Timothy Birdnow

This is interesting (though not surprising); most of the support for these socialists who won recent Democrat primaries come from the young and college educated in dense urban areas.

Now this borders on the cliche' and it's probably quite uninteresting to many readers, so why am I bothering with it? Because it once again illustrates the point that socialism is hopelessly unappealing to the actual workers, the very people it purportedly has the greatest appeal to while it is beloved by the rich and privileged - the very people who supposedly are targeted by the ideology.

Socialism is a toy of the rich.

FTA:

In other words it's a rich man's world.

I rather suspect most working people (at least those not in labor unions which are all leftist and tell their members to vote socialist) understand the basics of economics enough to know that these people are making pie-in-the-sky promises and that their tempting apples are full of poison. Socialism sounds great because it promises free stuff and even delivers free stuff at first. But in the end it winds down and pours out like milk from a carton because it produces nothing but rather limits and takes from the producer. The average American seems to know that these days, which is why so many in the working class are now MAGA.

MAGA is where blue collar conservatives go. The problem the Conservative movement always had, and especially the Republican Party, was it was full of rich people who saw conservatism as being a tool to keep their taxes down and little else. It was inherently upper-crust, aristocratic. William F. Buckley did a lot of good for the country but he epitomized this branch of Conservatism, the "House of Lords Conservative" types. They held sway in the GOP and in the Conservative movement for decades, and that is why the GOP was the minority party for so long. It had no appeal to the common man, who wished for conservative Democrats to represent their interests but who could not find such. The Democrats walked away from their more conservative base. Social inertia made it hard for such folks to pull the lever for a Republican, the guys who disdained them for so long.

Even now that inertia has many labor types pulling that lever for the D. But the times they are a changin' and Donald Trump found the Rosetta Stone to speak to them. The working class is now the base of Republicanism whether the elite types like it or not (and they don't; look at National Review and how it has nbecome a Never Trump operation more concerned with TDS than with fighting Lefism).

This rejection of socialism by the working class and the rural areas reinforces our understanding of this. The country rejects socialism - the rich urbanits are the only ones who want it.

Of course many of them have no idea what socialism is and think social security is believed to be socialist by conservatives, which is ridiculous. SS isn't socialism but it is a rather radical, ridiculous pyramid scheme and the current generation of codgers are at the bottom of the pyramid. The thing is going belly up because it has run out of money. Of course, if one should say SS is socialist then it is a prime example of why socialism doesn't work, but then you won't hear that from the likes of James Carville (who, on Fox News this Sunday, used it as an example of how there is no definition of socialism). Carville argued most of the current new "socialists" don't know what it means and are defining it as the welfare state. He's probably right on that score, but it is the very ignorance of what socialism is that makes it so dangerous. Many people supported Naziism too because they didn't understand what it meant and thought it was about pride in one's country too. Evil always succeeds by masquerading as a good thing.

Notice too how the advocates of socialism never offer their own money. Bernie Sanders owns three homes and has a worth of several million bucks and yet he pushes for other people to have their wealth confiscated and redistributed. Maybe he should hand over two of his homes to the homeless? There is a reason why Jesus told His disciples to give what you have to the poor and follow me; He did not say for Caesar to do it but for the individual. Caesar would just squander it.

I believe working folks understand this. I think they know that the rich will always find a way to stay on top. Anyone remember Dr. Zhivago? In it the rich guy - Komorowski - winds up an important man under the Bolsheviks as he had been under the Tsar. Some rise, some fall, but in the end the wealthy are better positioned than the laboring class to make good no matter what sort of social structure gets put in place.

Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

So the best one can hope for is a government that stays off your back and lets you make a living. Governments that offer all sorts of dandy "services" don't do that. There is a price to pay.

So don't fear this apparent rise of socialism. It's not the People who are doing it - it's the rich and the stupid. Don't take it too lightly but don't think for a minute that we are losing this country; it is alive and well in the heartland and in rural areas and in the suburbs and even in the poorer parts of the cities to a degree. Socialism is a kind of liquor and some have just partied hearty; the hangover will come soon enough.

Hide Comments | Add Comment