On a recent podcast, I noticed a bit of pro-socialism dishonesty from Scott Adams. I wasn't really surprised, because he is a government supremacist, after all. And you can't really have a state without embracing socialism.
It was hard to listen through to the end, but I did because I knew it would be important to refute the dishonest claims he was making.
He was first saying that it's meaningless to be against socialism because socialism is not a thing; it's multiple things and no one can explain why they believe it's bad. He attributed this to people being brainwashed by the "anti-socialist" media (FOX News?) they absorb.
But, no one can explain why they believe it's bad?
Challenge accepted-- Socialism is the attempt to base a "society" on theft (usually, by government); driven by envy and entitlement. Taking anyone's rightfully owned property from them when they'd prefer not to have it taken is theft, even if you like what the property is used for. Even if the stolen property is used for "good" purposes. I believe this is bad. Pro-socialism people think it's OK. Who is being reasonable here?
Then he went on to claim that socialism didn't destroy Venezuela because other countries do fine with socialism. That it was because Venezuela had a tyrant (who imposed too much socialism) rather than because Venezuela was socialist.
He claimed that America does fine with the "little bits" of socialism the US government imposes, and that European countries do fine with the socialism they have. This is also dishonest.
Yes, the US is socialist. I've been pointing this out for ages. Democrats are openly socialist, and Republicans are socialists in denial-- they still want socialism, they just call it "national security", "border security", or whatever socialist programs they like. Am I OK, or better off, because of that "little bit" of socialism? I'm more than willing to get rid of it to find out which is better.
But, he's almost right. A little bit of (antisocial) socialism won't destroy a society just like a small robbery won't wipe out an individual. But it's still theft and it still isn't good. You might survive it but you're better off without it. And, socialism and robberies frequently escalate into the thief killing the victim. Not always. You probably won't be murdered as long as things don't go off the rails in directions which shock, threaten, or thwart the thief, but your death is always on the table for thieves.
If you've convinced yourself that ethics aren't a real thing, that being pragmatic is the way to go, you can justify anything. I hope you don't follow anyone down that path.
Nice article Kent! Thanks!
ReplyDelete