Snowflakes and Snowstorms; FB post

There's a word that's getting popular on college campuses - "Microaggression". Saying "Freshmen" instead of "First Year Student" is considered an act of microaggression. The existence of "men" in the term "freshmen" is "potentially insulting and degrading due to gender issues." I saw one young lady who considered free speech advocates to be "suspect", because, in her words, "Free speech ENABLES hate speech."

Eventually, the right to free speech will be next to non-existent, due to the over-sensitive, as well as the under-sensitive. Those on the far right never liked the idea of free speech OR the theory of rights. Those on the far left are only just beginning to catch up to their "opponents" on the far right. Political theorists are now advancing the idea that politics has really never been about left and right, but is actually more of a vicious circle. ie: Go far enough Left, you arrive at Right. I talk with far-left "progressive" liberals all the time, and virtually none of them will have a single negative thing to say about Lenin, Stalin, or Mao. But just mention Shitler, well, they're on board when it comes to how evil he was. Let's just conveniently forget how many millions died because of Stalin. Oh, and he wasn't the "right" kind of communist anyway. Soon, the "right" kind of radical socialists will be in charge, and then everyone will sit down and hold hands. Yeah. I got some land in Siberia I'd like to sell you.

The favorite mudslinging term used by the new liberals is "fascist". Just call someone who disagrees with you a fascist, and you'll have plenty of pats on the back and you'll be able to feel really good about yourself - UNTIL you grow up, gain a modicum of wisdom, and understand that you were a budding fascist yourself.

5.5.17

Radical socialism doesn't work; BB post; Talk Freethought

Originally Posted by William A. Baurle

https://archive.org/details/KolymaTh...ovietLaborCamp
 

Do you really think some nice guy is going to be at the head of any radically socialist regime? It has never happened historically. What makes you think it will happen in the future?

j wrote: We agree. I just don't see how you can equate radical socialism with state gangsterism. They seem like opposites to me. 

Me: Well, my argument is, that radical socialism - becomes state gangsterism. Do you follow me? As a caveat, in the interest of understanding: socialism CAN work, on a small, non-industrial scale. Tribes all over the world, long dead and still extant, exist(ed) in a condition of necessary and obligatory socialism. But on a large scale, when you bring in industrialization, commercial trade, infrastructure, etc, etc, it begins to be untenable.

Work farms and cooperative communities of like-minded people can and do exist, but on the macro scale, when you have vast, quickly multiplying numbers, all of whom need food and shelter and the necessities, the dream of genuine, heartfelt socialism has been shown to be ineffective, and in fact, almost criminally ineffective, and it always comes down to the susceptibility of those in power to corruption: human nature. If you take the Native American tribes just as one example: there was no such thing, relatively speaking, as a "rich" Indian. There was leadership and scales of power, but they were manageable, and the harshness of mere survival kept heads straight, and without delusions of grandeur, by and large.

We all want what is best for people and critters, hairy and hairless. We just have different visions about how that is to come about.

Peace!

4.30.17