Equal?

So there I was,

Listening to what might be considered an opposing view to mine and it struck me, nobody has ever presented an interesting but often overlooked aspect of the socialist/secular progressive philosophy of government that is, you will still have the dreaded “haves and have-nots”. They, those that promote socialism, will only tell you how happy fair and equal we will all be. I hate to tell you this but there will always be people with more and there will always be people with less, only the names will change to protect the guilty. The guilty being those that have perpetrated the socialist ideals on an unsuspecting society. Some people that have-not are just upset that other people are willing to take advantage of their freedom to succeed to become haves. Oddly enough, some people that don’t actually do anything for the people that have-not except add to their numbers, will, through their efforts, become haves themselves and then mysteriously distance themselves from the have-nots, all the while telling them, “we’re here for you and we care!”  

 Have you ever noticed that the people in power, these people that are, oh so concerned about the “downtrodden” and lack of fairness in society, take vacations and holidays that would make Warren Buffet feel guilty and all “on your dime” with your money, without so much as a thank you for the trip! Upon return, they then jump in front of TV cameras and resume to complain that the “big, rich business CEOs” are just “screwing the poor” and not paying their fair share.  By the way, these people after leaving office will be receiving some benefits for life. That is both sides of the aisle. Surprisingly, (or not so surprising) according to Business Insider and the Huffington Post, 7 out of 10 of the richest people in congress are Democrats. It boggles the mind.  To be imperfectly fair, according to Roll Call, only 18 out of the top 50 richest people in congress are Democrats. The difference is though, that conservatives, Republicans and more than a few Independents celebrate and reward hard work and success with no desire to punish the successful. Success will, the majority of the time, be followed by some form of financial prosperity, and that’s a good thing. The “seven out of ten”, (and I don’t mean them specifically), will yell and cry about the “three out of ten” not paying their fair share  and try to demonize and  “punish” them for their success by higher tax rates. Sort of a, “we’ll teach you to be a success “mentality, all the while using the same “tricks of the trade” i.e. Business and tax “loop holes” in order to maintain their position in the top ten. How do you spell hypocrisy?!

Call me naïve, but who is worse? The “MAN”(businessman) that works to provide a product and spends time and money to convince you to spend or give your money to them for what they are offering or the “MAN”(government) that just flat out tells you how much you will pay him whether you want to or not and maybe tell you where it goes. If he actually told you where your money goes, you would be less likely to so freely let him stick his hands in your pockets. They are public servants. At least that’s what they told you they wanted to be when you gave them your money to attain that position. By definition they are here to serve the public. I suppose if you consider that they make it possible for the “have-nots” to remain as such, yes, someone is being served. But are YOU being served? Where else but the grand institution of government  does the “employee” (them) tell the “employer” (us) what he’s going to do, regardless of the “employers” wishes, wants and desires and how much money he’s going to take from the boss to do it. Don’t get me wrong, it irks me no end when I hear of huge raises, bonuses, and retirements for CEOs etc., especially right after they layoff half their employees or close down completely. I believe that it exhibits a definite lack of character. But here’s the thing, that is private money, acquired by providing the public a product or service that the public at large deems necessary or desirable.   Unless it’s……….wait for it……Stimulus! The Govt. takes our money and gives it to companies that have put themselves in trouble, some with the governments help, and then they send management on vacation as gratuity for helping them get in trouble in the first place and the Govt. doesn’t even slap their hands. Yeah, that’s stimulating!

Tell me, do these crusaders for the poor and downtrodden spend all their time shaking all the right hands, kissing all the right babies and/or butts, and making all the right promises to anyone they can get to believe them, just so after “clawing their way“ to the political top, climb back down to hang out with the poor and downtrodden they may have mistakenly  elevated to a higher level of poverty? It’s very doubtful. Look at the great socialist leaders of the past and present.   Joseph Stalin, Chairman Mao, Hugo Chavez and Michael Moore’s favorite dictator, Fidel Castro. They did help people to overcome oppressive regimes only to become the leaders of even more oppressive regimes. Oh, and let’s not forget the Kim Jongs both Il and Un. North Korea, the vacation capital of……no one. I hear tell that Un was voted “the worlds sexiest man” Could someone please send him the definition of sarcasm. It’s a safe bet that while their people were/are cold, starving, and doing without, they, these great leaders, weren’t/aren’t cold starving and doing without. I believe the term is “They be Livin’ Large”

I find it interesting that with history being played out right before our eyes, as in China, North Korea, Cuba and prior to the relatively recent fall of the Iron Curtain, a majority of the people in this country so readily endear themselves to the siren song of a socialist society. History has proven time and again, it just don’t work. I guess the song and dance put out there by some for all people being equal and no one lacks or wants for anything, is desirable enough for the “common sense switch” to be turned off. Think about it, somebody somewhere out there will get disillusioned, disgruntled and realizing that with a little extra effort, they can have more. There’s the fly in the ointment, the hair in the soup. Some “fool” somewhere will always want more and be willing to do what it takes to have more and spoil it for everybody, especially when they see that the “new boss” ain’t cold, ain’t hungry, and ain’t lacking. He’ll say to himself, “self, why can’t I have what they have?” This, by the way, will upset the “new boss”

So regardless of which form of govt. we have, can we agree that we’ll still have the rich and the poor. The haves and the have-nots. Sure we may all be at the same level, but the same level of poverty and lack is still worse than having the same opportunity to progress and succeed whether or not we take advantage of the opportunity. Can we also agree that regardless of who is in power, those in the positions of power will, no matter how much they say to the opposite, not be feeling the cold, hunger and lack of those they supposedly serve? The band “The Who” was right “Meet the new boss, same as the old boss!” At least the new have-nots can say “the new boss is OUR boss, the one we voted for.” Congratulations!

I’m sorry, but having the majority of the people equally at the same level of lack, and need is not to be considered success. But that is all you will achieve with socialism, and it is unsustainable, it will not and cannot last. The lack will increase. I was once told and please forgive me I can’t remember who or where, but there is enough wealth in the world that if it were evenly distributed, every living human being on Earth would be a millionaire. The catch is that within a ten year period, (if that long) everyone that had abundance before would have it again and those that had nothing to begin with, would again have nothing. It’s all attitude and taking advantage of opportunity.  The Bible says in Matt 25:29 For to everyone who has, more shall be given and he will have abundance; but from him who does not have even that what he has will be taken away. That’s red print in my bible so it was Jesus speaking, and it applies to every aspect of life, spiritual, mental, emotional, physical, social, and financial. That same man, Jesus, said “the poor you will have with you always” Matt. 26:11 This “wise man” came to seek and save the lost, feed the poor, heal the sick and set the captive free. This wise man also knew that not every captive wanted to be set free. He often asked,”what is it you want me to do”? Their problems were obvious but he wanted to know where their heads and hearts were at. It was their choice. “The poor you will have with you always.”Why? Human nature.

I am not, compared to some, “well read”, but I have opened a book or two in my life. I read books like I watch movies, for entertainment only. If there is a socially redeeming message to it, it won’t be in the top five to see or read. Then there are some that after you are duped into watching or reading you find a message. When I think of a socialist society, three books come to mind. George Orwell’s Animal Farm. (1945) The book reflects events leading up to the Russian Revolution of 1917, and then on into Stalinist Russia. The one phrase that sticks out in this case, "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others". Then there is the famous “1984”(1949) by Orwell again. He may have missed the date but,  Big Brother IS (and will be) watching.

Finally H.G. Wells Time Machine, particularly the relationship between the Eloi and the Morlocks.  The Eloi living in a euphoric paradise have nothing to do but lay about in the sun and enjoy life to the point that they no longer know how to provide and care for themselves. The Morlocks living underground are providing for the Eloi’s every need but not out of the kindness of their hearts. The Eloi are nothing more than cattle for the Morlock to feed from. Whether or not it was Wells intention to write a social commentary in 1895 or just good fiction, the commentary was made. I do keep in mind that we all see things differently, a little or a lot, so read these for yourself, and I suggest you read them before Fahrenheit 451(Ray Bradbury 1953) becomes reality.

In closing, I hate to be the bearer of bad tidings but for all of you that want social and economic equality that some people presently in power say they can give you. They can’t do it, it can’t happen or it can’t happen on any kind of a sustainable level. If you say, “oh well as long as I get mine”, then you are the problem and you have a bigger problem than capitalism.