"[Left-leaning Hollywood personalities] are uninteresting, they’re vicious, they’re vitriolic, they’re really, really not good people. I’m willing to say that on the record. You could probe them scientifically and anthropologically and prove that they’re not good people....[The Hollywood left] is a stale group of people who are recycling the same old bad ideas that don’t work. Why else would those people go to the stinky side?"
Andrew Breitbart
Thursday, May 6, 2010
Corporatism confused with Fascism
Russia and America: Turning the World Upside Down
A little over a year ago, a columnist for the newspaper that once served as the official communications organ of the Central Committee of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) had some choice words for what remains of America’s free market economy.
“Like the breaking of a great dam, the American descent into Marxism is happening with breathtaking speed,” the columnist wrote. “The final collapse has come with the election of Barack Obama.”
His prediction for the future?
“The proud American will go down into his slavery without a fight, beating his chest and proclaiming to the world how free he really is,” he continued. “The world will only snicker.”
As difficult as it may be to believe, that column appeared last April in Pravda – and a year later its chilling premonition has taken another step towards reality with the passage of Obama’s socialized medicine plan. Meanwhile in the former Soviet Union, things are moving in the opposite direction as health care reforms are currently being proposed with the aim of undoing decades of communist micromanagement.
Has someone turned the world upside down? Is a failed former socialist state really adopting limited free market reforms? And even less fathomable: Is a nation that was conceived in liberty – one that rode the free market to unprecedented wealth creation and an unrivaled standard of living – now adopting the failed ideology of the very nation it vanquished in a global struggle for freedom?
Amazingly, the answer to both questions is “yes.”
According to the Moscow Times, the Russian Duma is currently considering a health care reform bill that “adopts a laissez-faire approach instead of a micromanagement one.” Legislation is also being debated that would force certain hospitals to either start turning a profit or be shut down.
“While Washington plans to pump unprecedented sums into what critics call a government takeover of health care, Moscow is moving in the opposite direction by backing legislation that could force hospitals and other public institutions to go commercial or close,” the Times report notes.
Excerpts from an article By Howard Rich Americans for Limited Government">
A little over a year ago, a columnist for the newspaper that once served as the official communications organ of the Central Committee of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) had some choice words for what remains of America’s free market economy.
“Like the breaking of a great dam, the American descent into Marxism is happening with breathtaking speed,” the columnist wrote. “The final collapse has come with the election of Barack Obama.”
His prediction for the future?
“The proud American will go down into his slavery without a fight, beating his chest and proclaiming to the world how free he really is,” he continued. “The world will only snicker.”
As difficult as it may be to believe, that column appeared last April in Pravda – and a year later its chilling premonition has taken another step towards reality with the passage of Obama’s socialized medicine plan. Meanwhile in the former Soviet Union, things are moving in the opposite direction as health care reforms are currently being proposed with the aim of undoing decades of communist micromanagement.
Has someone turned the world upside down? Is a failed former socialist state really adopting limited free market reforms? And even less fathomable: Is a nation that was conceived in liberty – one that rode the free market to unprecedented wealth creation and an unrivaled standard of living – now adopting the failed ideology of the very nation it vanquished in a global struggle for freedom?
Amazingly, the answer to both questions is “yes.”
According to the Moscow Times, the Russian Duma is currently considering a health care reform bill that “adopts a laissez-faire approach instead of a micromanagement one.” Legislation is also being debated that would force certain hospitals to either start turning a profit or be shut down.
“While Washington plans to pump unprecedented sums into what critics call a government takeover of health care, Moscow is moving in the opposite direction by backing legislation that could force hospitals and other public institutions to go commercial or close,” the Times report notes.
Excerpts from an article By Howard Rich Americans for Limited Government">
Monday, May 3, 2010
Ron Paul accurately deems the terminology for President Obama's political structure
...the President and his defenders can easily deflect that charge(socialist) by pointing out that the historical meaning of socialism is government ownership of industry; under the President's policies, industry remains in nominally private hands. Using the more accurate term -- corporatism -- forces the President to defend his policies that increase government control of private industries and expand de facto subsidies to big businesses. This also promotes the understanding that though the current system may not be pure socialism, neither is it free-market since government controls the private sector through taxes, regulations, and subsidies, and has done so for decades.
Using precise terms can prevent future statists from successfully blaming the inevitable failure of their programs on the remnants of the free market that are still allowed to exist. We must not allow the disastrous results of corporatism to be ascribed incorrectly to free market capitalism or used as a justification for more government expansion. Most importantly, we must learn what freedom really is and educate others on how infringements on our economic liberties caused our economic woes in the first place. Government is the problem; it cannot be the solution.
Socialism vs. Corporatism
By Ron Paul
Published 04/27/10 Campaign for Liberty
http://www.campaignforliberty.com/article.php?view=806
Using precise terms can prevent future statists from successfully blaming the inevitable failure of their programs on the remnants of the free market that are still allowed to exist. We must not allow the disastrous results of corporatism to be ascribed incorrectly to free market capitalism or used as a justification for more government expansion. Most importantly, we must learn what freedom really is and educate others on how infringements on our economic liberties caused our economic woes in the first place. Government is the problem; it cannot be the solution.
Socialism vs. Corporatism
By Ron Paul
Published 04/27/10 Campaign for Liberty
http://www.campaignforliberty.com/article.php?view=806
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
