From Zerohedge, two polls are cited with overlapping percentages. 58% favour socialism; 64 percent favour a free market.
While Zerohedge is correct that socialism is not a free market, it is wrong to suggest only capitalism can be a free market. Before capitalism, we had free markets; free markets have always been a thing.
What we’re perhaps seeing is an end to a political ideology: Classical liberalism. That end cannot come soon enough. I believe it was the Cold War and the one-directional television/radio communication that created such fanaticism as we have today among the Hippie generation.
“Third Way” ideas are not some degradation of a perfect ideology; they are a return to sanity. Millennials might not know what socialism is, but they’re right to reject classical liberalism.
Addendum: Perhaps another factor that encourages rigid classical liberalism is the overfocus on a single historical period for political values, rather than appreciating multiple periods.
If there is, I don’t know what it would be.
Turns out feminists don’t always take kindly to male feminists speaking out for them. I think the model is suppose to be that a feminist says something or makes a stand and all the male feminists are supposed to nod and proclaim “Yeah, what she said!” from the background like the good little yes men that they are. (Hmmm… that model sounds familiar.)
Poor wittle Vivek Wadhwa now has his feelings hurt because the women he thought he was speaking out for are telling him to shut up and go away. What motivates people like Vivek to publicly emasculate themselves like they do? Is it some perverted sense of justice? Is it just a good gig? So some entrepreneurial type sees an opening like gender diversity training and consulting and exploits it? Does he think it is going to get him laid? I’ve got news for you buddy. High value women don’t go for male feminists. They go for manly alpha males. The only women who go for male feminists are feminists who have to settle.
This kind of thing (How dare a man pretend to speak for us!) is evidence that feminism is not really about equality. It is the mirror image of the supposed traditional role of men. They want women calling the shots and men just shutting up and going along for the ride. This is why activist feminism (vs. just the idea of female equality) is full of hysterical shrews.
Would someone please explain to me why the Keystone XL pipeline is a national issue that has to be voted on by Congress? If it makes free market sense, then buy the land and build it. What is the federal issue?
I posted the above as my Facebook status. I was actually jabbing left and right with my comment, but I’m not sure my intent was fully understood. What is in the actual legislation they are voting on? I don’t think it is invoking eminent domain at this point. As best as I can tell it is bypassing typical “state department” environmental analysis which is required because it crosses a national border. My point is that conservatives are getting worked up because the President vetoed the bill, but what they should be concerned about is that a bill is necessary to begin with. Building oil pipelines should not be a federal issue. I don’t deny the importance of environmental concerns, but environmental concerns should be handled at the state level because the EPA is not a Constitutionally authorized federal function.
I don’t have any use for Giuliani on foreign policy or social issues. I was furious with him when he grandstanded on the blowback issue against Ron Paul. This reply to his critics is fraught with problems as well, but at least he stood by and defended what he said and didn’t back down. Most Republicans quickly cower when faced with this kind of criticism from the MSM. He also was one of the few who got Ferguson right when he said Wilson’s case should have never even been brought to the grand jury in the first place, and he stood by that statement and other not so PC statements when the liberal media started to howl. Whatever you may think of Giuliani on the issues, at least we know he is a man with a pair of testicles, unlike most whimpering Republicans.
I think what Giuliani said initially about Obama not loving America was unwise because it gave the left-wing hysterics a rallying point, but there is some truth to the idea that liberals don’t actually love what America was and depending on how liberal still is. It just has to be said with some nuance. They love an imaginary idea of what they want America to be at some point in the future. Conservatives, on the other hand, love an America that was or depending on how conservative still is but is in danger of dying. Of course, Giuliani babbling about the left-wing American Exceptionalism myth doesn’t make that case, but the general Gestalt of was vs can be is still there.
If I was ever, by some great disruption of the Cosmos, invited to the Oscars, I would wear something appropriate to the occasion but affordable by the average Joe just to spite the limousine liberals and rep the common man. Maybe rent a tux from the Men’s Warehouse for example, although I’m kinda boycotting them until they re-instate George Zimmer. But you get the idea.
There is nothing more ridiculous than a bunch of supposed libs prattling on about a Vera Wang dress or whatever that costs someone’s yearly salary.
I disagree with Rush Limbaugh on foreign policy, but if you think that mainstream conservative/Republican Rush Limbaugh is some kind of far-right hater you are a deluded, thin-skinned, hyper-sensitive priss who seriously needs to get out more.