Stossel: Happy Thanksgiving!

Happy Thanksgiving! But before you eat that turkey, thank private property! Without it, Thanksgiving would be “Starvation Day.” Here’s why…

 

Did you know that the pilgrims almost starved after they arrived at Plymouth Rock? That’s because they were forced to farm “collectively.” The corporation that funded the expedition said, “grow food together. Divide the harvest equally.”

This is a terrible idea. It creates what economists call the “tragedy of the commons.” When you share property and the results of your work, people farm until the land is barren, don’t work as hard, or steal food from others.

John Stossel gathers young people from Students For Liberty and runs an experiment to demonstrate this “tragedy of the commons.” It shows the solution is private property, which is what saved the pilgrims.

H/T: ReasonTV
Subscribe to our YouTube channel: http://youtube.com/reasontv

 

Advertisements

Change Is The Wrong Metric To Determine Right And Left

Back during the inception of the Republican party it’s raison d’être was the radical idea of the abolition of slavery while the Democratic party favoured appeasement on the issue. The Republicans were the party of change while Democrats were of the status quo. The Video posted below details these facts.

In this case the change metric would have incorrectly had the Republicans on the Left and the Democrats on the Right.

This example aptly illustrates that the Right – Left determination has to be based on the proper metric of government size and power, not change. This is the underlying metric of the dictionary definitions of the various ideological terms with change being hardly mentioned.

It would seem that the primary purpose of the change metric is a desperate attempt at the incorrect placing certain ideologies that are clearly Leftist somewhere else. It should be obvious that governmental size and power is the only metric that makes sense given the ideological makeup of the various parties. It should also be manifestly obvious that the authoritarian extremes are on the Left. No amount of definitional prestidigitation, relativism or historical revisionism can change these facts.

Video: Pin the Tale on the Donkey: Democrats’ Horrible Racist Past | Bill Whittle

H/T PJ Media

 

PragerU: If You Hate Poverty, You Should Love The Free Market.

Globalization means the ever-increasing ability to move goods, people, and ideas from one distant location to another. Free trade is open access to markets and people from all over the world with few, if any, barriers. Property rights is ensuring that what belongs to you can’t be taken away on a whim by the state. The rule of law safeguards contracts, assuring that they will be respected and lived up to whether the deal is made in Peru or Poland. And entrepreneurship is the creativity of free people to dream up new products that we never knew we wanted or needed.

Did you know that since 1970, the percentage of humanity living in extreme poverty has fallen 80 percent? How did that happen? Arthur Brooks, president of the American Enterprise Institute, explains.

The next time you hear someone complain about capitalism, consider this: The percentage of people living at starvation level poverty has fallen 80% since 1970. Before then, more than one in four people around the world were living on a dollar a day or less. Today, it’s about one in twenty.

This is the greatest anti-poverty achievement in world history. So, how did this remarkable transformation come to pass? Was it the fabulous success of the United Nations? The generosity of U.S. foreign aid? The brilliant policies of the International Monetary Fund and World Bank? Stimulus spending? Government redistribution?

No. It was none of those things.

It was capitalism. Billions of souls around the world have been able to pull themselves out of poverty thanks to five incredible innovations: globalization, free trade, property rights, the rule of law, and entrepreneurship.

Globalization means the ever-increasing ability to move goods, people, and ideas from one distant location to another.

Free trade is open access to markets and people from all over the world with few, if any, barriers.

Property rights is ensuring that what belongs to you can’t be taken away on a whim by the state.

The rule of law safeguards contracts, assuring that they will be respected and lived up to whether the deal is made in Peru or Poland.

And entrepreneurship is the creativity of free people to dream up new products that we never knew we wanted or needed.

It’s worth noting that in places like East Asia, these five things were all made possible by the historic peace after World War II that resulted from America’s global diplomatic and military presence.

Let me put this in a slightly different way:

The ideals of free enterprise and global leadership, central to capitalism and American conservatism, are responsible for the greatest reduction in human misery since mankind began its long climb from the swamp to the stars. This remarkable progress has been America’s gift to the world.

So, if these American conservative ideals have done so much to lift up the world’s poor, you would think conservative ideas would be gaining strength every single day – everywhere. And not just gaining strength among conservatives, but also among young idealists, immigrants, minorities, and advocates for the poor—all embracing the principles of free enterprise and unleashing its power on behalf of the vulnerable.

But this hasn’t happened. To the contrary, capitalism is struggling to attract new followers. Indeed, some believe it’s destined to fade away – just as it has in much of Europe.

According to a Harvard Study, only 42% of young Americans 18 to 29 have a favorable view of capitalism. What explains this discrepancy between the incredible results of capitalism and its popularity? Why does capitalism get such bad rap?

One answer is simple: The defenders of free enterprise have done a terrible job of telling people how much good the system has done around the world. Capitalism has saved a couple billion people, and we have treated this miracle like a state secret.
According to a 2013 survey, 84 percent of Americans are unaware of the progress made against poverty worldwide. Indeed, more than two-thirds think global hunger has actually gotten worse.

Donate today to PragerU! http://l.prageru.com/2eB2p0h

 

The only way to stop the Left’s cultural revolution insanity is to go after it’s base ideology.

“The spread of evil is the symptom of a vacuum. whenever evil wins, it is only by default: by the moral failure of those who evade the fact that there can be no compromise on basic principles.” Ayn Rand

It has always been a goal of the left to erase the past and replace it with their version of reality to usher in their vision of a socialist Utopia of unicorns prancing about under rainbow skies. Even now they are letting the mask slip even further with attacks against the constitution and the founding fathers.

These attacks against fixed locations not only serve to erase history, but force the right into defending that which we fought against in the first go around.

Just to set the record straight, the Republican party’s original raison d’état had been the abolition of slavery. It was the Democratic party that favoured appeasement and later on revived the KKK. The left would like to call anyone who opposes their little revolution with the epithet Nazi, ignoring the historical fact that they were a National Socialist Worker’s party and Leftists like them. These facts should be known by those with the least bit familiar with history.

It should be obvious that the current strategy of trying to stop their erasure of history has not been effective. The nation’s Socialist left garners too much of an advantage for them to halt their efforts, and they will always have new targets for their cultural revolution. Merely trying to stop them will not work, and any victories they attain only fuels their efforts, neither will trying to embarrass them in their Orwellian actions.

They are very much like an army of ideological terminators, they can’t be bargained with, they can’t be reasoned with and they will not stop… ever

Army tactical doctrine has it that the best defense is a counter attack against the enemy’s most Assailable Flank. It should be clear that when a static defense is not working, one must go after the enemy’s weakest flank. In the case of the nation’s Socialist left, this would be their immoral and parasitic collectivist base ideology.

An article recently published outlined the long term goals of a socialist party being the elimination of economic liberty in the free market. So why not have a have a discussion about the elimination of the Left’s economic slavery with Socialism?

Is there any reason it should even be considered a valid form of government any more? It’s been a disastrous failure everywhere it’s ever been tried. It’s resulted in the deliberate mass murder of millions of innocents, why should rational people consider it’s failure ever again?

The nation’s left would like to keep the focus on the past, so why not indulge them in their efforts? If it’s a discussion of the history they want, let’s bring it on. We can start by talking about the deliberate mass murder by acolytes of their base ideology.

They want to talk about symbols and statues, fine we can debate them on that front as well. Let’s start with their idolization of a mass murderer Che Guevara.

More than likely they will parrot the tired old lines that “Socialism has yet to be tried” or that “Socialist regimes weren’t really Socialist.” Let them explain all the facts of history to everyone listening, it should be a fascinating discussion.

Or perhaps they will deny being Socialists, in which case they should have no objection to it’s eradication.

If people are given a choice between economic liberty of the free market or the economic slavery of socialism we can be very confident in the outcome. The odds are the nation’s socialist left won’t want to take up the challenge of this debate, for they cannot abide a frank discussion of their base ideology. And perhaps they may go back to their echo chamber and leave everyone else alone. We can only hope.

 

Here’s were we disagree with Glenn Beck on the characterization of the Nazi’s as ‘Far-Right’

Having viewpoint grounded in historic fact has it’s advantages and Glenn Beck uses this to good effect. However, there is one contention that he needs to address to keep with logical reality. Many a time he has asserted that certain Nazi groups are a vestige of the Far-Right with allusions to it being some sort of European model. With all due respect, the measurement of any logical construct has to be vested with a consistent metric to make sense and this metric cannot change by geographic location.

It should be axiomatic that the constructs of our life have a basis in logic and reality. Confusion reigns when these elements are missing. The subject at hand is a very good example, there are those that prefer to characterize certain political groups as ‘on the Far-Right’ under various rationales that seem to be rather arbitrary.

In order to have an understandable metric, one must have it based upon a certain logical factor endemic to that measurement. This is why governments maintain weight and measurement standards in controlled environments, since each of these metrics have to be clearly defined for everyone. Such is the case with the political spectrum. One cannot arbitrary place a particular ideology at some point with a rational basis for doing so.

The origins of Left and Right began under the auspices of support for a monarchy during the time of the French revolution. Clearly this is no longer the case and it only makes sense to set the metric to a standard of modern times. This metric should have a basis in the dictionary definitions of the various mainstream ideologies of the day.

In general terms, the Right is considered to be the Conservative imbued with the principles of individual liberty, free enterprise, private property ownership and limited government while the Left is considered to be Socialistic in nature, vested in the principles of Collective or Groups rights and unlimited government.

It should be obvious that the political spectrum should measure governmental power, with the Right favouring the limitation of this power while the left favours the opposite viewpoint. The Far-Right would thus be characterized as minimal or zero governance. While the Far-Left would be characterized by complete or total government control. Thus one would logically place anarchy on the Far-Right and Totalitarianism on the Far-Left.

The mere placement of certain groups arbitrarily or by past characterizations or only sows confusion and discord. The spectrum is meaningless without a logical basis in fact. This is why it makes no logical sense to place an ideology that would require expansive governance on the Far-Right. Moreover it doesn’t make any sense to have this metric magically change depending on which side of the pond one is on.

Video: What Caused Venezuela’s Tragic Collapse? Socialism.

Venezuela has the world’s largest proven oil reserves, and it was once Latin America’s richest country. Today, most grocery store shelves are empty, and Venezuelans are so hungry that they’re killing zoo animals for sustenance. Toilet paper, diapers, and toothpaste are luxury goods. Venezuelan hospitals have disintegrated, children are dying because they can’t get antibiotics, and the infant mortality rate is higher than Syria. The capital city of Caracas is the murder capital of the world, and just 12 percent of citizens feel safe walking alone at night, which is the lowest figure reported in the world.

The government blames slumping oil prices for the desperate situation. The real cause is the socialist economy.

The real lesson of Venezuela’s tragic collapse is that real socialism always leads to economic breakdown and political repression. Those of us in wealthier, freer countries need to keep Venezuela in mind as we confront calls for more regulation and government control of all aspects of our own lives.

Produced by Todd Krainin. Written by Nick Gillespie. Camera by Jim Epstein.

H/T Reason TV

Subscribe to our YouTube channel: http://youtube.com/reasontv

Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/reason
Subscribe to our podcast at iTunes: https://goo.gl/az3a7a

Reason is the planet’s leading source of news, politics, and culture from a libertarian perspective. Go to reason.com for a point of view you won’t get from legacy media and old left-right opinion magazines.
———-