to a capitalist class, and a system of salary and wage labor for the workers. Decision-making and investment is determined by the owners and/or managers of the factors of production. Competition is foremost with a philosophy of “survival of the fittest, let the devil take the hindmost”. As to free markets, no matter what others may tell you, they only really exist in the classroom. In the real world, markets are affected by manipulation of one kind or another, monopoly, and/or price fixing.

In the end, both Socialism and Capitalism are self-defeating. Generally speaking, without competition, under Socialism everybody wants to receive, nobody wants to give. By its very definition, Capitalism is self-defeating because, in the end, only the winner, i.e. the strongest, remains—then it is no longer Capitalism. As a result, all that is left is some form of dictatorship, i.e. an autocracy, oligarchy, etc. I think you can already see that in the progression of our democratic republic today (unless we do something about it before it is too late, that is).

Hopefully having cleared the air on this to this point, where are we now?  I’ll tell you how I view our nation’s status and you can (and you will) see for yourself. In all candor, our nation and our people, i.e. YOU, are being literally raped by an Oligarchy of the Corporatocracy and Power Elite, operating through a Shadow Government surreptitiously controlling our nation through our government elected by us, we the people, and bribed and manipulated by them. They, that oligarchy, even write our laws. We vote (some of us—that is) and pay the bills. They rule and take the spoils. You have heard the expression, “to the victor belong the spoils”. You have heard from many sources of the course our income has taken over the past forty years, the disappearing middle-class, and of the growing disparity in income and wealth. You have even felt the pain. You have to know where you stand, i.e. your status, in these matters. You surely know.

These people have owned the Republican Party from the beginning; but, now, in recent years, they have done the unthinkable. They have begun to take over the party of the people, the Democratic Party—the only hope the people, we in the 90%, have had left to represent our needs, the party of Roosevelt, the party of Truman, and, yes, the party of Carter, after which we begun to go downhill.

But “Avast”, there is a light at the end of the tunnel. The honorable Senator from Vermont, Bernie Sanders, has thrown his hat in the ring for president. He calls himself a Democratic Socialist. I call him a Liberal. Everything he proposes is liberal. Nothing he proposes is any more Socialist than we are now. Nothing he proposes is any more Socialist than we have ever been in the past. Was our bailout of General Motors Socialist? Was our bailout of the mortgage industry Socialist? Is anything we support, our guarantee of the risk, with the private industry receiving the profits, Socialist? Let me tell you what one of the greatest, if not the greatest, leaders in all history had to say about Socialism vs. Liberalism in a speech one hundred years ago; and it is just as true today:

I want to-night to speak about these cross-currents; and let me first say a word about Socialism. There are a great many Socialists whose characters and whose views I have much respect for—men some of whom I know well, and whose friendship I enjoy. A good many of those gentlemen who have delightful, rosy views of a noble and brilliant future for the world, are so remote from hard facts of daily life and of ordinary politics that I am not very sure that they will bring any useful or effective influence to bear upon the immediate course of events. To the revolutionary Socialist, whether dreamer or politician, I do not appeal as the Liberal candidate for Dundee. I recognise that they are perfectly right in voting against me and voting against the Liberals, because Liberalism is not Socialism, and never will be. There is a great gulf fixed. It is not only a gulf of method, it is a gulf of principle. There are many steps we have to take which our Socialist opponents or friends, whichever they like to call themselves, will have to take with us; but there are immense differences of principle and of political philosophy between our views and their views. Liberalism has its own history and its own tradition. Socialism has its own formulas and aims. Socialism seeks to pull down wealth; Liberalism seeks to raise up poverty. Socialism would destroy private interests; Liberalism would preserve private interests in the only way in which they can be safely and justly preserved, namely, by reconciling them with public right. Socialism would kill enterprise; Liberalism would rescue enterprise from the trammels of privilege and preference. Socialism assails the pre-eminence of the individual; Liberalism seeks, and shall seek more in the future, to build up a minimum standard for the mass. Socialism exalts the rule; Liberalism exalts the man. Socialism attacks capital; Liberalism attacks monopoly. These are the great distinctions which I draw, and which, I think, you will agree I am right in drawing at this election between our respective policies and moods. Don’t think that Liberalism is a faith that is played out; that it is a creed to which there is no expanding future. As long as the world rolls round, Liberalism will have its part to play—grand, beneficent, and ameliorating—in relation to men and States. The truth lies in these matters, as it always lies in difficult matters, midway between extreme formulas. It is in the nice adjustment of the respective ideas of collectivism and individualism that the problem of the world and the solution of that problem lie in the years to come.

Winston Churchill
October 11, 1906

One hundred years ago, Winston Churchill called it Liberalism. I call it Progressivism. The truth of the matter is that some markets are better adapted to collective governance and others are better governed as regulated “free markets”. In no event of which I can think should we allow Laissez-faire Capitalism to prevail in our economic markets. How many times do we have to suffer thieves in our hen houses? Our government is permeated with them. Surely we should not over regulate. Surely we should eliminate the liars, cheaters, and thieves in our government and restore the will of our people to power. We should elect Bernie Sanders to the presidency and we should elect the right people to support his efforts. All we have to do is get out and do it.

In the mean time, this is Ronald Miller, www.sageobserver.blogspot.com signing off. Email me at mtss86@comcast.net