Chuck on the right side
THIS IS A BLOG THAT TRIES TO APPEAL TO THE AVERAGE CONSERVATIVE CITIZEN AND HAS NO AGENDA OTHER THAN TELLING THE TRUTH AS WE SEE IT.
A few years ago that question would be scoffed at, but today that question is being debated and in some cases embraced by a significant number of people, mostly left-leaning people (a/k/a Democrats and Progressives).
With the emergence of socialist Bernie Sanders, during the 2016 Democrat primary, when ole Bernie attracted a strong, vocal following in his quest for the Democrat presidential nomination (which he lost to the chicanery of Hillary and the DNC), to now, with the emergence of 28 year old Alexandia Ocasio-Cortez, who won the Democrat primary in NYC against a sitting long time congressman, by proclaiming that she was a Democrat Socialist (she won with only 13% of the registered voters voting in the district), she has now become the darling of the Democrat left.
In subsequent interviews in the press and on T.V., she has espoused what she thinks is the way our country should change - to a socialist system of government. Quite simply, she defines her socialism as taking money and property from some people (the rich) so it can be given to make everyone more or less equal. She has as her goals, free college, paying off a student's debt, housing as a human right, Medicare for all, and a mandatory minimum wage guaranteed by the government. Basically, what she is proposing is that “stealing” is the right of governments to try to level the playing field of life.
When she is asked, “Who is going to pay for all this “free stuff”, her answers vary, but all have one thing in common, confiscatory taxation, and she graduated from college with a degree in economics? It looks like she missed a few classes, or she was just repeating the words of her ultra-liberal professors who make up 90% of the faculties of our colleges and universities and who believe in the socialist philosophy.
Ole Bernie and his protege, Ms. Cortez, have been barnstorming around the country espousing their socialist ideas and programs, which seems to find sympathetic ears on the group called “Millennials” (18 to 35 age group). That group of people are easy marks because many of them are saddled with a huge amount of debt due to their student loans, and their inability to get a decent job to make their college degree pay off financially. I guess a degree in women's studies, black history, and communications etc. are not that much in demand, and they are “pissed”, so they welcome the “free stuff” offered by Bernie and Alexandria.
Socialism is defined as such: “Socialism requires the intervention and control of the marketplace by an overwhelmingly powerful central government. It penalizes high achievers, rewards laziness, and stifles choice”. As the late former Prime Minister of Britain, Margaret Thatcher, once said; “The trouble with socialism is that you eventually run out of other peoples money”. A recent report by George Mason University evaluated the proposals of Bernie and Alexandria and came up with the figure that it would cost $33 trillion over the next 10 years to implement their proposals. Both of them don't know where or how we would get all that money to pay for all that “free stuff”, but they say not to worry as it is for the benefit of society (deja vu Margaret Thatcher). Isn't that called “pie in the sky” or “wishful thinking”? Of course, and that's why the question asked at the beginning of the editorial should read that socialism is NOT a viable alternative to capitalism. And in the words of another famous Brit, Sir Winston Churchill; “Socialism is the philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery”. And, that's the way it is.
Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann