Posts
I find something to admire in the political left – the true
left, not the version to be found in the United States. Mostly I admire the clear vision when it
comes to the Anglo-empire and its wars.
But I also admire the left that is unafraid of the label socialist or even communist, the left that is unashamed of their truth. (I hope I don’t
need to add that there is much that I do not admire in the political left.)
Say it Loud, Say it
Proud
The
English-speaking world’s fear of calling communism, ‘communism’, by Ramin
Mazaheri.
Despite openly calling for every plank of the communist
platform, many in the west are fearful of using the term:
In many ways this fear is
justified: communism is a dirty word in the English culture.
Of course, this might also be the strategy – why openly use
a “dirty word” when you are able to achieve the same ends by subterfuge? But I admire those who are direct, open and
unafraid, as is the author of this piece:
…many well-meaning, intelligent and
prominent Western leftists simply cannot or will not openly call for communism
or socialism.
One such western leftist is the former Greek Finance
Minister Yanis Varoufakis. He has
written a book, “And the Poor Suffer What They Must?” in which he apparently
draws on communist economics in every form absent having a hammer and sickle on
the cover.
Varoufakis repeatedly uses the term, “political surplus
recycling,” in his book. According to
Mazaheri, this term is nothing other than good old-fashioned communist
redistribution and central planning, all dressed in acceptable garb.
Because deficits and surpluses are
inevitable between two nations which trade, there must be a multi-national
mechanism/parliament/boss which redistributes wealth from surplus nations to
deficit nations in order to ensure economic balance and social/regional harmony.
Being that Greece is one of those deficit nations and
Mazaheri is an unashamed communist, you will understand precisely the context
and intent of the phrase.
Just say it openly, man!
Don’t be ashamed,
says Mazaheri; let it all hang out. Say it loud, say it proud!
Anglophones must accept: They are
already communist, they just don’t believe it: “Central planning” does exist in
Western capitalist/Anglophone countries: in the United States their economy is
guided by the Pentagon, the world’s largest employer; which hands out the
fruits of their taxpayer-funded research to private companies…
He nailed that one.
As for the communism already
present in the Anglophone world: Do I need to get into social security for the
elderly, the 40-hour work week, the living wage, universal health care, rent
caps, seniority pay, capital gains taxes, progressive taxes, universal
childcare, mass education, free higher education and on and on and on?
He nailed that one as well.
…Westerners and especially
Anglophones…appear unable to realize their true communist paternity. And it is
a single-parent household….
In this, not so much.
The west has allowed the philosophy of the true left – the true
socialist and communist left – to punch holes in the vulnerabilities (and there
are many) of traditional liberal and libertarian political philosophies
grounded in traditional Christian values.
Instead of defending and shoring up those vulnerabilities,
the west decided to take a walk on the wild side. The west is not “a single-parent household.” The west is the product of a beautiful young
girl who allowed one too many of those equally-created men to get a little
close…eventually, she gave in to temptation.
Unfortunately in this case, the father has yet to run off with another
woman.
In Mazaheri’s view, the problem with not being truthful in
labeling this dialogue as Marxism is that time is wasted treading the same ground
that Marx already opened to the world 150 years ago. Of course, I think it is a purposefully
brilliant strategy to get the camel’s nose back under the tent even after the
death of hundreds of millions and the destruction of billions.
Conclusion
I admire Mazaheri for this and I mean this sincerely: don’t be
ashamed for what and who you are. Of
course, it would not play well as a strategy if expanding communism in the west
is your goal.
In any case, while the west has taken many steps toward
communism (as Mazaheri rightly points out), the road to communism in the west
will still pass through cultural, and not economic, gates. Destroy traditional western civilization and
cultural norms and the only thing left will be the state.
Call that communism or whatever you want. It is the opposite of freedom. Those who don’t value traditional western
culture are leading us down this road.
Postscript
Mazaheri lives in Paris.
While riding in a taxi, he heard something on the radio which prompted a
conversation with his taxi driver:
The Black taxi driver and I
listening to the radio agreed: the French (the White French) are willfully
blind, hypocritical, extremely clannish, their arrogance causes them to waste
the talent of so many millions and billions, etc. and etc. White people are not
privy to such conversations, I imagine, and that is a shame – but I can guarantee you they are routinely
held among the Colored. White Communists probably have such conversations
with the Colored, I would certainly expect…. (emphasis added)
Something to think about when it comes to immigration and
the future of France (and the west, generally).
Communism is, itself, merely a euphemism for stealing. They say,"Property is theft" so they can then steal property.
ReplyDeleteThe American political system has been soft-core fascist for almost a century. Liberals love to call conservatives fascists. The problem is, the liberals are right. Of course, well-informed conservatives like to call liberals fascists, and they are correct, too. Everyone who believes in the efficiency of the so-called government-business alliance is a fascist.
ReplyDeleteThe fascist state has always been an attempt to control private industry by means of inflation, taxation, and regulation. Fascism has always been a system of keeping the big boys alive and happy at the expense of the taxpayers. Of course, the faces change. The system was always one gigantic system of cartels, regulation, and fiat money. It was, in short, everything that the critics of modern capitalism say is wrong with capitalism.
https://mises.org/library/economic-fascism-and-bailout-economy
max
If you allow nominal private property, but impose government control, it’s called fascism.
ReplyDeleteIt bothers me a little when conservatives call Barack Obama a “socialist.” He certainly is an enemy of the free market, and wants politicians and bureaucrats to make the fundamental decisions about the economy. But that does not mean that he wants government ownership of the means of production, which has long been a standard definition of socialism.
What President Obama has been pushing for, and moving toward, is more insidious: government control of the economy, while leaving ownership in private hands. That way, politicians get to call the shots but, when their bright ideas lead to disaster, they can always blame those who own businesses in the private sector. Politically, it is heads-I-win when things go right, and tails-you-lose when things go wrong.
One of the reasons why both pro-Obama and anti-Obama observers may be reluctant to see him as fascist is that both tend to accept the prevailing notion that fascism is on the political right, while it is obvious that Obama is on the political left.
Back in the 1920s, however, when fascism was a new political development, it was widely — and correctly — regarded as being on the political left. Jonah Goldberg’s great book “Liberal Fascism” cites overwhelming evidence of the fascists’ consistent pursuit of the goals of the left, and of the left’s embrace of the fascists as one of their own during the 1920s.Mussolini, the originator of fascism, was lionized by the left, both in Europe and in America, during the 1920s. Even Hitler, who adopted fascist ideas in the 1920s, was seen by some, including W.E.B. Du Bois, as a man of the left.
…What socialism, fascism and other ideologies of the left have in common is an assumption that some very wise people — like themselves — need to take decisions out of the hands of lesser people, like the rest of us, and impose those decisions by government fiat.
…Only our own awareness of the huge stakes involved can save us from the rampaging presumptions of our betters, whether they are called socialists or fascists. So long as we buy their heady rhetoric, we are selling our birthright of freedom.
Thomas Sowell
max
Instead of right and left, it would be nice to begin speaking of up and down. Up to freedom, down to authority.
Deletemax, I am happy to see that you are branching out!
DeleteThe great info you have provided. Really very thanks.
ReplyDelete