Category Archives: Politics on the left

Einstein when it came to economics was no Einstein

Posted on by
1

This was written by Albert Einstein, yes that Albert Einstein, in 1949: Why Socialism?. He begins:

Is it advisable for one who is not an expert on economic and social issues to express views on the subject of socialism? I believe for a number of reasons that it is.

One reason being to discover that however high someone’s IQ, when it comes to economics there is no guarantee they won’t be a complete idiot. You should read it all, but here is the core proposition:

I have now reached the point where I may indicate briefly what to me constitutes the essence of the crisis of our time. It concerns the relationship of the individual to society. The individual has become more conscious than ever of his dependence upon society. But he does not experience this dependence as a positive asset, as an organic tie, as a protective force, but rather as a threat to his natural rights, or even to his economic existence. Moreover, his position in society is such that the egotistical drives of his make-up are constantly being accentuated, while his social drives, which are by nature weaker, progressively deteriorate. All human beings, whatever their position in society, are suffering from this process of deterioration. Unknowingly prisoners of their own egotism, they feel insecure, lonely, and deprived of the naive, simple, and unsophisticated enjoyment of life. Man can find meaning in life, short and perilous as it is, only through devoting himself to society.

The economic anarchy of capitalist society as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of the evil. We see before us a huge community of producers the members of which are unceasingly striving to deprive each other of the fruits of their collective labor—not by force, but on the whole in faithful compliance with legally established rules. In this respect, it is important to realize that the means of production—that is to say, the entire productive capacity that is needed for producing consumer goods as well as additional capital goods—may legally be, and for the most part are, the private property of individuals.

The “today” of “as it exists today” was 1949. This was at the height of the Cold War when Stalin’s Russia – The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics – threatened the peace and prosperity of the entire planet, the year of the Communist Revolution in China. And if you read the article through, it states every cliché known to every soapbox revolutionary since the start of time. Even geniuses can be morons.

“Climate Change is a [Cultural] Marxist Hoax”

Posted on by
Reply

Do you want to know the near perfect dye marker to determine whether someone is on the left or the right? Just ask them about climate change. This is an article worth your attention: Brazil’s New Top Diplomat: Climate Change is a Marxist Hoax. I think he has explained the mania over climate change (aka global warming) with uncommon accuracy.

Brazil’s newly appointed foreign minister, Ernesto Frago Araujo, who starts his new job in January under President Jair Bolsonaro, has stated that the climate change issue was invented by “cultural Marxists” to help push a globalist agenda that is anti-growth and anti-Christian, reported The Guardian and the Daily Mail.

I think he is also right about the anti-Christian ideology which I would prefer to discuss as anti-Western Civilisation, and I don’t think of it as pro-China as such but rather anti-capitalist in its fundamental ethos. But these are side issues. This is what climate change really fundamentally is on about:

“An important part of the globalist project is to transfer economic power from the West …” said Araujo, and “a key part of Trump’s project is to disrupt that process, which is already happening.”

As for global warming, “the left has sequestered the environmental cause and perverted it to the point of paroxysm over the last 20 years with the ideology of climate change,” he wrote. The climate scientists “gathered some data suggesting a correlation of rising temperatures with increasing concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere, but ignored data suggesting the opposite, and created a ‘scientific’ dogma that no one else can challenge on pain of being excommunicated from good society. This is just the opposite of the scientific spirit.”

The evidence for climate change is so flimsy to the point of non-existence that it would have been astonishing that it has kept rolling along were it not for its actual underlying agenda.

The “Progressive” checklist

Posted on by
Reply

Attached to this post was a comment from Tel that needs to be brought to the surface.

Leftists take over stale causes and distort them towards socialism. They lack the ability to create. The original feminists got everything they wanted: votes, jobs, property rights. Having achieved their purpose they gave up and went on with their lives.

The cause was then picked up by a new generation of so called “feminists” who just stole the name and then invented new and pointless demands for the purpose of making people miserable and making themselves feel important. Be divisive, make your demands unreasonable, respond irrationally when called on it. They cloaked themselves in the legitimacy of the earlier cause and pretend to speak on behalf of all women.

The “Progressive” checklist:

* Steal the vocabulary, distort it to your own ends;
* Divide people into tribes and set them at each other’s throats;
* Pretend to speak on behalf of a whole segment of the population despite having no legitimate authority;
* Outrage, distraction and name calling when put under scrutiny.

It’s a system, this is merely one facet.

She is not as stupid as many of her critics think

Posted on by
1

She is also young and has a long way to go. The right response is fear.

Social credit coming to a community near you

Posted on by
Reply

Here is how it’s being done in Britain: Britain creates a more hostile environment for immigrants.

“Promiscuity or sexual preference within the law. Drinking or gambling. Eccentricity, including beliefs, appearance and lifestyle.” These are just a few of the criteria that Britain can use to deny citizenship, if “by the scale and persistence of their behaviour, [applicants have] made themselves notorious in their local or the wider community.”

Reading the wrong sort of blog will soon be part of the protocol. Meanwhile, the Chinese are leading the way.

In the West, we have tended to leave it to the private sector, with Facebook, Twitter and Google deciding what you should know, what you can say and what information you can access. We are only however just starting. Lots more to come.

Political madness on three fronts

Posted on by
Reply

I will mash these all together rather than put up three posts since they really are all about the same kind of thing: political madness.

First there is the disaster with the re-election of Dan Andrews, but I am not sure that electing Matthew Guy would have been much less of a disaster. That there was even an election going on in Victoria was something I only barely noticed. Labor will only raise my taxes and shovel heaps of money into useless construction projects – my favourite being the one billion being spent on the new train station at The Shrine. Not only will no one take the train there around 364 days of the year, but there are around half a dozen tram lines that go there already from the city. But if your aim is to create wealth-depleting forms of employment, it’s about as good as anything.

The worry is that our Federal Libs will draw the wrong lessons. At the national level, the name of the game is border protection. I realise that it is no longer fashionable to make distinctions between Australians who want to live in Australia and non-Australians who want to live in Australia, but there is a distinction, and the Libs have got to make it an election issue.

Let me meld this into climate change. I understand that there must be no end of people contributing to the party who wish to see subsidised “renewables” but you have to resist. But while some ideas are crazier than others, this one has a kind of madness that really ought to terrify anyone, specially since the probability of a new ice age seems higher than a rapidly heating planet. But how’s this: Controversial sun barrier technically possible, would be “remarkably inexpensive”.

Spraying sun-dimming chemicals high above the Earth to slow global warming could be “remarkably inexpensive”, costing about $A3.1 billion a year to run over a 15-year period, according to a study by US scientists.

Some researchers say the geo-engineering technique known as stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI) could limit rising temperatures that are causing climate change.

As yet unproven and hypothetical, it would involve the use of huge hoses, cannons or specially designed aircraft to spray large quantities of sulphate particles into the upper layer of the atmosphere to act as a reflective barrier against sunlight.

Total costs to launch a hypothetical SAI effort 15 years from now would be $A4.8 billion, scientists at Harvard University said in a report published in the journal Environmental Research Letters, adding that average annual operating costs would be about $A3.1 billion a year over 15 years.

And the last takes us to the next political sensation in the United States: Fox News has found a new ‘villain’ in Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. She is hardly a villain, more a figure of fun, someone to laugh at. But I wouldn’t laugh that much myself, since she really does represent the future of a large proportion of the Democratic Party in the US, and of parties on the left everywhere.

In addition to being a Latina woman, she’s calling for bold, progressive initiatives for America that Fox News has deemed socialism. (In reality, Ocasio-Cortez is a Democratic Socialist and is championing issues like Medicare for all and raising the minimum wage to $15 — not the government taking control of all means of production, as we would see in traditional socialist governments.)

Bringing the political culture of The Honduras to the US.

The smartest political leader of all time

Posted on by
Reply

Of course, accomplished nothing positive, but you know what he means. And here is something else along the same lines from the worst American president ever. And yet it will be his wife fighting Bill Clinton’s wife for the Democrat nomination in 2020, and who’s to say she wouldn’t win. Knowing anything at all, or having no policy sense whatsoever, no longer seems to be a qualification for the left. See below.

Discussed more fully here: Off-teleprompter Obama rambles, nearly incoherently attacking American global warming skeptics

The forces of stupidity, ignorance and what can I have for free seem to overwhelm everything else.