By Professor Doom
The Trump election, a repudiation of a few of the lies which have been the foundation of our recent culture, is certainly something…but it’s not a complete solution.
Our campuses in particular seem bent on enforcing the lies; there are many reports that these places are hotbeds of resistance to the “Trump repudiation,” and go so far as to provide coloring books and Play-Doh to the college students “suffering” from being exposed to the idea that reality may not be as the safe space of campus presents it.
The big reason for this is the strong left-wing bias of administration. Administrators punish conservative faculty, restrict and harass conservative student groups, and keep conservative speakers from presenting ideas on campus. This prevents students from ever learning of any other way to think but one, the one that is strongly encouraged on campus.
Socialism is endlessly presented as the solution to all problems, and Northeastern University’s promotion of Boston’s International Socialist Organization really exemplifies the mindless support given here, as the latter has been allowed to “provide” multiple events and workshops on campus…even as conservative options are not allowed.
I don’t understand how socialism can be taken seriously; to do so requires completely ignoring the historical evidence, written in oceans of blood during the 20th century, particularly a great war where the Nazis (National Socialists) lost to the USSR (International Socialists, much like Boston’s Organization)…with the USSR collapsing despite winning the biggest war in history, because a socialist system simply doesn’t work. It’s funny, when the USSR collapsed, we learned that parts of Moscow’s phone system had been basically unchanged since the Bolshevik revolution many decades earlier. While the rest of the non-socialist world went through generations of phone technology, the USSR’s phones, like most everything else, was incapable of advancing under socialism.
Not being exposed to other ideas and ignoring historical evidence are only part of what’s necessary to believe in socialism…you also need to not think about what socialists are saying today, because they haven't changed.
Let’s take some examples of what this society teaches our kids on campus, to exclusion of other points of view:
“Inequality is a law of capitalism.”
Turns out, inequality is a law of reality. All one needs to do is go to the grocery store, and pick up a bag of grapes and see it with your own eyes: not all the grapes are equal in size and consistency. The closest we can come to equality in the real world is an anthill, and again, we see how socialist inequality works: most ants count for nothing, but the one at the top, the queen ant, gets everything. There hasn’t been a socialist system yet that didn’t give everything to the guy on top…but that doesn’t make inequality a law peculiar to socialism, either.
Yes, I grant this system seems to work quite well for ants but I just don’t think it’s a good system for human beings. Time and again we’ve seen individual human beings do amazing things, and these humans aren’t at the top of the heap. On the other hand, outside of the queen, most every ant really is just like every other ant. When I see a lone ant invent a written language or the like, I’ll reconsider my opinion here.
Another tidbit of socialist “wisdom”:
“In the United States, there are 400 billionaires. They are the reason why there are 47 million poor people,” an event description asserts, contending that “you cannot have obscene, untold wealth unless you have obscene, unimaginable poverty.”
Look, the socialists should be allowed to speak, but not letting other sides present their point of view allows for obvious foolishness, like the above.
Let’s take the socialist’s numbers at face value. If we simply kill the 400 billionaires and distribute their wealth to the 47 million poor people in the US, what would that change? The poor people will get less than $9,000 apiece. They still won’t be able to get a car with that money, much less pay for insurance and maintenance for the car. They won’t be able to buy health insurance for their family for more than a year. They won’t be able to pay a year’s tuition at most any US university. It’s not even a year’s rent in most cities.
In short, the end result of killing off the rich will be that the poor will remain poor. Basic math shows that the existence of the rich is not, by itself, the reason there are poor. Of course, basic math isn’t necessarily part of the college curriculum any more (and what we call “advanced” math today has been dumbed down to the optional basic math you can find on many campuses).
Indeed, the event description praises Sanders’ candidacy as a confirmation of “what people struggling for a living wage and against racism and police brutality have been saying for years: Capitalist [sic] isn’t working for anyone but bankers and billionaires, and to end our suffering we need an alternative.”
Hey, Sanders was at least attempting to fix the very serious problems in our current economic system, and Sanders should be allowed to present his ideas…even if I disagree, he should be allowed to speak.
On the other hand, the “other side” of economic thought should be allowed to be heard as well. It’s not capitalism per se that’s causing the suffering…if anything, capitalism is what’s keeping it from being much worse. The “other side” says our fiat monetary system is causing suffering because any attempt to save inevitably just transfers wealth to the “bankers and billionaires.” The “other side” says our current zero interest rate policies are causing suffering because people can no longer survive on the interest from their savings...even as the “bankers and billionaires” get rich because they still collect interest on loans to the little people. There’s the difference: while socialism attacks all the rich for being rich in a spasm of primal envy, the “other side” addresses why some of the rich are getting rich, and seeks solutions to the heart of the problem causing the suffering. There’s room for open discussion here (none of these nonsocialist ideas, incidentally, were even remotely mentioned to me in high school, where I was trained to believe the fiat system was a great system).
There is supposed to be an exchange of ideas here, but the only “alternative” presented is the socialist, failed, “alternative.”
While the university informed that it is unaware as to whether any student organizations are involved in the event, the school’s chapter is now listed as a co-sponsor, along with the International Socialist Organization.
has yet to hear back from the school as to whether the student groups’ involvement means that any university funds will help pay for the day-long event.
I won’t bother addressing the university’s probable lie about not knowing about a student group co-sponsoring, but it’s obvious university funds are paying for this, dare I say it, indoctrination.
I know, indoctrination is a strong word, but as long as it’s forbidden to speak of any alternative to our current problems besides socialism, what other word applies to forcing only one method of thought down our students’ throats?