slug.com slug.com

7 1

For the good of "the people" - "for the many not the few". Surely, state owned means of production, distribution and the forced redistribution of wealth is the only logical and morally correct thing to do. Surely, you must agree?

Incajackson 6 Apr 9
Share

Be part of the movement!

Welcome to the community for those who value free speech, evidence and civil discourse.

Create your free account

7 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

0

Thanks everyone.

Actually, I agree with you all! I was just playing devil's advocate to try and elicit some different views. It's a pity that nobody agreed with the OP - it could have been lively!

Incidentally, "For the many, not the few" is the current slogan of our Labour Party in the UK and there is a worryingly possibility that they could form the next government!

what a world we live in aye. smh

2

No I disagree wholeheartedly, any system that puts the state in charge of individuals and there economic activity is slavery, individuals are born with the right to work, live, be successful or dismal failures without the government interfering.

3

For good of the many? Do you realize every socialist nation has its 1% also? They are the top level apparatchniks.In the Soviet Union these are the ones who had limos and summer dachas, while the many waited 5 or more years to be able to buy a modest car and lived in cramped apartments with extended families because there was no housing available to have at any price. State-owned means for the benefit of the politically powerful and connected. State-owned means at the whim of the inept bureaucrat. How is that morally correct or logical? What is it that makes you think government employees are so altruistic?

2

Well, look how well it did in USSR, Mao's China, Pol Pot's Cambodia, Castro' Cuba, and Maduro's Venezuela. So successful that numbers desire to immigrate-- not to, but from. People willing to risk their lives to escape Communist failures

1

Surely, I don't.
“Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all. We disapprove of state education. Then the socialists say that we are opposed to any education. We object to a state religion. Then the socialists say that we want no religion at all. We object to a state-enforced equality. Then they say that we are against equality. And so on, and so on. It is as if the socialists were to accuse us of not wanting persons to eat because we do not want the state to raise grain.” - Frederic Bastiat

2

Responsibility and authority should never be separated. If we are established as free people, then we truly have the responsibility and authority to order our lives. If we are slaves then that responsibility falls to our owners and the fruits of our labor is placed under the authority of our master.

1

Only a serious Marxist would say such a thing .

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:29024
Slug does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.