SYNDICATED COLUMN: Bernie Sanders is a Socialist and So Are You

http://vignette3.wikia.nocookie.net/socialism/images/c/ce/Socialist_party_of_america_logo_.gif/revision/latest?cb=20090319232217            When it comes to politics, Americans are idiots.

Because American voters are political ignoramuses, Bernie Sanders found it necessary to take the stage at Georgetown University yesterday to explain what socialism, and democratic socialism are. The point being that too many Democratic primary voters plan to cast their ballots for Hillary Clinton, not because they like her or her ideas, but worry that a self-declared socialist (or democratic socialist) won’t be able to beat the Republican nominee in the general election.

Setting aside the rather idiotic idea of voting for a candidate because everyone else is voting for her — what’s the point of holding an election? we’d might as well turn elected office over to the candidate with an early lead in the polls — I have to wonder whether an electorate that knows nothing about socialism is qualified to vote at all.

And remember: these are Democratic primary voters. One must shiver in fear at the colossal dumbness on the Republican right, where climate change denialism is normative, Ronald Reagan was brilliant (and brought down This Wall) and Tea Party marchers famously carry signs demanding “government get out of my Medicaid.” To them, socialism means Stalin — if they know who he was.

Socialism, Marx and Engels explained, is the long transitional economic form between laissez faire capitalism and communism, an ideal utopian state that will only become possible after the rise of a New Man (and Woman) whose total commitment to communitarian ideals over individualistic concerns allows the state to wither away and people to rule themselves in small collectives. This true ideal communism, Marxists believe, is centuries away at best.

In contemporary politics, Communist Party rule in nations like the Soviet Union and China led to confusion, especially in the West, where capitalist news media was only too happy to turn a relatively simple idea into a muddle. Neither the Soviet nor the Chinese Communist Parties ever claimed to have achieved communism. With the exception of Pol Pot’s bizarre Kampuchea, communist parties governed self-declared socialist states, not communist ones. It was, after all, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.

When Bernie Sanders calls himself a socialist, he’s drawing upon a tradition of Western European electoral politics in which socialist principles live alongside free-market capitalist ones, rather than a fully fleshed-out transformation of the economy into one in which the workers control the means of production. For Sanders and the hundreds of millions of citizens of the nations of Europe and their post-colonial progeny (Canada, Australia, many African countries), democratic socialism is a system that looks a lot like the United States of America.

In the ur-democratic socialist nations of Norway, Denmark and Sweden, citizens’ elected representatives propose and vote on laws — just like here.

There is no state economy. There are, like here, small private businesses and giant corporations.

So what makes them socialist? Government regulations and the social safety net. Government agencies tell power companies, for example, how much they may pollute the air and sets the minimum wage. There is, as in all capitalist societies, poverty. But the government mitigates its effects. Welfare and unemployment benefits, social security for retirees, free or subsidized healthcare make things easier when times are tough.

The United States is a democratic socialist country, albeit a lame one.

Senator Sanders wants less lameness.

In his speech, The New York Times summarized, “he said he wanted an America where people could work 40 hours a week and not live in poverty, and that such a society would require new government entitlements like free public colleges, Medicare-for-all health insurance, a $15 minimum wage, $1 trillion in public works projects to create jobs, and mandatory [paid] parental leave.”

These benefits are standard in almost every other technologically advanced nation on earth, as well as many developing countries. Democratic socialism? It’s like that old dishwashing liquid ad: you’re soaking in it.

Yet here is Sanders, in what pundits are calling a do-or-die speech attempting to fix his “I like him but America won’t elect a socialist” crisis. David Axelrod, who worked on Obama’s 2008 campaign, says, “The issue here is, is that word [socialism] a barrier for a sufficient number of voters that it creates an electoral ceiling for him?”

As far as I know, Bernie hasn’t emphasized the quality of public education in his campaign. But something is, no pun intended, radically wrong when so few Americans understand basic political and economic terms — especially when they apply to the political and economic system under which they themselves live.

By global standards, Sanders’ campaign is calling for weak socialist tea. In most European countries, all colleges are free or charge nominal fees. Socialized medicine, in which your doctor is a government employee and there’s no such thing as a big for-profit hospital corporation, is the international norm. Paid leave? Obviously. And most governments recognize the importance of public infrastructure, and not relying on the private sector to provide every job.

There can only be one reason Americans don’t know this stuff: they’re idiots. Their schools made them that way as kids. Media propaganda keeps them stupid as adults.

(Ted Rall, syndicated writer and the cartoonist for ANewDomain.net, is the author of the new book “Snowden,” the biography of the NSA whistleblower. Want to support independent journalism? You can subscribe to Ted Rall at Beacon.)

COPYRIGHT 2015 TED RALL, DISTRIBUTED BY CREATORS.COM

55 thoughts on “SYNDICATED COLUMN: Bernie Sanders is a Socialist and So Are You

  1. How can you trust the socialist convictions of a Jew whose loyalties remain first with a fascistically Zion-nationalist, war-criminal corporation?
    http://smoloko.com/?p=7027
    http://www.realliberalchristianchurch.org/2014/07/24/why-did-bernie-sanders-get-gaza-so-wrong-hes-a-zionist.html
    http://rehmat1.com/2015/09/01/bernie-sanders-a-con-zionist-jew/

    Within the Democratic Party, which Netanyahoo-bitch do you want as America’s pResident?

    DanD

    • Sanders was born in 1941, right at the start of the Holocaust.

      Consider how much you complain about how white trash is treated today, – do you think you’d have stronger feelings if someone tried to wipe ‘your kind’ off the face of the earth? Would it affect you even stronger if you had watched it happen during your lifetime?

      Even so – Bernie is in favor of the two state solution, that’s far more progressive than most Jews of his generation.

      The sad reality is, no American politician can speak out against Israel and ever hope to achieve office – let alone the highest in the land. Look at what happened when Obama spoke out mildly against the mass murder perpetrated by the Israelis in 2014.

    • Dan, you are an asshole. I am really fucking sick of your antisemitic bullshit. Israel may be fucked up but tarring every Jewish person in the world with that is every bit as fucked up as tarring every Muslim as a terrorist.

      • CrazyH,

        Actually, somebody did try to wipe my ancestors off the map … They were the Anglo-fucks of England.

        But what’s really fucked up is ass-wipes like you Russel who claims that I’ve “tarred” all Jews on Earth with “antisemitic bullshit.” Instead, you are the lying pissuck of a bullshitter.

        Not every Jew is a Zionist. Many are even quite reasonable. There have also been a whole shitload of American Jews who were crooks to the core. Murder Inc. anybody?

        Sanders is a New York, Zionist Jew. Bernie Sanders is a German Shoa-business survivor even so much less than I’m a survivor of England’s genocidally managed famine against Irish Catholics of the “British” Isles..

        So you can take your “antisemite” twat-dribble and suck it back down your throat with a straw, bitch. I’m against all war-criminal cultures , and ANYBODY who endorses Palestine’s conquering horde of Caucasoid Khazarian Zio-Nazis is — by their own adoption — as much a war-crook as Hitler, or Stalin, or Mao were ever advertised to be.

        DanD

      • Go read your links again, Dan. The term “jew” is used as a pejorative, and the first is nothing but graphics. So let me amend that to lying antisemtitic asshole.

      • Dan, your hatred of everyone who isn’t just like you is quite obvious. Blacks, Jews, gays, whatever. You are a bigot, and the only way to stop being called a bigot is to stop being a bigot.

      • CrazyH,

        What is being just like me? What race, culture, or ethnicity have I avoided calling crooks when that race/culture/ethnicity has people who claim that being a member of their own race/culture/ethnicity exempts them from the descriptive of “war-crook?”

        D

      • > What is being just like me?

        So near as I can tell, straight, white, Christian.

        It’s not a matter of who you avoid, it’s a matter of who you denigrate and how you do it. I’ve heard you complain about cops, but you don’t call them ‘crackers’ or ‘honkies.’ You don’t lay the blame for war at the feet of all white people, you don’t make sweeping derogatory generalities about them.

        OTOH, you bring up Jews very often, always in derogatory terms, and usually in topics completely unrelated to Israel. You go on & on about cartels and conspiracies, AIPAC etc.

        You’re not alone – most bigots don’t self-identify as bigots. Rather they believe that they are just more aware of the defects of The Other than the general population.

        See whether this article rings any bells: http://www.cracked.com/blog/6-weird-things-you-learn-when-youre-raised-to-be-racist/

      • Epic Fail Dan. A racist is not identified by who he likes, but by who he dislikes. Also by whining such as demonstrated in the cartoon.

        Your cover is blown, dude, the more you protest the more obvious it becomes.

      • CH,

        Busted? Simply because you say it doesn’t necessarily make it so. Your own generalizations are so massive that any declaration you make really means nothing. So, while I hate Jewish/Chinese/Russian/German/AMERICAN war-crooks, because I’m more focusing on the Jewish identity of Zionland’s AshkeNAZI ones this week or two, that makes me a racist? Maybe if the corporate media didn’t focus so much on anonymizing (or otherwise justifiying) Zionist war-crimes, then maybe I would focus more equitably on something else.

        As it is, while my dislike of the criminal element of Zio-Jewish culture is most noticable, how can it be racism? I’m (as you’ve noticed) also “White,” and so are the Jewish institutions I’m castigating. Do I hate “White” war criminals? You’re damned tootin’! The blowback created by all those Caucasoid Jews who’ve criminally transplanted themselves on other people’s property in Palestine makes me less safe while I travel anywhere in that hemisphere (which includes Europe).

        Busted? You are so disingenuous.

        DanD

      • You keep trying to demonstrate that the Jewish people don’t have a valid historical claim to Israel, but I really don’t care about that. The facts on the ground RIGHT NOW, which you consistently ignore, is that you’ve got 6 million Jews and a million and a half Arabs that have the most basic claim to the land that it is: they are there. No one has the right to ask either group to leave. They loathe each other so much that a two state solution might make the most sense, withdrawing the settlers and apportioning the Arabs the entire west bank. But the Arabs would probably need to give up any claim to any part of Jerusalem.

        None of this has anything to do with the fact that I’m white, generally not capitalized.

        I’m sure you are going to come up with some other reason why those 6 million Jews don’t have a right to be there but if so, please tell me precisely what you propose should be done with them. If you actually have an idea that doesn’t involve displacing either the Jews or the Arabs, let’s hear it. Bonus points if you can do it without once using any variant on the word Zion.

    • Yeah, well Russel,

      So has been used as a pejorative “Irish (Paddy), Italian (Ginzo), German (Boches), Southern White (Peckerwood), oh yeah, and Jew (Kike). Tell me, why are Jews the only ethnicity in “the West” that is over-the-top forbidden as a subject as far as criticism is concerned? Why is it still considered “anti-Semitism” when Jews (the vast majority of whom are “Semitic” by adoption only) — who are hiding behind their Jewish identity — commits Jewish-focused war crimes, yet calls it bigotry when somebody calls them out on their Jewish identity-specific criminal conduct?

      I talk about Jewish crooks no different than I do any other ethnicity, especially when that ethnicity is hiding behind its own ethnic identity for the specific purpose of avoiding criticism.

      The greatest critics of Jewish criminal conduct are Jews themselves.
      http://www.gilad.co.uk/

      DanD

      • Yeah, and if every one of your posts went on about ginzos and ginzonism I’d call you out on that too. With you it’s Jew this and Zionism that. Yes, there really was a Zionist movement in Europe since the late 19th century but it wasn’t some gnomes of Zurich world domination scheme. Its intent was to create a Jewish state in the traditional Jewish holy land. The Balfour Declaration of 1917 indicated Great Britain’s sympathy, but it was not until after WW2 that GB actually placed those territories under Zionist control. At that point Zionism had succeeded in its aim. Zionists continue to encourage Jews to migrate to Israel.

        The Palestinians were not fairly treated, but what exactly are we to do now? There are several million Israeli Jews, mostly well-educated and decently well off. There are several million Palestinians, rather poorer, not so well educated. Neither party is going anywhere and both are heavily armed. In a better world Israel would withdraw from territories occupied since the ’67 war, but in that world Israel also wouldn’t be subject to attacks from the territories and neighboring countries.

      • Russell,

        You include: ” … Its intent was to create a Jewish state in the traditional Jewish holy land.”

        The “traditional” Jewish holy land — before 400BC — is a syncretic myth. Before King Omri, Palestine was a Persian satrapy. As an actual nation, Israel/Judea experienced independence (at best) for only a few hundred years. Kings David/Solomon are just fables. there is no definitive archaeological evidence that they ever existed.

        When factoring in the Khazarian genetic heritage of the world’s modern Jewish population, the “Jews” are stealing Palestine (again?) on a busted flush.

        http://askwhy.co.uk/

        DanD

      • Your history lesson is pretty slanted. For starters, in Omri’s time there was no notion of “Palestine” as a political or cultural entity at all.

        There certainly was by the time the state of Israel was established, but the mismanagement of the division of occupied territories in 1948 is largely the fault of the British.

        None of which addresses the really important question: what exactly do you propose that we do now? Relocate all the Jews in Israel? To where?

      • Why not do to the apostate “Jews” of Zionland what they are currently accomplishing against the non-Jews of Palestine? Goose, gander and such? Fact remains, before the 20th Century, Muslims and Christians vastly outnumbered Jews in Palestine. Since then, the Zionist element of “Western” culture has a “Greater-Israel” agenda of ethnically cleansing ALL non-Jews — both Muslim and Christian — (who functionally aren’t incarcerated slaves) from that greater territory within the Fertile Crescent.

        http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/demograhics.html
        http://tomhull.com/ocston/projects/ajvp/wp1.php
        http://www.fsmitha.com/h2/ch17jeru.html
        http://www.globalresearch.ca/greater-israel-the-zionist-plan-for-the-middle-east/5324815

        DanD

      • Also Russell,

        Even if you’re going by the midrash of Torah fairy tales, well before there was a fictional Abraham patriarch (the first alleged Hebrew) whose descendants supposedly established “Israel,” there was Philistia, the land of the Philistines, or PALESTINE.

        http://www.palestinefacts.org/pf_early.php
        http://www.bible-history.com/old-testament/abraham.html
        http://ancienthistory.about.com/od/biblicalhistory/g/012411-The-Philistines.htm

        Then of course, there’s the archaeologically established standard of historical accuracy revealing who the “Jews” really were, which blows the fantasy romance of the United Monarchy (Kings David and Solomon) right out of the water regarding what really happened.
        http://www.askwhy.co.uk/judaism/index.php

        DanD

      • [ Why not do to the apostate “Jews” of Zionland what they are currently accomplishing against the non-Jews of Palestine? ]

        What? How? Give the Palestinians better weapons?

        Come back to me when you have some realistic idea how to manage the situation based on the demographics as they are now, not as you think they should be.

        And how does a non-Jew know whether a Jew is “apostate” anyway? Are you *sure* you’re not a bigot?

      • And are you sure Russell that you’re not a Zio-Zombie? You know, the kind of cannibalistic twat who finds it intolerable that the Boer descendants of South Africa practiced racist Apartheid against the South African Black people, but thinks it’s a manageable war-crime when genocidally practiced by your own AshkeNAZI brand of religious fellow-travelers?

        There is no ideal answer to the crimes of Zionland, at least while any one group of people can claim that some fantasmic Zombie from heaven gives them special permission to be evil fucks who are yet deifically self-declared beyond human condemnation. The cultural monster that is “Israel” will always be protected by the fellow-traveling monster of Christian-Zionism, which is mostly championed by a Caucasian class of war-crook. Since Zionland cannot exist without “Jews,” then anybody who calls himself a Jew is going to have to deal with it, just like White folks also have to deal with it.

        Are you White, Russell?

        DanD

      • You keep trying to demonstrate that the Jewish people don’t have a valid historical claim to Israel, but I really don’t care about that. The facts on the ground RIGHT NOW, which you consistently ignore, is that you’ve got 6 million Jews and a million and a half Arabs that have the most basic claim to the land that it is: they are there. No one has the right to ask either group to leave. They loathe each other so much that a two state solution might make the most sense, withdrawing the settlers and apportioning the Arabs the entire west bank. But the Arabs would probably need to give up any claim to any part of Jerusalem.

        None of this has anything to do with the fact that I’m white, generally not capitalized.

        I’m sure you are going to come up with some other reason why those 6 million Jews don’t have a right to be there but if so, please tell me precisely what you propose should be done with them. If you actually have an idea that doesn’t involve displacing either the Jews or the Arabs, let’s hear it. Bonus points if you can do it without once using any variant on the word Zion.

      • Well, the first thing “we (as in America)” can do is stop financing Zionland’s over-the-top ethnic cleansing and genocide. For that matter, the only reason Zionism ever got a foothold in Palestine is because America has extensively bankrolled it. It used to be that England bankrolled it, that is until Jewish terrorists forced GB to abandon their mandate. If Global Zionism hadn’t blackmailed Truman, chances are “Israel” would have been stillborn.

        So that’s my answer, simply stop financing the war-crooks of Zionland, and then treat them like the world did Apartheid South Africa. Like all parasites, without a host to suck dry, the murderous war crooks of Zionland will then look for some place else to infest, say like Oklahoma.

        And also, capitalizing the race of a person is acceptable, as long as it is also used consistently.
        http://www.dummies.com/how-to/content/when-do-you-capitalize-references-to-people.html
        “White and Black (or white and black) are acceptable descriptions, but be consistent. Don’t capitalize one and not the other. Always capitalize Asian because the term is derived from the name of a continent.”

        DanD

  2. As soon as I saw the title I knew the forum would be full of long arguments between Jack and CrazyH.

    Pure planned economies choke off the incentives that make people productive. Pure free markets give us child labor and rivers polluted enough to catch fire.

  3. A lot of yakking and arguing about definitions and “you is stupid, me no better” crap. Having universal healthcare for all, education available for all at a minimum cost, etc. is what a civilized developed country should do. The US is Bedtime for Bonzo crazy with big money interests calling the shots, horrible endless wars, bullying the world, and a population more interested in fake reality shows, status, and ignorance of what is around them. We need to end the wars, remove the big money from politics, and take care of our poor, disabled (especially veterans) and less fortunate people so that we can have a better standard of life for more people, not just a disgusting concentration of massive wealth for a few…

  4. The official definition for you all:

    “Socialism is the philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance and the gospel of envy.”

    And I officially know socialism better than anyone else here.

  5. Ted, I was waiting with bated breath for you to throw the Soviet Union under the bus. Thanks for not doing that. However, I would have held up the USSR and China as a better model to follow rather than the Scandinavian countries who have benefited, and continue to benefit from, imperialism (the highest stage of capitalism).

    One major clue that Bernie isn’t a real socialist is his lack of internationalism and open support of imperialism.

    • > I would have held up the USSR and China as a better model to follow

      Of course you would have, that’s what you’re paid to do. So, are you paid in Rubles or vodka?

      • Finance capitalism has existed for thousands of years. Monarchs would borrow money to finance wars of aggression, and from war profits was repayment of principle and interest to his financier investors to be made.

        The more recent and more commonly known “capitalism” is industrial capitalism, with its massification of labor that was previously applied in individualized production.

        Both still exist today, but due to the low profits of industrial capitalism, many industrial capitalist do not make their money from the goods they produce but from their finance capitalist branches that loan money to finance sales of their goods.

        When the automobile manufacturers lost their status as the largest (and highest wage) employers to retailers (and lowest wage employers) like Walmart, auto sales could not be maintained. General Motors’ GMAC then became the profit center, likewise with Ford and its finance branch.

        When Walmart and Amazon shuts down its competitors on main street, former main street employees move to where the jobs are, and where the wages are also lower, and no longer have money to repay debt and so debt defaults crash out the economy.

  6. Good luck with this, Ted. I’ve been making the same point for years – but you can’t fix stupid. Especially when stupid’s been thoroughly brainwashed by years of “godless communism” and “evil empire” talking points.

    Maybe what we need is to rebrand Marx’s ideas. Rather than using the terms “Communism” and “Socialism” we could call it “PlayingNiceWithOthersism”

    It would absolutely take a new man & woman to make Communism work. They’d all have to be altruistic, honest & possessed of a strong work ethic. But then, if that was universally true of the human race, any system of governance would work.

    Democratic Socialism is the best we can hope for given homo sap. Oops, I meant “PlayingNiceWithOthersism”

    • Hitler also envisioned a “new man.” Utopians and totalitarians always do.

      Democratic socialism. I suppose it is a very appropriate term. It’s about rule of the mob in contradistinction to other socialist systems which are dictatorial. But of course tyranny is tyranny no matter how many or few crack the whip.

  7. Are you talking about the socialist indoctrination of public schools and Universities and the liberal-biased media?

    Seriously, unless you can hide the millions of dead bodies generated by peace-loving and fraternal socialist states (and the supreme efforts they undertook to keep people from leaving the worker’s paradise) and quiet the hundreds of thousands of ex-pats from modern democratic socialist states you’ve just to accept that no one is going to buy what you’re selling.

      • What point? What I see is someone trying to improve the image of a brand which has been sullied the worst by those who practice it the best. Come on – where’s the evidence that socialism works? More to the point, what can you conceivably say to promote it? Europe is in the grip of high taxes, crushing red tape (!), increasing censorship of people and the press while catering to the demands of immigrants whose gratitude is expressed by violence. But, apparently, saying no to living under such a system is idiocy rather than common sense.

      • > What point?

        The point that you and your ilk have no clue what you’re talking about – which you just demonstrated for the umpteenth time.

        > What I see is someone trying to improve the image of a brand which has been sullied the worst by those who practice it the best.

        That sentence is self contradictory.

        The worst sullying has been done by the good ol’ USA. Where did you get your beliefs? Not from living in Sweden, but from the USA’s constant stream of Koolaid.

        It *is* true that many places which *claim* to be run by a communist party are not very nice places to live. But neither are they communist societies. (Hint: politicians lie)

        > More to the point, what can you conceivably say to promote it?

        “Read the article”

      • Fleming,

        You’re not going to convince any of them of the obvious. Of course socialism results in death, oppression, and debt. They’ll just talk semantics and say those societies did it wrong, and *we’re* the ones who are so stupid for not understanding all the wonderful nuances of socialism!

      • Jack – Forget “nuance” neither you nor Flaming BS have any idea what the big ideas of socialism are. Which pretty much makes it impossible to to have any sort of meaningful conversation about it.

        You are, however, demonstrating exactly what Ted is talking about – go read the first two sentences while looking in a mirror. Yeah, he’s talking about you, drowning in Koolaid, while believing everything you’re told by those who stand to gain from your massive ignorance.

        As for Death, Oppression & Debt – have you looked at the news lately? Shall we use America’s policies in the Middle East as examples of the wonders of capitalism? Or would you insist we’re doing it wrong?

        Unrestrained capitalism DOES lead inexorably to oppression. Adam Smith pointed that up long before Marx.

      • The fact that most Americans know at very least socialism is no good puts them miles ahead of your understanding of it.

      • I just believe all theft should be illegal. You and your ilk legalizing it does not make it ethical. Only free and honest people benefit from my position.

      • Jack – one of these days you should really consider thinkingbefore you hit the post button.

        What you’re saying is that Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels didn’t know what socialism or communism was.

        That’s like saying that Thomas Edison didn’t know what a light bulb was.

      • Actually, Jack – the people who benefit most from your position are people like the Koch brothers, and you seem to have no problem with them stealing from you.

      • The very fact that you STILL insist that capitalism is to blame for all our ills shows you are the one with the learning to do. Free markets by definition are free from violence and force. So if there is death involved, we aren’t talking about capitalism. Why are we in debt? Socialist programs account for nearly half of federal spending.

      • Lmao. Oh, no! The Koch brothers. Get new boogeymen already. Most billionaires are Leftists. Think Soros.

        “Yet David and Charles Koch, who Democrats worked to vilify as the very personifications of the corrupting effect of big money in politics, ranked as only the 10th and 29th biggest givers of disclosed cash in POLITICO’s analysis.”

      • And if we’re going to talk accuracy of definitions, we have to address what most here believe is a right-winger–simply someone violent. Obama drones people and starts wars. Right-winger! I guess Stalin and Mao were the biggest right-wingers ever!

      • > The very fact that you STILL insist that capitalism is to blame for all our ills …

        Except I’ve never said that. The term I used above was “unrestrained capitalism” and I linked it to oppression specifically rather than ALL our ills. Even in the article above, Ted talks about capitalism and socialist policies happily living side by side.

        > Most billionaires are Leftists

        Yes, Jack, most billionaires are against the very system that made them billionaires in the first place. I guess that makes about as much sense as anything else you’ve ever posted.

      • You hold the unenviable distinction of being the most hopeless ideologue I’ve ever encountered.

      • You’re so slippery and evasive you should consider work as a press secretary. No one can nail you down! Natural born talent or carefully honed skill? Who can say?

      • Again, I read the article and it’s the same old song: Ostologie and trying to excuse or whitewash the crimes of socialist regimes.

        I’m sorry, but free enterprise, at it’s worst, is still preferable to secret police, centralized commissars with 5-year plans or having to fill out a dozen forms in triplicate and take a mandatory safety lecture every time I need to take a dump. It is also most certainly preferable to having my property confiscated and given to every penniless jihadi who wants it in the name of blind multicultural ideology.

Leave a Reply