19 February 2008

Castro's Out, Socialism Sucks

Just read the news over at Hot Air that Castro is finally gone and all I have to say is good riddance. This might come as a shock to a lot of youngsters on college campuses across the country but communism, socialism, or whatever "ism" that involves granting tremendous amounts of power to the state will ultimately lead to calamity. This holds especially true with socialism as it seeks to collectively "benefit" society by not respecting the individual. This inevitably leads to the loss of rights or "purging" of a few million people or so as seen with Stalin's Gulags, Mao's Cultural Revolution, and the "Year Zero" campaign under the Khmer Rouge. Castro's ideology was a reminder of these genocides that will hopefully remain 20th-century history (although people like Kim Jong-Il and Chavez scare me).

I'm a little disturbed that despite the atrocity, people still view low-level socialism as a viable option (aka "creeping socialism"). Crooks and Liars ran an article on the happy Danes who "don't have to worry about basic necessities", because the all-powerful nanny state takes care of them (see my response at comment #14). I'd rather be a free and miserable person than a well-behaved slave to the state, IMHO. Spokesman for the naive Hollywood Left, Michael Moore, talked about why the state needs to control health care. I purchased the bootleg of "Sicko" (you heard me Moore! a bootleg, and I want my $1.70 back!) and saw how he portrayed Cuba's health industry as a shining example on the hill. Give me a break. This might play well for all the cool college kids rebelling against their upper-middle class parents with Che shirts, but I'm not buying into this scam that has been proven by history to be a total disaster. Adios Castro, another stooge for a movement that sought to destroy civilization in the 20th century.

The Workers Paradise that was Mao's Cultural Revolution

13 comments:

Brown said...

Don't know if I buy your 'slippery slope' argument about "creeping socialism." What we have now is essentially corporate socialism under the guise of a free market.

Regulation is a useful tool to force corporations (and other amoral actors) to internalize the non-monetized costs of the way they do business. It's also clear that even under a moderately regulated health insurance industry, millions of Americans are uncovered (and not, as free-marketers would have you believe, as a result of their own laziness or ineptitude).

You don't like Castro--given and taken. Would you make the same judgments about the healthcare systems of Canada, England and France as you do about Cuba's? I know too many hardworking folks stateside who have been broken by medical bills to think that less regulation or government control is the answer.

LT Nixon said...

Brown,

My opposition to state-controlled health care stems from ideological opposition. I agree with you that corporate socialism is a sham as well. Looking at America's federal healthcare program to wounded vets, which has been sub-par at best and has sparked watchdog groups like IAVA (which is a well-run organization I'm thankful that exists), I can't help but think what a monstrous federal health care program would do for the rest of the country.

Anonymous said...

Sir,
Without ten paragraphs to confirm it, I will humbly submit that I am in agreement with you about good riddance to Castro. (I know, you're shocked since all I ever do is give you a hard time.)
Kath

Katana said...

creeping socialism - it's about as cheery as Jonathan Swift's "A Modest Proposal". Oh, I agree with you whole heartedly on this one.

Bag Blog said...

Maybe the government could socialize medicine and capitalize education. That way our education system would improve and everyone would get healthcare benefits.

LT Nixon said...

Kath,

Thanks for the encouragement. I think castro's resignation is welcomed by many. Maybe we can lift this ridiculous embargo now.

Katana/Bag Blog,

Thanks for dropping in, you always have interesting insight.

Anonymous said...

Re: "Looking at America's federal healthcare program to wounded vets, which has been sub-par at best...I can't help but think what a monstrous federal health care program would do for the rest of the country."

An insightful discussion of this issue--with praise for the Veterans' Hospital model--occurs toward the end of Brownlee's outstanding book "Overtreated" (2007), find it at
http://www.amazon.com/Overtreated-Medicine-Making-Sicker-Poorer/dp/1582345805
they deliver. sorry if the link gets truncated.

LT Nixon said...

Anonymous,

Thanks for the link. I'm certainly no health-care expert, but it seems these drug companies are over-prescribing medication.

boadicaea said...

A true rant, LT! You've been so calm on VetVoice I was starting to think I'd have to report you for bait-and-switch.

If your opposition to socialism has to do with your preference for an emphasis on the individual, you have to think about the individuals not blessed (and that is the word--you've heard about the guy who was born on third base and thinks he hit a triple, haven't you?) with what they need to survive properly.

Survival is what they're clawing after, not prosperity or recognition--just survival. If you're not surviving--according to Maslow that takes nutrition, shelter, health, and he's right--you're not advancing.

That's why we have those "socialist" attempts to help people survive--food stamps, Section 8 housing, health care for everyone . . . . oops, not that. But in Cuba they do, and it's rated very good. Very good indeed.

If you're not concerned about any of the no-have people themselves, it matters how the individual fares is that inevitably the wealthy can't insulate themselves from the rest of us (and I do mean us--I raised 3 kids on my own, one with an incurable and potentially fatal illness that took all kinds of medical care and meds; then I became 100% disabled from a work injury).

People without health care can't work well, and their children can't help passing on contagious illnesses at school. The kids education is at risk for a lot of reasons, one of which is that the family sometimes has to work so hard the kids lack attention, books, all the things that only parents can provide. They often have to choose between paying the rent and paying for medical care, or food (yup, yup, and yup).

Cheap housing affects everyone depending upon why its cheap--location, condition, distance from work. Undependable transportation or no money for it=work problems, little time at home, etc.

So unless they tent their very large homes and don't come out, the well-to-do can't escape the effects of the poverty that local-to-federal government can and should have systems in place to alleviate or prevent. And i think that's what you call socialism.

You might think differently some day when there are hungry mouths to feed. Think of them as baby birds, mouths open and squeaking like crazy, and eventually you'll beg Fidel himself to come to your house and personally help you take care of them so they will shut up and go to sleep!

JEDI said...

LT,
Thanks for the comment on my blog I'm in the process of reading yours. Would you mind linking me and I'll do the same for you. Thanks, you have a dry wit that gos well with todays constant posturing and self apologistic ninnys that are supposed to be serving us. {Gov'ment at all levels}

Jedi

http://mywarstories.blogspot.com/

JEDI said...

Oh by the way...is that Roudy Roddie Pifer in the headline?

"I came here to chew bubblegum and kick ass----and I'm all outta bubblegum."

Jedi

LT Nixon said...

Jedi,

Already got you linked on the right sidebar there, thanks for dropping in. Everyone should go check out his blog, great stories from Afghanistan and on war itself.

Haha, you're the first person to catch that it was rowdy rowdy from "They Live". I ripped the capture from when he first puts on the glasses and freaks out. This is shortly before he starts shooting alien Yuppies in the face. Such a great under-rated movie.

I look forward to seeing more of your work.

LT Nixon said...

Boadicaea,

I'm not against stopping poverty and famine per se, I'm simply against the state "feeding" the masses due to evidence postulated in my post above. I'm also a big fan of personal responsibility and I think people need to stop looking for freebies from Uncle Sucker. I'm much more big on charity providing help for people in a bad way.