This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Daniel Hannan Explains Why Socialism Does Not Work
Having explained how well socialism worked in France and in Venezuela, why socialism alway fails; and exposing the "costs" of socialism around the world, we leave it to the much more erudite UKIP member Daniel Hannan to explain why socialism does not work. Hannan, simply put, explains why socialism (using force to make individuals comply with planners plans) doesn't produce the results the planners planned. As Austrian Addict notes, socialists don't like the spontaneous order that results when individuals are free to make decisions on what they produce, consume, and exchange. The only reason central planners think that socialism hasn't worked is because it hasn’t been tried by the right people, namely them.
»
- 33551 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
"Socialism" is an automatically bogus label. All "isms" tend to be bullshit. The supreme ideology is militarism. However, that is paradoxical because the oldest book on The Art of War starts by saying that success in war depends on deceit, and ends by saying that spies are the most important soldiers.
The ONLY things which exist are organized systems of lies operating robberies.
The ONLY things which exist are the dynamic equilibria between different systems of lies operating robberies.
All other "isms" operate within militarism. They do so by being systems of lies, backed up by violence. There is not, and can not be, anything else. Their could theoretically be better dynamic equilibria between the different systems of lies, backed by violence. However, what actually tends to happen is that those who were the best at being deceitful and backing that up with destruction then tend to become ruling classes, which can dominate the schools and other media. Pretty well all political debates end up being dominated by the best professional liars and immaculate hypocrites, which are operating the systems of lies, backed by violence, which enable them to rob and defraud others, generating positive feedback loops for more of their bullshit political speeches to be promoted.
There is NOT any genuine "capitalism" nor "free market," that actually excludes fraud and murder. Instead, what actually happened was that the methods of organized crime were applied to dominate the political processes, so that the governments became the biggest form of organized crime, controlled by the best organized gangs of criminals, the biggest gangsters, the banksters.
This goofy speech by Hannan deliberately ignores the history of the Bank of England, which made an increasing mockery out of "democracy," "capitalism," "free markets," and more recently has reduced the "rule of law" itself to a mockery of its own principles by never properly applying the jurisprudence of punitive damages against the frauds of the biggest banks, which now routinely get away with token fines for breaking laws.
I despise bullshit speeches like this one made by Hannan, that deliberately ignore the MEANING OF PRIVATE BANKS MAKING THE PUBLIC "MONEY" SUPPLY OUT OF NOTHING AS DEBTS, which totally destroys the sense of "capitalism," since thereby "capital" is being made out of nothing, and, as well, that also destroys the "free market," by rigging interest rates, and everything else on through down from that.
THE SUPREME PARADOX is that the most important thing that people do is operate the murder systems. However, those were ACTUALLY most successfully done through deceits, and spies, etc. ... Upon that foundation of human ecology, with those deceitful death controls, was built the political economy, which has ended up with fundamentally fraudulent financial accounting systems, whereby the application of the methods of organized crime through the political processes has resulted in an on-going situation of the legalized counterfeiting of the public "money" supply by private banks.
Our civilization has developed for thousands of years, based on lies, backed by violence, to now become based on astronomically amplified globalized systems of electronic frauds, backed by the force of atomic bombs. Hence, our civilization is controlled by the maximum possible frauds and deceits in its combined money/murder systems. THE SUPREME PARADOX of civilization being made by the history of warfare has produced our kind of political debates, illustrated by goofy bullshit speeches, such as this one by Hannan, that deliberately ignore the most important social facts, that the most important things human beings do is operate their death controls. Those death controls back up the debt controls, because money is measurement backed by murder. To not talk about the real death controls is to not talk about anything that matters most. However, due to the history of successful warfare being based on deceits, the actual ways that we talk about our death controls is done through the maximum possible deceits about those!
THE SUPREME PARADOX OF MILITARISM (that its success was based on being the best at dishonesty), is at the radical root of all of the rest our political problems, throughout our human ecology and political economy. Militarism is the ideology of the murder system, which backs up the money system, and therefore, pretty well controls everything else. The paradoxical problem that the murder systems were best done by those who were the most dishonest about them has segued into financial systems being best done by those who are the most dishonest about how they are doing that too.
In the foreseeable future, as the exponential growth due to the industrial revolution being able to strip-mine a fresh planet of its natural resources reaches the limits of diminishing returns from doing that, there will be strong resurgences of the needs to develop different human and industrial ecologies, that work with natural ecologies, rather than tend to deliberately ignore those. THEN SUPREME PARADOX OF MILITARISM WILL GROW BIGGER, since the paradigm shifts in basic sciences have enabled technologies to become trillions of times more powerful and capable, BUT, the central issues of civilization, its death controlling murder systems, and its monetary system based upon those, continue to operate through the maximum possible deceits and frauds.
Therefore, mainstream political speeches tend to always be goofy bullshit, because they deliberately ignore the most important social facts, which are the ways that the death controls have been backing up the debt controls. As long as our political debates continue to be dominated by that kind of bogus bullshit, that gets away with deliberately ignoring the real facts about human ecology and political economy, then we will continue to employ technologies which are trillions of times more powerful and capable to be MORE DISHONEST, AND BACK THOSE LIES UP WITH MORE VIOLENCE!
My view is that we are being backed into a corner, where we should go through an intellectual scientific revolution, so that a radical critique of the concepts of general energy systems can be applied to politics, and especially to the monetary and military systems. We are being backed into a more and more dangerous position due to the PARADOX OF MILITARISM, which is behind why all the other "isms" tend to be merely different kinds of bullshit.
there is on ism that you missed - feminism. But that's OK, because socialism and feminism are the same thing. I'm sure you've all noticed that the socialist welfare state is particularly generous to women, and that the taxes are primarily paid by men.
Men are the source of surplus in any society, the differences are how you arrange for that surplus to be conveyed to the women and children. One way is via the family, and another is via state force. Feminism/socialism is the latter.
"...the Bank of England, which made an increasing mockery out of "democracy," "capitalism," "free markets," and more recently has reduced the "rule of law" itself to a mockery of its own principles by never properly applying the jurisprudence of punitive damages against the frauds of the biggest banks, which now routinely get away with token fines for breaking laws."
I'll buy that, except that you're being too kind.
The BoE sits on top of the huge unelected British Establishment that actually runs the country and as you allude, is virtually above the law along with most other organs of The State. Elected politicians are mere public figureheads in the overall scheme of things to give the masses a false impression that we live in an accountable democracy. We do not.
According to one senior retired Met Police Chief Detective, before the Met Police can investigate and prosecute financial crime in The City, it has to get approval from the government - the Business Secretary (Vince Cable at the moment).
--- Lily Tomlin
Real capitalist societies print their own money and don't except toilet paper from London in exchange for the gold. Their universities point out the federal reserve is not federal.
Radical marijuana, rock on that is an upvote
but can he do it in a sentence or less?
the gift of directness comes through simplicity......
From the beginning, the most ruthless men with biggest rocks have made the rules, and the only things that really change are that technology produces more powerful rocks and the ruthless men get more clever about hiding the threat of force behind ever more elaborate systems of control.
How's that? It loses a lot of the detail, but I think that's the gist.
RM, I always look forward to your posts, and I have a similar impression about where we are and what options are still open to people who can see this train coming down the tracks.
I agree, BadLibertarian: "that's the gist."
Why reference only France and Venezuela? Why no mention of Sweden, Denmark, or Norway where their various programs work well and the population is happier than almost anywhere else?
Every time someone mentions these countries I get PISSED.
APPLES TO FUCKING ORANGES
Lapland does NOT have;
MILLIONS OF ILLEGAL ALIENS - SUCKING THE SHIT OUT OF THEIR SOCIAL PROGRAMS.
TRY to get into any of these countries....try. Good luck on that.
NO black folk yammering about slavery
Indigenous populations in those countries is huge - one race dominates.
ANYONE COMPARING THIS TO THE US IS A STUPID FUCK
Despite Mises, Rothbard and Hayek making devastating critiques in their various books on "socialism," i.e. collectivism, I must add the following:
All governments are nothing more than a syndicate of thieves backed by violence.
All plans and actions by them are nothing more than schemes, scams and rackets to steal wealth from their victims.
All utterance from them are nothing more than stories, elaborations or lies to cover up their thefts and violence.
All labels applied to government, "socialism," "fascism," "democracy," "communism," etc., are just brands--Brand words for their particular type of plunder and brutality.
And then why do "socialism," "fascism," "democracy," "communism," etc. fail?! Because of what they really are.
"government is an organised crime syndicate"
He is either an idiot or a hypocrite. Idiot if he does not notice, hypocrite if he hopes we won't notice that
What he wants is not to get rid of the coercion, not to eradicate the mechanism of the distribution of this coercion, but to climb into the cozy immune cockpit from where to distribute coercion.
He will then come up with a very heartfelt, sincere and coherent explanation of why more taxes and less freedom is something we all need.
Have you considered that the cost of government is less than what I'd take from you if there wasn't a government restraining my actions?
Samuel Colt says "You'd be broke still, son, but well ventilated."
Mr. Beretta only says "Vaffanculo."
Do you realize that you are going to be dead, with or without government?
UPD:
Replace the UN with open source software.
in other words.... a virus!
Think smaller, local, an island say. All form of governance would be by open source code, almost all bureaucratic functions automated, and for those functions that can't be automated think live cam wearing volunteers.
Now imagine if this island were to be purchased free and clear from some corrupt indebted state, no shortage of those. Imagine if an IPO raised the funds to make the purchase. Imagine how wealthy the original investors would become.
Our nigger Congress critters are almost as eloquent and well spoken as Daniel Hannan is. Almost. A few more government hand outs and they'll be right there.
Has Guam tipped over yet?
Socialism is working quite well in Sweden. Their biggest problem, which is also true in all but a handful of countries, is their privately owned central bank. Until the cancer of privately owned central banking is driven from all countries, the symptoms of which are reported ad nauseum on ZH and elswhere, we will never have economic justice, or peace.
Sweden would have you believe that socialism works there, but there are few Anglo-Saxons who'd want to live in that country under its grossly highly taxed society and interferring government.
Those taxes in Seden are going for public services, which is to the benefit of all Swedes. In so-called capitalist countries (and I use that term very loosely), those taxes and tax benefits go to the richest segment of society, a socialism for the rich if you will. High personal taxes are not bad at all if they gain you medical care, social care, education - areas which we who pay relatively little taxes must bear upon our individual shoulders to the detriment of society as a whoe, and the enrichment of the .001% specifically. If I pay high taxes but get free medical, free education through collage, and reasonable public services why do I need more disposable income? The Scandinavian countries have the right balance. We should be looking at htem more seriously.
Rotfl.
Shitty little rent-seeking countries in Europe can claim to be a socialist paradise until German tanks start rolling. Then the paradigm starts to fall apart.
This idea can go fuck itself. It's an illusion of prosperity and happiness.
Socialism was a thousand gulags and a hundred death camps and another hundred million crushed souls away from success in Europe and Asia in the twentieth century. If it were only given a fair chance.........
Capitalism works. When it gets gov't money in the form of QE, ZIRP, Rate Twists, favorable tax status, subsidies and any other legislation via gov't to prop it's sorry ass up.
If we pulled every stimulus penny out there...how long would capitalism last? 40 seconds?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBPqksG9nbA
I think you mean corporate welfare, or corporate socialism. I'd rather all the stimulus and handouts end and see ehere the chips fall. It will be good to clear out the clutter.
Not at all.
The overleveraged banks and their synthetic underwriters and markets would collapse but the prudent farmers dairymen bakers etc. would continue as before because they live within their means. Prices could temporarily rised for high demand good like food and energy as marginal business die, and fall drastically in other low demand goods as the artificial bubbles created by floods of (capital) edit: fiat are wiped out.
True price discovery would take place as the system purged itself of malinvestment.
Borrowed time.
"...we leave it to the much more erudite UKIP member Daniel Hannan"
Tyler: Eh. Dan Hannan is a Conservative MEP, not a UKIP member.
+1. He's about 1 of 3 that I would actually vote for. The other two being Douglas Carswell and Steve Baker, who tried to introduce a bill that would make banks require your permission to loan out your funds (i.e. give you the choice between fractional or full reserve banking). It died (quelle surprise), as far as I can tell.
A major problem in Britain is that over the last generation or so, many people have drifted towards the Left of politics to what many of us would call "socialism" or "socialism light". It may not yet be at the level of Hard Left socialist countries but it's only a matter of time and Red Ed Miliband is doing his best to hide his Marxist roots. Of course most of these people would flatly deny being socialists, but on the Left is where they really are. They have bought the Left's fallacious arguments of "fairness", "equality" and "justice" hook line and sinker. They see little or nothing wrong with the growth of an ever larger State that assumes ever more power.
This disastrous state of affairs is exemplified by the fact that the last Labour Govt under Blair & Bown wrecked the British economy and wrecked British society, turning it into one of the world's bankrupt surveillance states. Yet, there remains a strong possibility Labour will win the 2015 general election.
As a direct consequence of this, the political Right has edged towards the Left too, to the point today where Cameron's and Osborne's economic policies are little different from the ill-feted policies of Blair and Brown: corporatism. The police retain far too much power with no attempt by the Conservative coalition to reign it back. The power of the bureaucracy - which itself largely belongs to the intellectual Left - is growing ever larger and ever more authoritarian with the government's blessing.
It goes on ...and on ...and on.
I see no solution to this for the simple reason that when more and more people are brought into the Welfare State net, they will always vote for more of it, not less.
Are you serious???? Blair was a corporate and financial services industry whore. He propogated the parasitic class, extracting wealth from the middle class and burdening public balance sheets with trillions in private debt. Now, if you want to call that socialism, I am in agreement. If you are articulating some stupid ass tripe about "everybody is on welfare" or "takers v. producers" bullshit, then you are intellectually lazy and part of the problem.
Blair is, and always was, a socialist by his own mouth. There were many other aspects to his political policies which further defined him as a socialist, later becoming a neo-fascist. What you describe is sort-of corporatism, a well known feature of socialism.
You can yank on your dick all you want, but your hard-on for socialism doesn't change history and fact. Don't give be some bullshit about the words of a politician. You must be more sophisticated than that. During his years as prime minister Blair (and Clinton) just continued and fostered the neoliberal economic dogma of the last 40 years. Calling that socialism is ,as stated earlier, being intellectually lazy and caught in political tribalism. Pure bullshit.
The neoliberals are giving you "less government" fools exactly what you want. Decreased regulation, low labor costs, environmental degradation, privatization of education, capitalistic health care system and the ability of private entities to transfer their debt onto public balance sheets.
You obviously thought yourself to be clever. It didn't work.
If you didn't live under Blair's premiership then you are not qualified to make assertions about him.
Blair has always been a socialist and he elevated himself to a neo-fascist, introducing a police state with unprecedented surveillance and endless anti-liberty laws and rules/regulations to "control" the population and enhance his power. Blair's corporatism was simply a feature of fascism. Ask Benito Mussolini, he should know.
LOL British society was wrecked about the time Eve bit the apple. The British are determined to be the ciminals and not the victims. There is nothing more disgusting than watching a British mob ranting about morality.
"... over the last generation or so..."
The cranks are always identifiable by their bashing of the "younger generation". It's pathognomonic.
"It goes on ...and on ...and on."
What really goes on and on and on is the picking and choosing of historical periods for arbitrary ends...choosing periods of recession and then pointing to this party or that is like shooting ducks in a barrel but it does little to shed any light on what kind of government or economy works best. This is true the more so when one recognizes that Party no longer represents a static or reliably consistent practical applications of economic policy or ideology. Even when party rhetoric says one thing, the actual implemented policy can be the opposite.
And over time, Party platforms change according to popular will and appeal.
So Smacker, you really cannot take a short cut to some point about economic policy choices by using "Party" as a proxy. Unless your goal is just a political one, rather than an intellectual one. To make a valid and useful point, you have to actually point to the implemented policy and then describe the outcome and explain your take on why it was good or bad.
There are no shortcuts to the truth here. Economics is too complicated and politicized for that.
The politicians can pontificate about the glories of their chosen ism all they want. Unless and until they recognize that Islam is a poisonous and malignant disease that must be destroyed and expelled from the body politic it's all just gum flapping and whistling past the graveyard of their own demise.
Socialism stops working when Austrians get involved.
Capitalism also works until Austrians get involved.
China does not have Socialism and the USA does not have Capitalism, which is why they are both failing. China is more Capitalism and the USA is more socialist.
Interesting statement.
I'd be curious to hear an explanation of how an alternate economic theory caused the failure of two opposing systems of thought, other than pointing out the flaws of each, as practiced.
It's obvious if you have done enough reading on the topic.
All governments eventually get to their 'Hunger Games' moment.
Doesn't matter if they are a God King Emperor from Egypt, a Communist in China, a President in North America or a Prime Minister of a Social Democracy; all leaders eventually get to the point where you (the citizen) are their property and they take your labour, your time, your work, your money, your property, your body, and finally your life.
Happens every time, has for 12,700 years.
The history of humanity is Feudalism, with humans being cattle owned by one person who owns 100% of all s/he surveys.
Both countries believe in governmentalism. Both use the public as objects to benefit the ruling elite.
Neither of those have anything to do with capitalism.
The education paradigm of Socialism Communism Marxism Capitalism Fascism Left Right etc, needs to be changed.
Either a government and society seeks to accrue all power and wealth in the hands of the top 0.10% or it does not. There are governments that want all power and ones that want just a little bit less.
China, Germany, France, Venezuela, USA, Saudi Arabia - they differ little.
They all have an elite of a few million who run the show, call the shots, and appear on TV.
Daryl Hannah was hot.
The REAL reason socialism hasn't worked YET is because the weather keeps interfering with the planners plans. And it should be obvious to everyone that capitalism-fueled climate change is the reason why the weather keeps changing, so....
It's Bush's fault.
Both sides....Socialism and Fascism are Extremes. In between these there is the space that I live in. Fighting the a)Capitalists that sell death for profit or Control and b)working as a Slave for others that disperse my labours to others. The Elected just don't get it.............they do what they want or for those who pay them Bribes to do what the puppet masters want. JMHO. Greed seems to come from the Fascist side and Socialists remove the harder workers efforts. Either way the general population loses.
It's so simple.
Bowtie guy talking about what he thinks is socialism, rather than what it actually is; always good for a laugh. Specially if it comes from the UKIP, the oxymoron party.
Yes,
Because compulsion by force is so confusing and difficult to define.
"I demand dead-white-European-male type of Socialism, or off to the prison camps!"
Hybrid system.
We have managed to combine the very worst of capitalism with the very worst of socialism.
Crony capitalism where govt. erects barriers to economic freedom while granting lese majeste to the favored few.
Socialism in the form of State control of education, corporate subsidies, welfare benefits and the production and control of fiat money.
One could easily argue about the fascist element involved but an equal argument could be made that fascism is merely a subset of crony capitalism as State and Mega-corps. use coercion and power over the citizens in a symbiotic relationship.
Fuck all these "isms". If we value money the most, nothing will work. That's the biggest problem!
A heartfelt plea usually uttered by the well intentioned but terminally naive.
The simple fact that producing more value than is consumed creates surplus (capital).
Without surplus,from which all things flow, you would be doomed to a stone age subsistence life.
Granted, if you root around and find some copper and tin and collect a lot of wood and start practicing, you could thumb your nose at evil 'money' and be the talk of the hut.
More likely, is that since you have invented division of labor, others will be forced to create surplus because they want to trade their surplus for your newly created bronze tools, that without that trade, you would have no extra time to devote to your new invention.
No escape. Surplus is King.
"A heartfelt plea usually uttered by the well intentioned but terminally naive.
The simple fact that producing more value than is consumed creates surplus (capital)."
Euro Monster wrote: "If we value money the most, nothing will work." . He probably didn't write about production/surplus, but about "love" of money/possession/power (pride/hubris ?).
I'd call countries like Norway, Denmark or Finland authoritarian 'socialist'. As far as living standards go, most people there are not complaining as far as I know. With close to free healthcare, education and unemployment benefits for those that were outsourced to China, as well as the creation of almost a trillion dollar sovereign wealth fund (in Norway) for public good, economically this is about as good as it gets for the majority of the population. Sure the banksters and über rich don't like it. They might be the only ones in those countries calling for Ayn Rand type of talmudic nihilism. Even Rand went on to get her social security payments when she got old and sick, which is everything she spent thousands of book pages denouncing when she was younger, fitter, and able to support herself better.
People there do complain, but just not about "Socialism" Mostly, they complain about fascist Capitalists in the USA.
Just become God conscious, that's your birthright. For the rest execute your duty.
A grand idea.
Can I get the God that unmercifully slays his creations by the metric shitload because they don't obey his meglomaniacal demands to worship only him?
That guy kicks some ass.
None of that namby-pamby hippy peace and love bullshit.
Its so cute watching people argue the pro/cons of outdated 19th century beliefs.
Now go worship your skydaddy.
Bare with me as Ydhishthira proves the future can be seen.
"Sometime around 23 hundred years ago we see in the Mahabharata Ydhishthira has a vision of the age to come: I see the coming of another age, where barbaric kings rule over a vicious, broken world, where puny, fearful men live tiny lives, white hair at sixteen, copulating with animals, their women perfect whores, making love with greedy mouths. The cows dry, trees stunted, no more flowers, no more purity, ambition, corruption, the age of Kali, the black time."
On the one hand, sure, if you choose models of socialism that don't work then you have great examples of socialism not working.
And then, of course, there is CHINA. OOOPS. Or Sweden. Or Germany...
Do China and Sweden have a lot in common? Only Volvo. So what is this "Socialism" that idiot Dan was talking about?
...Ooooooohhh!!!! Socialism EQUALS Coercion! Now I get it! How could I have never seen this before.? /s
I think that Dan doesn't like to pay taxes. Couldn't Danny have just said that?
I am Dan and Socialists I do pan.
But at the core, I do abhor,
Paying taxes to the Man.
This guy sounds like a central planner.
Point of order: Hannan is not a UKIP MEP, he's a Conservative MEP.
And an excellent, predictably hysterical whiny interruption by some socialist in the audience. As surely as night follows day, and undoubtedly rich - the only people who can afford to be socialists.
I didn't heard any usefull argumentation from the guy. Just a lot of part trues, demagogy and avoiding to answer "dangerous" questions.
Wtf is that video? This shit sux.
yep.
i bet he's the kind of chap who also believes his english accent gives him extra credibility...
i used to like the guy for the humor, but now he's just taking himself too seriously.
how about some trews?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=meNT62Efd14