When media or an average person use words like ‘violated’, ‘ignored’, or ‘disobeyed’ those are called emotional-trigger words, meant to make you feel like the person in question is not to be listened to or given any right of defense. Words like ‘in my opinion’ have become hate speech, including phrases like ‘I think’ and ‘according to the constitution’.
The more extreme leftist mentality will have you believe that they are pro-personal liberties & exposing facts, while then denying you liberty to express your opinion and discover the facts on your own. This is called covert manipulation, appeasing your emotional triggers while telling you what to think or believe.
Another way they do this is direct association with words that correspond to facts by qualifying them as obstruction of freedom or racist. Words such as “black”, “white”, “privileged”, and now even “socialism”.
By doing this they have destroyed the beauty of diversity, while claiming that you have the right to call yourself whatever you want, and be whoever you want to be. They have created division based on a minority option by claiming likewise that you have to give yourself a particular title. They have called the majority vote ‘Un-American’ by comparing those who disagree with them to communist and power-hungry figure heads, while then ignoring and stepping on the minority to achieve a social encore.
To put it simply, why is calling your neighbor “black” make you racist? Is it not a fact that you can clearly see in front of you that he has dark-skin. You are not claiming his origin. You are not treating him poorly, subjecting him to slavery or demeaning his personal liberty. So it’s an outrage, because its an obvious truth and because the word ‘black’, by those who claim that race and color of ones skin doesn’t matter, has become a racist term. Thus, you are then called a racist, that is not an obvious fact by your statement, for giving explanation of a particular person’s actual skin-color.
The more scarier truth is ‘socialism’, which according to my pervious statement has been accosted as being anti-open minded. These people have deemed ‘socialism’ a progressive idea to secure your freedoms and your rights that are given to you by government. Which, if you read that correctly, is an oxymoron. However, if you were to hop on twitter, facebook or other social-media platforms meant to communicate thought and expression, and make a statement to explain something as “socialist” you are then told you don’t know anything; you are told to shut-up because you’re an idiot or worse language that I will not put in this essay.
So, what is socialism?
My personal and simple definition of the current ideologies of socialism is
- when people rely on the government to solve their problems; a hand in the pot so everyone is equal but no one has a fighting chance to improve their personal status or increase their personal wealth. A child’s ideal with their hand out to receive a cookie but then kick and scream like teenagers when the government doesn’t do what they want them to do.
However let us examine what socialism really is, where it comes from and then we will discuss its dangers and why people treat you poorly when you stand against it.
Socialism is a product for profits generated for social reform and allocated according to the calculated problem as deemed important by the government “for the greater good”; ignoring all sources of welfare for the people-based profitable gain.
Social ownership can be public, collective, cooperative or of equity. The profit of the system is no wealth, no prosperity, the over power of government and the necessity of people. Gov then choose that necessity and defines the people’s rights accordingly. Socialism is a product for profits generated for social reform and allocated according to the calculated problem as deemed important by the gov “for the greater good”; ignoring all sources of welfare for the people based profitable gain. The word “socialism” can be derived from the Latin word “sociare” which means to share. By gov institution then what is to share is common wealth, common knowledge, common identity and by extension the lack of diversity, individuality, and the blanket of personal freedom. Socialism by its nature after Karl Marx has come to signify the opposition of capitalism and advocates for the gov to deem the difference between right, wrong, justice, injustice, without regard for popular vote or inalienable human rights and freedoms. The power this out of the hands of individuals, and entirely in the power of gov officials to make laws and deem laws fit to be upheld by whatever method necessary. Common wealth for example means a private business owner thus has no right to claim his wealth, or goes to the gov. Such gov by nature produces an economic mechanism and a political power associated with ones own greed and ones own abilities and ones own ethics. The methods are often gruesome and inhumane as if views people as objects to produce and enhance its power. Such a system may have at first formed a moral compass, to give to the poor, to treat everyone equally, and to enhance economic growth. But, this is basing human nature on the ideals that no one is selfish, no one is evil, no one can be corrupted or manipulated. In extent, it is entrusting the human nature of all to the human nature of one, by denying the human truths to the mass for the sake of the many. Socialism was an original social and economic philosophy not meant for a political alternative. Disagree with knowledge for knowledge, disagree with wisdom for wisdom, and give your rights, your wealth, your protections, your stability, your children to the gov, for the greater good. If this is indeed, the type of gov you wish for, then by all means fight for what you believe in. But, in so doing, you are agreeing with the type of gov that is capitalism, for you have freedom of opinion, expression & speech. If I disagree with you, and am a gov official, I could call upon your household, arrest you and take away your property and give it to someone else because I, the gov, gave you the right to own those things in the first place, thus I have the right to take them away. Community. Co-operation. Social equity. Class politics. Are said to be the pillars of a socialistic economy. We are by nature social beings, demanding time & attention from others according to our personal influence and needs. These things, naturally, sound good to the human ear because we seek to be good and do good amongst our community to better society and better policy and in general make things better. However, by giving that power to the gov means they decide what is good amongst our society. The consequence could be social justice, social equality, and social wealth. Where the enforcement of those things abandons the rights of individuals to decide for themselves what is justice, what is equality and to accumulate wealth. This is why you may hear Americans say that is it ‘anti-American’. For at its founding, it was to give those within its borders a fighting chance of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. The constitution was written to be used against the government not to be interpreted how to control the people. I had a right to study this topic, to digest it and understand it and formulate my opinion based on educational information readily available to me from all sources. Just as you have a right to do the same and have a contradicting opinion. It is social then for us to share these opinions in open forums and commonality, to increase the diversity of thought and stimulate action among our society for its betterment. Take away this ability and we all must agree, we cannot express, we cannot be diverse. Because the rights of the one take control of the rights of the many. However, I do not speak of ‘social democracy’ I speak of the actual term, history, and result of this political alternative. So to use this term, it is social to give to the Red Cross, to charities, to tithe in church, to vote on matters one cares for, to take a pie to a member of our community who has lost a loved one. But, to use another term, it is socialist to have the gov take your money and give it to whatever, to cast your vote as it appeases them, to demand from you that your food pantry is only as full as necessary. Now social democracy is accomplished by the evolution of thought and education by swearing commitment to a representative and participate in democracy; the measure of income for redistribution, regulation of the economy for the general interest and social welfare of provisions. Though in essentials it is socialistic. Social democracy aims to uphold capitalism by leading greater democratic, egalitarian and solidaristic outcomes. This is where checks and balances, and the diversity of political parties comes in. This is where you might hear Republicans call Democrats “socialists”. Republicanism by definition is a political ideology centered on citizenship in a state by state organization within a republic. A republic is defined as a government in which the country is considered a public matter, not the private concern or property of the rulers. To quote, “…United States of America… and to the republic for which it stands, one nation…” Thus in each state, we are democratic by nature, submitting ourselves to the representation of those elected. Thus in the grand scale, we are republican for our government is made up of individuals and those of representation for the concern of popular opinion and structure. In the reverse of this balance, we submit ourselves a government of interpretation of our rights and thus not a popular vote or popular opinion. We may all be social in nature, but socialistic government will only produce an impersonal and tyrannical outcome. I would go into this further, but as I see I have gone quite long, I will stop here. I have my house to clean, my pet to feed and groceries to buy. I wish my fellow Americans the best in the beautiful lives they lead.