Communism and Socialism DO Work

Particularly with communism, and more generally with all forms of collectivist thought, there is one excuse for why this ideology has always led to catastrophe: 'it's never been done properly before'. That is the standard line for any Marxist wannabe class warfarist who still thinks Communism 'could work'.

Well, I am writing this to say that Communism and Socialism HAVE worked, pretty much every time they've been 'tried'.


(We all know the American-based 'international bankers' funded Hitler. But, did you know the same people backed the Russian Revolution? Perhaps the differences between socialism and fascism are arbitrary, and don't matter to the bankers - either way they get control, right?)

The state becomes all-powerful. Secret Police fill their quotas of arrests and excecutions. The central bank (it's in the Commie Manifesto to have one, don't you know?) plunders the wealth of the people by inflation of the money supply. Controls of the market lead to all sorts of problems, including shortages; people are reduced to abject poverty. In the name of egalitarianism and economic equality, the whole populace is reduced to living as the very poorest did beforehand.

There is also created a handful of wealthy oligarchs lording over this mass of peasants who have lost everything. Free from any market competition since the middle classes have been destroyed. Free from any kind of legal accountability because they own the system of trade control, they own the state itself, because they bought it off with money printed by their central bank, which essentially constitutes a flat tax on everyone else.

Ironically, this pyramidal controlling wealth structure is the very thing collectivists say is caused by capitalism, and which they say they are trying to avoid.

Communism and Socialism DO work, but not like the average lefty would believe; because while an idealist sees 'economic justice' in Socialism, the bankers who know better see an opportunity to reinstate medieval-style feudalism. And yet, it's libertarians (eg Ron Paul) that are considered as the regressive force in politics! Nope, socialists and 'progressives' truly are - even if they don't know it. They unwittingly support a return to the Dark Ages.


(Monument to Communism in Prague, Czech Republic.)

If you believe capitalism naturally concentrates wealth in a few hands, as I used to, the missing piece to the puzzle is the monopoly over the issuance of currency held by a central bank (watch Fiat Empire). This, not freedom of trade, is the reason we do have, unfortunately, a lot of imbalance in terms of wealth. But the solution isn't government programs, taxation, or coercion of any kind.

Freedom works better than control in delivering both prosperity and relative equality. Economic fascism ('crony capitalism') as we have now, and socialism, are both ways for small groups of power brokers to take over and control you. Which, incase you haven't read any history, is a fitting description of essentially every regime historically.

Liberty is the relatively new idea (this is what the true liberals pre-1900 believed in, before the establishment's doctrine of socialism polluted the liberal school of thought), coming out of the Age of Enlightenment and the Renaissance. Blood has been spilled time and again for freedom from the tyrants' grasp. Throwing away all that sacrifice, because some propaganda says that capitalism is the reason one guy gets 100x the salary of his employees, is not very virtuous, if you ask me.


Sound Money now. Reinstate capitalism!
Ron Paul's speech on 'Paper Money and Tyranny'