An interesting trend I have noticed is actually not a new trend at all. Possibly it was hidden by my unwillingness to accept the sheer stubbornness and stupidity of those clinging to methods that just don't work.
"You're a socialist." "Am not." "Am too." "Am Not!" Etc, etc, etc. This conversation happens every so often when an individual who prefers government to make their lives better rather then have themselves make their lives better argues that Capitalism is the "ultimate evil." The selfish bastard on the other end than calls him a socialist. Why? The defender is hurt. Why? (See wikipedia entry: "Stalin.")
The definition of socialism includes having government control all means of production. Well that certainly doesn't exist. But wait, maybe that's the problem. I'm not a propagandist.
The problem is with the definition. Or rather, defining it at all. A definition, aka excuse, only allows for "leftists" to propose ideals that allow for the distribution of wealth among the masses, increased government intervention in the daily lives of it's citizens, and ballooning welfare states because they are not socialist. There is still private enterprise. Flaws, anyone?
A perfect example is of a well educated young man, likely hailing from a well known and established institution is stuck on "definitions". School wins. Logic fails. Deductive reasoning actually. There is none anymore.
Laissez-faire economics. The libertarian party. Daddy Smith. These ideas, parties and people all believe that the market is of the organic type. Can not be controlled by a well to do wealthy "activist". But being organic in nature, it changes. And sometimes those changes can not be measured by a definition, but rather must be analyzed and reviewed by no one. No one? What?!?!?!? That's right. No analysis is actually needed. Being that it relies entirely on people pursuing their own self interests, you can bet your top dollar that it will be fought for valiantly. Even by all the charitable and altruistic people that "just want to help." Those are the ones who we actually might have to be careful of. Charity isn't free after all. Ask the tax man. Deductive reasoning would help you understand that each person pursuing what they want will only allow for others to do the same. Shipbuilders normally don't harvest corn.
But definition has hurt us. Our society. The former Soviet Union showed us a definition and we have been blind since.
"You're a socialist." "Am not." "Am too." "Am Not!" Etc, etc, etc. This conversation happens every so often when an individual who prefers government to make their lives better rather then have themselves make their lives better argues that Capitalism is the "ultimate evil." The selfish bastard on the other end than calls him a socialist. Why? The defender is hurt. Why? (See wikipedia entry: "Stalin.")
The definition of socialism includes having government control all means of production. Well that certainly doesn't exist. But wait, maybe that's the problem. I'm not a propagandist.
The problem is with the definition. Or rather, defining it at all. A definition, aka excuse, only allows for "leftists" to propose ideals that allow for the distribution of wealth among the masses, increased government intervention in the daily lives of it's citizens, and ballooning welfare states because they are not socialist. There is still private enterprise. Flaws, anyone?
A perfect example is of a well educated young man, likely hailing from a well known and established institution is stuck on "definitions". School wins. Logic fails. Deductive reasoning actually. There is none anymore.
Laissez-faire economics. The libertarian party. Daddy Smith. These ideas, parties and people all believe that the market is of the organic type. Can not be controlled by a well to do wealthy "activist". But being organic in nature, it changes. And sometimes those changes can not be measured by a definition, but rather must be analyzed and reviewed by no one. No one? What?!?!?!? That's right. No analysis is actually needed. Being that it relies entirely on people pursuing their own self interests, you can bet your top dollar that it will be fought for valiantly. Even by all the charitable and altruistic people that "just want to help." Those are the ones who we actually might have to be careful of. Charity isn't free after all. Ask the tax man. Deductive reasoning would help you understand that each person pursuing what they want will only allow for others to do the same. Shipbuilders normally don't harvest corn.
But definition has hurt us. Our society. The former Soviet Union showed us a definition and we have been blind since.
