By Jeff Thomas
International Man

January 23, 2018

Today, more than at any time previously, Westerners are justifying a move toward collectivist thinking with the phrase, “Capitalism has failed.”

In response to this, conservative thinkers offer a knee-jerk reaction that collectivism has also had a dismal record of performance. Neither group tends to gain any ground with the other group, but over time, the West is moving inexorably in the collectivist direction.

As I see it, liberals are putting forward what appears on the surface to be a legitimate criticism, and conservatives are countering it with the apology that, yes, capitalism is failing, but collectivism is worse.

Unfortunately, what we’re seeing here is not classical logic, as Aristotle would have endorsed, but emotionalism that ignores the principles of logic.

If we’re to follow the rules of logical discussion, we begin with the statement that capitalism has failed and, instead of treating it as a given, we examine whether the statement is correct. Only if it proves correct can we build further suppositions upon it.

Whenever I’m confronted with this now oft-stated comment, my first question to the person offering it is, “Have you ever lived in a capitalist country?” That is, “Have you ever lived in a country in which, during your lifetime, a free-market system dominated?”

Most people seem initially confused by this question, as they’re residents of either a European country or a North American country and operate under the assumption that the system in which they live is a capitalist one.

So, let’s examine that assumption.

A capitalist, or “free market,” system is one in which the prices of goods and services are determined by consumers and the open market, in which the laws and forces of supply and demand are free from any intervention by a government, price-setting monopoly, or other authority.

Today, none of the major (larger) countries in what was once referred to as the “free world” bear any resemblance to this definition. Each of these countries is rife with laws, regulations, and a plethora of regulatory bodies whose very purpose is to restrict the freedom of voluntary commerce. Every year, more laws are passed to restrict free enterprise even more….. Read More

by Garland S. Tucker III , Jon L. Pritchet

Socialism has crippled nations and impoverished their citizens. The evidence is clear. Yet, despite this, lots of people in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Europe want more of it. A recent survey of adults from the American Culture and Faith Institute found that four out of every 10 adults in America prefer socialism to capitalism. A 2016 Gallup poll found that 35 percent of Americans viewed socialism favorably, but among voters under 30, that number was an eye-opening 55 percent. The Democratic Socialists of America, the largest Marxist organization since World War II, now has 25,000 members – up from just 8,000 members in 2015, when it endorsed Bernie Sanders for president. The DSA now has chapters in 49 states.

As free-market capitalists and advocates for liberty, it is clear that we have work to do…. Read More

MFP commentary:

To anyone that understands the framers intentions, the promises of the Declaration of Independence, that all men are created equal, and that we are the sovereigns, was never fully realized by the Constitution, and the current implementation of that document has instead of being a document that protects liberty been converted  to a document that enslaves us.

If you would like to get into the legitimacy and morality of man’s law VS natural law I do not think there is a better primer than Mark Passio’s YouTube on Moral Relativism. You will find it on this MFP page. Either it will expand your outlook, or you will fail to grasp it… the first time you are exposed to these ideas. I like Lew Rockwell’s views, and  tend to lean towards a  philosophy of free market anarchism.

~MFP

Update: I just thought of a book that I read years ago, that reasons along the lines that  Erick Peters does in the article below. It’s worth a read and looking at:
Hologram of Liberty: The Constitution’s Shocking Alliance With Big Government

 ~MFP

It Did What it Was Written to Do

A great many people – especially conservatives – reverence the Constitution, consider that it has been abused and that if only the doctrines expressed within were revived and respected, all would be well with America again.

This, of course, is a kind of children’s bedtime story – and approximates reality to about the same degree as the story of the Three Little Pigs.

The Constitution was peddled and imposed on us by men like Alexander Hamilton, a grasper after power who very openly loathed the ideas expressed by men like Jefferson in his Declaration (and even more so in his Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions).

Hamilton and his faction – they were called Federalists, which meant then what it means today – intended to create a centralized government on the British model, but without a hereditary monarch. The Bill of Rights was just barely added, in order to sooth the (rightly, as it turned out ) suspicious, such as George Mason of Virginia.

Patrick Henry smelled a rat.

At any rate, the fact remains that the Constitution was written with great calculation by lawyers – who are trained in and well understand the meaning and potential use of words – in such as way as to assure the expansion of federal power via (among other things) the purposely open-ended Commerce Clause and deliberately nebulous phrases such as “general welfare” that can be – and have been – interpreted to mean . . . anything those who control the levers of the federal government wish it to mean.

Including – as actually happened during the Roosevelt Years – that a man farming on his own land whose produce never leaves his land let alone the state is nonetheless subject to federal regulation, because his actions “affect” Interstate Commerce.

In the same manner, Americans are forced to pay for other people’s retirement (and in their turn, forcing others to pay for theirs) and this is characterized as a “contribution.”

Regardless – the debate ought not to be over a piece of paper and what it does or does not legalize. A thing can be morally vile and entirely legal. The debate ought to be over the question of rights vs. conditional privileges. And whether the immoral can ever – rightfully – be lawful….. Read More

It Did What it Was Written to Do

This is a good follow up to the article below.
A Prison By Any Other Name (SCHOOL BRAINWASHING SYSTEM, BEHAVIOR CONTROL

~MFP

By Gavin Nascimento, A New Kind Of Human

Study Shows We Are Born Creative Geniuses But The ‘Education’ System Dumbs Us Down