February 29, 2020

Dems: "Socialism is superior!" Boris Yeltsin's visit to a U.S. grocery store said that was a lie

One of the unfortunate blind spots of older Americans is that we often don't actually internalize how much time has passed since some really big event, like the fall of the Berlin wall or the reversion of the former Soviet Union into Russia and 18-odd former soviet states.

This takes on relevance when you realize that both those world-changing events happened over a decade before today's college students were born.  Meaning that almost no college student today has even the faintest idea of what caused those events, or what caused them, or what the Cold War was.

By chance, for the past 30-some years my job has given me the opportunity to casually interview 100 or so top-quality college students each week.  And I can confirm that so far, not one knows anything about the events above.

For example, Democrats and the Mainstream Media have repeatedly tried to equate building a wall on our southern border with the infamous Berlin Wall.  Today's students have no idea that after WW2 the communist regime in East Germany built a virtually impenetrable wall between East and West Germany, complete with minefields, machinegun towers and spotlights.  The purpose was to keep oppressed East Germans (and citizens of other communist nations that were allowed to travel to that nation) from fleeing to the west.  Our media have equated the two walls despite the crucial difference that the East German wall prevented its own people from leaving, while our southern wall is to keep illegal invaders OUT.

The two can't be rationally equated, and yet our media have repeated done it.

The failure of today's college-age students to know anything of the Cold War is NOT an indictment of today's college students, because with tiny exceptions they only know what they've been taught in school.  And with most school systems being run by far-left board members and administrators, U.S. schools just don't teach anything relevant about world politics during that time, preferring to spend precious, limited contact hours teaching about the joys of transgenders, or the joys of gay parents, or the outrageous lie that slavery was a uniquely American institution created by the Founders.

With this in mind I wanted to pass along a vignette that seems to convey the vast gulf between communism and capitalism, which would eventually lead to the fall of the Berlin Wall, the re-unification of Germany and the dissolution of the former Soviet Union.

The former Soviet Union was larger than the U.S., and blessed with virtually identical natural resources.  The people were smart and the best schools were very competent.  Yet compared to all western nations, the standard of living in the Soviet Union was miserable.  They simply didn't have the economic output to let ordinary citizens live well.

The leaders rationalized this vast gap in a number of creative ways, even blaming higher rates of alcoholism for lower productivity.  But at least some of the Soviets realized all the excuses didn't account for the discrepancy.  And no one in the Soviet Union was brave enough to venture a guess as to the real cause.

Finally, in September of 1989 a newly-elected member of the Soviet parliament--Boris Yeltsin--visited the U.S. as part of a Russian delegation.  Returning from a tour of the Johnson Space Center, the group made an unscheduled stop at a fairly small grocery store in a Houston suburb.

Yeltsin was stunned by aisle after aisle stocked with all possible varieties of food-- a sharp contrast to the breadlines and empty shelves that were the rule even in the Soviet capital city.  He roamed the aisles in amazement, marveling at free cheese samples, fresh fish and produce, and freezers packed with ice cream.  He chatted up customers and store workers: “How much does this cost?  Are all American stores like this?”

Yeltsin was a member of the Politburo--the top level of Russia’s government--yet he’d never seen anything like the stocks of this small American grocery store. “Even the Politburo doesn’t have this choice. Not even Mr. Gorbachev,” Yeltsin said.

Young Americans simply can't understand Yeltsin’s astonishment, because they don't know how bleak the Soviet economy was.  After all, the Soviets have jet airliners and spacecraft, top-notch military equipment.  How could a country do those things but not have the same sort of great food selection western countries have?  "It doesn't make sense."  So young Americans don't believe it.

Yeltsin’s experience that day ran contrary to everything he knew. A longtime member of the Communist party who had lived his entire life in a one-party system that punished dissent harshly, Yeltsin had been taught since childhood that socialism wasn’t just more fair, but also better at providing the things its citizens needed and wanted.
His visit to the small grocery store left the future Russian president with a severe case of "cognitive dissonance."  “When I saw those shelves crammed with thousands of cans, cartons and goods of every possible sort, for the first time I felt quite frankly sick with despair for the Soviet people,” Yeltsin later wrote.  “That such a potentially super-rich country as ours has been brought to a state of such poverty! It is terrible to think of it.”

Yeltsin was hardly the only person who bought the propaganda that communism was better at everything. Thousands of Western intellectuals--academics, media elites and economists--hammered Americans with what they claimed was the superiority of communism. But at least Yeltsin and other soviet leaders had the excuse that their education had forced them to believe.  The western elites--who, unlike Yeltsin, didn't live in a state-controlled media environment, had no such excuse. 

Paul Samuelson, the first American to win the Nobel Prize in economics and one of the most influential economists of the 20th century, was a longtime enthusiast of Soviet central planning and predicted it would lead to a higher standard of living. 

After the collapse of the Soviet Union Samuelson is said to have asked a fellow economist “Who could know that [the data the Soviets published] was all fake?”

Who indeed, eh?


Despite decades of propaganda, the lie that socialism was better was eventually fully exposed with the publication in the 1990s of the archives of the former Soviet Union after it dissolved. No longer could academics claim communism was better at supplying citizens' needs.

Yeltsin deserves credit for laying bare the lie of socialism that so many others had refused to see. “[T]here would be a revolution,” he told his entourage that day in 1989, if the people in the Soviet Union ever saw the vast array of food in American grocery stores.

Unfortunately a "perfect storm" of greedy, power-hungry Democrat presidential candidates, enabled by a corrupt, anti-capitalist mainstream media, are within a hair's breadth of reasserting communism again.
===

Source: https://thefederalist.com/2019/11/13/how-a-russians-grocery-store-trip-in-1989-exposed-the-lie-of-socialism/

Dems love socialism; Lying Mainstream Media agrees. But Cuba shows us the truth

Your Lying Mainstream Media are totally in the tank for Democrats.  And all the top Democrat presidential candidates except Bloomberg enthusiastically push a system called...socialism.

But most rational Americans over the age of 40 know socialism sucks, which poses a huge problem for the Mainstream Media:  To give the Democrats a chance to win the presidency, the Media have to convince Americans that, far from being horrible, socialism is actually faaaabulous.

And never fear, citizen:  Your Lying MSM is perfectly willing to do that.

The nearest socialist country to us is Cuba.  For young Americans, Cuba was taken over by socialism (communism) in 1959, when Fidel Castro led an army to overthrow Cuba's former leader.  And if you get your information from the Lying MSM, you think Cuba has been a roaring success ever since.

Do a quick social media search for “Cuba.” You'll see colorful images of men in suits smoking cigars and driving vintage cars, brightly colored buildings, pics of Hollywood celebs walking the streets of Havana, and pictures of President Obama enjoying a baseball game with communist dictator Raúl Castro.

But all these images are part of a carefully crafted Narrative (i.e. a fable) designed to deceive visitors. The communist government of Cuba carefully hides the reality, and American media goes along with the deception, leading Americans to believe socialism must be great.  But the reality is long lines for bread, gasoline and most foods, and crippling poverty.

Last fall an American video crew went to Havana to see for themselves.

They report that food is rationed by the government.  Most housing is government-provided, but since no one maintains it, it's mostly crumbling and dirty.  What were once beautiful mansions (built in pre-communist times) have been divided into tiny apartments that have fallen into decay because there are no private owners to maintain them, and the government spends its money on other things.  For Cubans over 60 the old mansions are a haunting reminder of the prosperity of the country before the communist takeover.

Communism destroyed Cuba's prosperity in a single generation.  Yet the Democrat candidates for president breezily ignore the evidence, and continue to praise and push socialist policies.  How can they ignore the evidence (which is also visible in Venezuela--once the richest nation in all of Latin America)?

Young Americans in particular love Dem/socialist policies because they promise "FREE" stuff.  And because schools don't teach a single word about socialism, no young American has the education or knowledge of history to have any idea of what socialism actually delivers to citizens.

Naive Americans believe socialism works because the Mainstream Media tell Americans--every single day--that Trump and conservatives lie to them, but that the Democrat pols tell the truth.  If the top Dem political candidates say socialism is workable, and the Media don't call 'em on this lie, young Americans have no reason not to believe them.

One of the fundamental problems of socialism is that no one except a tiny minority of government officials has any incentive to improve anything.  In a capitalist system almost anyone with a good idea and drive can start a small business and grow, but in a socialist/communist system this is virtually impossible.

The Mainstream Media have managed to convince Democrat voters that our economy is almost entirely run by big corporations, and that those corporations are eeevil.  But in fact small businesses account for roughly two-thirds of all economic activity.  Take away the incentive and that economic activity vanishes--along with its benefits. 

And of course socialist governments rarely allow large corporations to exist, since the socialists view them as potential rivals for power.

Take away both small businesses and large companies, and what does that leave?  Inefficient, wasteful government bureaucracies (think of your local department of Motor Vehicles, times a thousand), trying to predict production targets and prices for thousands of different items needed to satisfy the needs of everyone in the country.  Impossible.

Hopefully you're starting to understand.  The big question is, will enough Americans understand that socialism will always, always give awful results to avoid electing a socialist president in November?

February 28, 2020

NYTimes: Coronavirus? "Let's call it Trumpvirus"

Gail Collins writes "opinion" pieces for the New York Times.  She edited the rag's editorial page for six years.  So her views likely mimic those of the rest of that rag.

Two days ago Collins wrote a piece--dutifully published by the Times--about the OMG-we're-all-gonna-die threat, the corona virus.  She titled the piece "Let's call it Trumpvirus."

Sub-head: "If you're feeling awful, you know who to blame."

Really.

Can you imagine the screams of outrage if around 2011 one of the biggest rags in the country had called the swine flu "Obamaflu"?

Of course no rag would have done that.  Wouldn't even have considered it.  But with Trump as president there's no limit to the vile accusations they throw, every damn day.

The Democrats have found what they hope will be their magic wand--the thing that will let them win in November:  Use their media power to link the virus to Trump a hundred times every day.  Plant the idea that any deaths are due to Trump's failings; that 99 percent of the inevitable deaths could have been avoided, IF ONLY we had a Democrat president instead of the awful, horrible, incompetent OrangeManBad.

Other Democrats, like Cali governor Gavin Newsome, will pour fuel on the paranoia by claiming that his state is monitoring 8000 or 20,000 or 100,000 "cases" of the virus (he actually claimed 8000, but it's all bullshit so one figure is as good as any other).  Of course the fact is that 8000 people in that state had a fever and cough (which is certainly true on any day of any year), so, well, it's ALMOST CERTAINLY THE VIRUS!!!!

And the scary, huge number made the stock market drop over a thousand points.

Mission accomplished.

If the Dems can crash both the market and the economy, they're confident they'll win in November.

And they'll consider that a great trade-off.
===

Collins piece here: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/26/opinion/coronavirus-trump.html


At liberal universities half the students say they prefer communism to capitalism


If Sanders wins the Democrat nomination, in the first presidential debate the first question Trump should ask him is
"America needs you to answer just one question tonight:  Do you believe either communism or socialism is better than capitalism?"

Then don't say anything for a full minute. Let that sink in to everyone watching. Then see how the communist Sander responds.

You're welcome.

"You didn't build that. I built that."