Millennial Ping!
Also, how was your Passover? I spent mine in Las Vegas!
ocialism attempts to vanquish nature by a front attack. Individualism, on the contrary, is the recognition, in social politics, that nature has a beneficent as well as a malignant side. The struggle for life provides for the various wants of the human race, in somewhat the same way as the climatic struggle of the elements provides for vegetable and animal life—imperfectly, that is, and in a manner strongly marked by inequalities and anomalies. By taking advantage of prevalent tendencies, it is possible to mitigate these anomalies and inequalities, but all experience shows that it is impossible to do away with them. All history, moreover, is the record of the triumph of Individualism over something which was virtually Socialism or Collectivism, though not called by that name. In early days, and even at this day under archaic civilisations, the note of social life is the absence of freedom. But under every progressive civilisation, freedom has made decisive strides—broadened down, as the poet says, from precedent to precedent. And it has been rightly and naturally so.
I.46
“Freedom is the most valuable of all human possessions, next after life itself. It is more valuable, in a manner, than even health. No human agency can secure health; but good laws, justly administered, can and do secure freedom. Freedom, indeed, is almost the only thing that law can secure. Law cannot secure equality, nor can it secure prosperity. In the direction of equality, all that law can do is to secure fair play, which is equality of rights but is not equality of conditions. In the direction of prosperity, all that law can do is to keep the road open. That is the Quintessence of Individualism, and it may fairly challenge comparison with that Quintessence of Socialism we have been discussing. Socialism, disguise it how we may, is the negation of Freedom. That it is so, and that it is also a scheme not capable of producing even material comfort in exchange for the abnegations of Freedom, I think the foregoing considerations amply prove.” EDWARD STANLEY ROBERTSON
Socialism is taught in schools. Then it wears off as people get older and experienced.
“33% of millennials don’t like socialism”
So 67% like it? Doesnt sound like good news.
If Millenials don’t like socialism, why do they vote for liberals by ridiculous margins?
Many of the socialists were probably pussies who were afraid of getting a well-deserved beating from the pollster.
Send the other 67% to Venezuela where they can become a part of history.
They can live there and actually experience the wonders of socialist life until Venezuela explodes into anarchy as the latest of many, many countries driven into ruin by socialist fanatics.
Thank you for referencing that article SeekAndFind. As usual, please bear in mind that the following critique is directed at the article and not at you.
Socialism isn’t necessarily the problem imo. After all, the roads and sidewalks that we use every day, along with police departments and public schools, are products of socialism imo.
The problem with socialism is when minority factions manage to subvert the will of the majority and pirate government powers and taxes for their own benefit.
I am amused the author thinks that’s “good news”. That’s it?
Get a clue people before it’s all over.
It’s the winning 66% that I’m worried about.
Remember, Comrade Obama won with less than a 1% advantage.
Comrade Salvador Allende of Chile won with a fraud-riddled “0.5%” of the vote (out of three candidates). He lost in total votes to a conservative majority, but in Chile then, the one who had the plurality won, and you see what it got them.
STUPID is well engrained in Obamites, Millenials, rich Baby-boomers on the Left, Hollyweird (about 95% Left), much of the mainstream media, academia (over 90% leftist), and the BLM thugs.