Below is my column in the New York Post on the bizarre effort of Democratic Socialist leaders to herald South Africa and Cuba as models for the United States to emulate. They have apparently replaced Venezuela as examples of the workers’ paradise that can be found through collectivism.
Here is the column:
Socialism has long been a political theory that survives more on hype than history.
The problem for the growing movement of young socialists in America is that it has consistently failed, outside the confines of their college Marxism 101 courses.
During the Cold War, Soviet communists referred to American liberals as “useful idiots,” armchair revolutionaries who spouted proletarian slogans at cocktail parties. Zohran Mamdani and his newly appointed cadre engage in chest-pounding about their intentions to “seize the means of production” while living off their parents or working friends in high society.
Today, they are often young people who joined communist coffee klatches in college under the tutelage of academia’s “radical chic.”
They often reveal little actual historical or philosophical knowledge, which is an advantage if you are going to call for the replication of one of the least successful political theories in history.
Venezuela is a prime example.
At one time, American radicals pointed to Venezuela as the new workers’ paradise.
Socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders claimed that the “American dream is more apt to be realized” in Venezuela than in the United States.
As recently as 2019, Chicago Teachers Union members went to Venezuela to herald life under socialism and how they did not see “a single homeless person.”
They also did not see any dissent or free speech, which helped conceal a collapsing economy.
In short order, socialists in Venezuela turned one of the most affluent nations on earth into an economic basket case.
After seizing control of the once-burgeoning oil industry, the socialists reduced production to a trickle.
The people suffered starvation; some were forced to eat their pets.
Venezuelan socialism was only preserved through the suppression of elections and a large force of Cuban military and security personnel.
With Venezuela now mostly out of fashion, American socialists are citing other models for the United States.
Mamdani is now heralding South Africa as a model, a country where his family owns a large estate and a guarded manor.
In his pledge to govern “expansively and audaciously,” Mamdani told New Yorkers to “look to Madiba and the South African Freedom Charter.”
The suggestion is that conditions in the United States are akin to apartheid in South Africa, and similar measures to redistribute property might be necessary in this country.
Of course, South Africa’s economy is in tatters, while many are alleging a loss of due process in the confiscation of land from white citizens.
The country has struggled with economic conditions for years under measures that range from the repressive to the moronic.
Other American socialists are citing another socialist “success” story: Cuba.
Interviewer Brandi Kruse asked Democratic Socialist Shaun Scott this week to “give me one example of socialism working well somewhere.”
The state representative from Seattle immediately cited Cuba as “a good example of socialism working well.”
He noted improvement in literacy rates and public health — while ignoring that Cuba’s economy has been reduced to little above subsistence for many citizens, and the regime continues its blood-soaked repression of its own people.
Indeed, Cuba relied on Venezuela to keep its lights on and, in return, supplied troops to repress the Venezuelan people.
Nevertheless, Scott insists that Cuba is “one example that I can think of that would resonate with pretty much anybody in our state who cares about education or health care.”
He added, “Would you disagree with that?”
Well, yeah, I would.
More importantly, so would millions who fled that nation in search of freedom. Try asking that question on the streets of Miami.
In my forthcoming book, I discuss this shift toward socialism among a new generation of young people with no experience or memory of the collapse of such systems in the 20th century.
They have been fed a reassuring line that their failure to get jobs is not due to their studying “community advocacy and social policy” but inherent failures in capitalism.
Of course, repeating communist dogma and a degree in Africana studies from Bowdoin College can still get you elected as mayor of New York City.
However, for many, the lack of employment prospects seems to reaffirm what radical faculty told them about the conspiracy of evil capitalists ranging from oligarchs to oil companies.
They are much like Cea Weaver, the new director of the Office to Protect Tenants, who holds degrees from the ultraleft universities of Bryn Mawr College and New York University, where she studied urban planning.
She has called for the seizure of private property, dismantling “white supremacy and capitalism,” voting against white men, and electing more communists.
New York will now be a type of field trip for these college communists in creating another worker’s paradise, from free buses to state-operated stores.
In the end, I expect that they will prove the Soviets wrong: There is nothing “useful” that will come from such idiocy.
Jonathan Turley is a law professor and the author of the forthcoming “Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution.”
James Madison understood property as more than land or goods. In his 1792 essay Property, he wrote that in the larger and juster meaning,property includes a man’s property in his opinions and the free communication of them. Marxism attacks that idea at the root.
When private property is abolished, intellectual property goes with it; thought, judgment, and responsibility dissolve into the collective. Nothing is truly yours, so nothing is truly your fault.
What replaces responsibility isn’t shared accountability, but shared identity; a system designed to eliminate ownership, erase blame, and make dependency feel like virtue. It doesn’t elevate the individual; it abolishes him.
Madison believed property could belong only to a man. Not a woman or a slave. Just the white privileged ones or those who inherited it could have any influence on government.
Women who got married would lose any property rights and would automatically become the husband’s property.
Unmarried women, those who never married or widowed could own property, but did not have the same rights as men who owned property at the time.
Anything regarding property during Madison’s time meant it only applied to men. Those who owned property had more rights than those who didn’t.
That’s not an argument against the principle being discussed, it’s a deflection. And you have historically sucked at this tactic.
Pointing out that rights were imperfectly applied in Madison’s era doesn’t refute his definition of property; it avoids engaging it. The claim is that property includes the product of one’s mind; opinions, conscience, labor and that abolishing property dissolves personal responsibility.
Historical exclusions are a failure to live up to that principle, not evidence that the principle itself is corrupt.
Marxism doesn’t correct past injustices; it eliminates the very idea that individuals can own anything at all, including their thoughts.
Beautifully stated Olly!!!
Thanks HB. This is why Svelaz is now X. He has to run from his reputation. We never have to.
Olly, wrong. Applying property as it was believed over 200 years ago is irrelevant to today’s views. You’re applying socialism as if we’re still the same concept of the 1900’s. Not today’s.
Socialism, specifically Democratic socialism is much different than what you wish to describe. The principles Mamdani and Sanders ascribe to are rooted more closely with the Scandinavian models regarding wealth. We both know their models work because they have produce better outcomes than ours in certain subjects like education, healthcare, retirement, and other social benefits that are enjoyed by everyone in those countries. Norwegians are famous for having a culture of not being boastful of personal wealth. Everyone’s income is open to everyone else. They don’t believe in excessive displays of wealth and lording over others as being better or more elite. That is the kind of democratic socialism that drives Mamdani’s and Bernie Sander’s views. There is nothing sinister about that kind of socialism. Because it works and Republicans and conservatives are terrified of the idea that some socialist ideas do work and could be more effective than ours.
You’re applying the most extreme example of socialism without considering the ones that do work because you’re stuck on the ideas that did not work in the past. Like any sociopolitical philosophy it evolves. Just as Democracy does and so does communism. China’s communism is not the same as it was when Chairman Mao was on power. Vietnam’s communism is not the same as when Ho Chi MIn was in power. But conservatives seem to still think the same ideas and views never changed since those days.
Strangely, these days Republicans believe we are better off with one party rule, theirs and that is why they are making sure every election is rigged towards a republican outcome. That sounds strangely very authoritarian. Like communists once believed.
X, You’re switching labels, not principles. Scandinavia isn’t socialist in the Marxist sense, it’s market capitalism with high taxes, strong property rights, free enterprise, and cultural cohesion that pre-exists the welfare state.
Those countries generate wealth first through capitalism, then redistribute some of it; they don’t abolish property, markets, or individual responsibility. Calling that “democratic socialism” is rhetorical laundering. And ideas don’t magically become harmless because they rebrand; abolishing property, weakening incentives, and expanding state dependency still produce the same pressures, just more slowly.
Evolution in language doesn’t change first principles, and history shows that when redistribution replaces production as the moral center, decline follows, no matter how polite or well dressed it looks at the start.
Olly, nope. Not switching anything. You want to limit the definition of socialism to its Marxist extremes. Mamdani and Sanders are not Marxists. They are Democratic Socialists, the same ideals Nordic countries adhere to are the same ones they aspire to emulate.
You don’t want to admit it because it undermines the misleading argument you want to present. You’re fighting against reality. Socialism, like any other political philosophy, changes over time. It adapts to new ideas or views. They are never static. Communism in China changed over time from Mao’s views. Vietnam’s views changed from those of Ho Chi Min, Russia’s views changed from those of Lenin and Stalin. They are not the same. But you keep wanting to assert that they are the same as they were almost 100 years ago. Please.
“Evolution in language doesn’t change first principles, and history shows that when redistribution replaces production as the moral center, decline follows, no matter how polite or well dressed it looks at the start.”
Evolution in language follows evolution in views. You didn’t know that? It always changes “first principles”. For example take Perestroika, Glasnost, remembered that? Language changed the common views. The views of Lenin or Stalin are no longer the guiding principles. They changed.
Strangely enough here in the U.S. redistribution replaced production. We no longer produce everything we need domestically. Right? We redistributed wealth towards the top by taking from the bottom by sending jobs to China and other countries. We are not outsourcing more jobs to AI while redistributing MORE wealth towards the top. In Democratic socialist countries they limit that sort of thing to ensure there is equity in production and wealth. Which in turn creates a healthier society. We are not heading in that direction.
That is why places like Norway, Sweden, have always has consistent quality of life and happier citizenry than we have.
You’re proving my point: you keep treating shifting language and rebranding as if it changes reality. It doesn’t. First principles don’t evolve because they’re descriptions of what’s always true about human nature, incentives, scarcity, property, and power.
Words can change and policies can repackage, but the underlying mechanics remain: concentrated power concentrates abuse, incentives drive behavior, and abolishing or degrading property rights degrades responsibility and production.
If “socialism” just means “capitalism with higher taxes and a safety net,” then call it that, but stop pretending the label rewrites first principles. The constant move is to rename the same impulse, dodge the tradeoffs, and claim the outcome will be different this time.
Olly,
“You’re proving my point: you keep treating shifting language and rebranding as if it changes reality. It doesn’t. First principles don’t evolve because they’re descriptions of what’s always true about human nature, incentives, scarcity, property, and power.”
Again, you’re wrong. You’re not paying attention. Shifting language shows a shift in views. Language is a product of how one views the world. When language changes as in words having new meanings show a shift in social views and principles.
Principles do evolve. Those who don’t want principles to evolve are usually the conservatives who cannot accept the thought that society is moving on from “normal” principles.
Shifting language does change reality. It happens all the time. Your inability to recognized it is part of your problem. For example take the word “gay”. It once meant to be joyful, merry. Right? It was an innocent and perfectly acceptable word to use that everyone knew meant exactly that, being happy and joyful. Now it means something completely different. It shifted the view of society and how they view the word to mean something completely different. Right?
Socialism is the same way. Socialism is being held to the same standard it was held nearly 100 years ago because it is a convenient way to pigeonhole the meaning into the extreme of the past when it means more than what it once did. It evolved. Just like everything else.
You don’t want to admit that Socialism can be beneficial under certain circumstances and issues because you attach the most extreme definition to it without considering the nuance of the more modern definition.
Medicare is a socialist derived program and it is extremely popular. Because it works and is cost effective. People don’t want to give it up. Because they paid into the system for years. That is what Republicans and conservatives fear most. That people will learn to like the idea and accept the fact that it works and doesn’t do the things they falsely claim it does.
You’re still confusing words with mechanics. Language can change meanings, but that doesn’t change the underlying realities of human behavior, incentives, scarcity, or power. Calling something by a softer name doesn’t alter how it functions. When I say first principles don’t evolve, I mean this: people respond to incentives, concentrated power invites abuse, and separating benefit from responsibility produces dependency. Those truths don’t expire because a term gets rebranded.
Pointing out that “gay” changed its meaning proves only that language shifts, not that gravity, economics, or human nature do. If “socialism” now means limited government programs operating inside a market system with intact property rights, then it’s not socialism in any meaningful sense. It’s redistribution layered on capitalism. Medicare’s popularity doesn’t refute first principles either; it demonstrates how benefits disconnected from cost create political permanence. Renaming policies doesn’t change their tradeoffs. First principles aren’t old because they’re conservative—they’re first because everything else bends around them.
“You’re still confusing words with mechanics. Language can change meanings, but that doesn’t change the underlying realities of human behavior, incentives, scarcity, or power.”
Wrong. You’re conflating words with mechanics. Language changes with views and principles. Human behavior changes over time. Even political philosophies adapt to changing attitudes and incentives and changes in language reflects that.
“Calling something by a softer name doesn’t alter how it functions.”
Yes it does. I’ll give you an example. George Carlin made this point quite well. “Shell shock” was how it was It use do describe the condition many soldiers experienced in battle that mentally scarred them for life. It was simple direct language and to the point “ shell shock” that same condition was softened over time to just an acronym PTSD and it completely removed the directness of the condition which altered how we see it. As a clinical term totally disassociated from personal perspective. Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. It completely destroyed the ‘first principle’ and the view from its original.
You want to restrict the definition of “socialism” to its narrowest most extreme construct to support your flawed argument. Socialism is not exclusive your personal definition. It’s more nuanced and broader than that. Republicans have used that word to mean anything they don’t like and automatically associated it with its oldest irrelevant definitions attached to Marx, Lenin, Venezuela, Cuba, North Korea etc. while ignoring and dismissing countries that have successfully implemented variations of it in their society to great effect.
You just don’t want to admit or acknowledge that even a modified version or a product of its use has indeed been beneficial and even better suited to society.
“If “socialism” now means limited government programs operating inside a market system with intact property rights, then it’s not socialism in any meaningful sense. Its redistribution layered on capitalism. ”
That’s your denial of the fact that we do employ a socialist concept within our capitalist system. Parsing words is just another form of denial.
Medicare is more efficient because it’s government run. Private insurers want in on the program because they bear none of the risks while government does. Medicare advantage is the only entirely within the medicare program that is costing more than Medicare proper. It’s the source or more fraud and waste than Medicare itself. That is why people won’t tolerate any private companies meddling with their government healthcare. Our politicians in congress benefit from socialist medicine all the time. When they need quick quality care they go to Walter Reed or any military facility to get free medical treatment provided by the government. Threaten to take away that privilege and see what happens.
“Medicare’s popularity doesn’t refute first principles either; it demonstrates how benefits disconnected from cost create political permanence. Renaming policies doesn’t change their tradeoffs. First principles aren’t old because they’re conservative—they’re first because everything else bends around them.”
Eh,nope.
Medicare’s popularity refutes first principles precisely because people see it works. Those benefits are not disconnected from cost. The government dictates and negotiates what prices they will pay for medical care and the power of government’s ability to say this is what we will pay forces providers into lower pricing when they could get away with higher inflated costs with individuals. That is why pharmaceutical companies don’t want Medicare and Medicaid to negotiate prices. Because they will not get the overinflated prices they are accustomed to.
I never said first principle aren’t old because they are conservative. I have stated that ‘first principles’ are no longer relevant because their philosophical meanings are no longer what they used to be. There are new ones that are adapters to modern times and some have successfully been implemented and others have had some success.
If you deny the existence of first principles, then any argument can be made to sound reasonable. That’s the danger. Our system doesn’t run on outcomes or intentions. It relies on citizens who understand the principles that make self-government possible in the first place. Remove that foundation and politics becomes pure improvisation, power untethered from limits. A people incapable of reasoning from first principles cannot govern themselves, and any departure from that understanding isn’t evolution—it’s an abandonment of American citizenship itself.
Olly: Your comment @ 9:12 ^^ is very good.
I regret that “X/George” retreated to the same corner yesterday when I challenged him, -accusing me of playing “semantics.”
X/George started out by “educating” you with, “The principles Mamdani and Sanders ascribe to are rooted more closely with the Scandinavian models regarding wealth. We both know their models work because they have produce better outcomes than ours.” He ended comment with: “That is why places like Norway, Sweden, have always has consistent quality of life and happier citizenry than we have.”
(I am of maternal Scandinavian and paternal British heritage.) I regret that X/George speaks on things he knows little about
https://www.indiatoday.in/world/story/lost-control-says-swedish-pm-as-immigrant-gangs-take-over-sweden-islamic-muslim-balkan-ulf-kristersson-2674047-2025-02-04
https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1901453/sweden-civil-war-migrant-crisis
In 2022 or 2023, the Swedish government engaged in a “public inquiry” asking its population to offer advice and solutions. Recently published are some of the results and actions pursuant thereto/therefrom (including a clamping down on asylum admissions as well as exposure and removal of illegal immigrants). Since I am limited to two posts, I attach it below.
Thanks for your meaningful contributions to this blog.
https://regeringen.se/contentassets/c126e6c34ea54a5cab31fcd1232b4bb9/vissa-atgarder-for-starkt-atervandandeverksamhet-och-utlanningskontroll-sou-202480.pdf
from lin.
Appreciate that, Lin, and for what it’s worth, I’m of Swedish and Scotch-Irish descent as well. That heritage probably explains why I’m so insistent on grounding these debates in first principles rather than romanticized models. Culture and responsibility matter as much as policy, if not more.
Olly, first principles doesn’t help with your argument. You’re trying to downsize any definition to it’s most basic form and with socialism you want to apply it’s most basic definition without any nuance or context because it’s the only way to support your flawed argument.
First principles does not address the nature of changing geopolitics and definitions, nuances, and context built over time. Your pursuit of first principles approach to socialism neglects the constant changes and present relevancies against past assumptions gained from bare bones basic understandings that are not longer relevant except to study it in academic terms.
You’re using it to discard the fact that current definitions and views of socialism vary greatly and are used effectively. To deny the truth that some of it works now by insisting that we adhere to its most basic extreme meanings. Your need to stick to the super basic while ignoring the more complex and richer nuances that have created true beneficial policies and practices only show us a form of denial on your part.
You could invoke a “first principles” argument for slavery by pointing out that it was sanctioned by the bible because God condoned it. Right?
This is where the argument finally breaks down. First principles aren’t “basic definitions” or academic abstractions, they’re constraints that don’t disappear with nuance, context, or time. They don’t explain everything, but they explain what cannot be escaped: incentives still govern behavior, power still concentrates, property still anchors responsibility, and human nature still hasn’t changed. Nuance that ignores those constraints isn’t sophistication, it’s evasion. And the slavery analogy proves the point rather than refutes it: slavery violated first principles by denying self-ownership, which is precisely why it was ultimately condemned. First principles didn’t justify slavery; they destroyed it. If your case depends on abandoning first principles to make policies “work,” then what you’re defending isn’t progress, it’s success purchased by ignoring the very limits that make self-government possible.
Lin,
Great comment and thank you for pointing out the immigration troubles in Sweden. Sweden was once the safest country in the EU. Now it is one of the most dangerous. Once again, failures of far leftists policies.
Upstatefarmer, you have no idea what you’re talking about.
Sometimes your ignorance is your worst enemy. Fun fact. Sweden is still much safer than the U.S.
Homicide Rate: In 2024, Sweden recorded 0.87 homicides per 100,000 people, the lowest level in a decade. For comparison, the U.S. homicide rate typically averages around 5.0 per 100,000.
Safety of the “Safest”: Sweden is statistically safer than even the safest U.S. states. For example, New Hampshire (often the safest U.S. state) has a homicide rate of roughly 1.9, which is significantly higher than Sweden’s national average of 1.15.
Gun Violence: While Sweden has seen a spike in shootings due to gang conflicts, the total number of gun deaths is still roughly 10 times lower than in the U.S. when adjusted for population.
That’s the false game being played here. Fixating on field statistics while ignoring what the scoreboard represents misses the point entirely. In a free society, the scoreboard isn’t raw metrics, it’s whether rights are secure, property is protected, responsibility is enforced, government power is limited, and social cohesion is preserved. You can rack up favorable numbers for a season, but if those fundamentals are being lost, the society is already losing the game.
Lin, wow that is quite the non sequitur.
What does immigration have to do with the fact that some Scandinavian countries have socialist programs or policies that are successful. We both know they are not the kind of socialism Olly and others seem to want to limit the definition to. Right?
You don’t agree there are indeed some programs or policies in those countries that are considered socialist?
Aren’t Scandinavian countries big beneficiaries of their huge social welfare policies, some paid for largely by oil sales and smart investments. Finland’s social protection benefits comprise of 32% of their GDP and still remain a successful wealthy society.
Calling this a non sequitur only works if you refuse to anchor the discussion in first principles. When there’s no fixed reference, no agreement on incentives, human nature, property, or limits on power, every new example becomes another disconnected claim. That’s why the argument keeps jumping from labels, to countries, to programs, to anecdotes. Without first principles, there is no sequence to follow, only a series of rational-sounding detours. Arguments don’t connect, they accumulate. And when nothing is anchored, calling something a non sequitur is just a way to avoid admitting there was never a logical sequence to begin with.
“. . . socialism to its Marxist extremes.”
The only difference between those two is time.
Which is the whole point. Olly is applying a definition of a principle that is no longer relevant. He’s stuck in the past trying to adapt it to the present without any context.
Republican critics and conservatives have been calling Mamdani a “Marxist” only because they see everything associated with the word “socialist” as Marxist which is not true. It’s the equivalent of calling every Republican a MAGA extremist because it’s associated with the word “Republican”. You know that is not true for the same reasons I point out. There are nuances and distinctions that do separate them from the extreme.
Olly, wrongly believes the principles never change because….? He never explains. I point out that principle DO change as time goes on. I provided examples which he chose to dismiss and was unable to refute because he can’t get past the sad fact that principles, views, and ideas change over time including associated language.
I’ve explained it repeatedly: first principles don’t change because they describe constraints, not preferences; human nature, incentives, scarcity, property, and power operate the same regardless of era or vocabulary. What changes are policies, language, and justifications used to work around those constraints. Calling that “evolution” doesn’t refute the principle; it confirms the need to obscure it.
Nuance about labels is irrelevant if the underlying mechanics remain intact. If a system weakens property rights, severs benefit from responsibility, and concentrates decision-making while diffusing accountability, it will produce predictable outcomes whether you call it Marxism, democratic socialism, or something newly branded. The refusal to anchor the discussion in first principles isn’t sophistication, it’s how consequences are perpetually postponed and never owned.
Sam, If everyone argued from first principles as the anchor, we wouldn’t be dragged in every direction by shifting language, labels, or emotions. First principles are what keep disagreement honest, everything else is just movement without direction.
X says: Olly, wrong.
Olly’s wrong; I’m right. Turley is wrong; I’m right. John Say is wrong; I’m right. Hullbobby is wrong; I’m right. Diogenes is wrong; I’m right… repeat ad nauseam… Lies that hope to survive as opinion.
There’s a pattern being missed in this lifetime (not just a moment) of narcissistic and complete lack of self-awareness.
357 days of complete and abject failure still remaining in 2026, X/Anonymous/George/Sveltez…
OLLY,
Great take down of the slow and dumb one!!!
“That’s not . . .”
A surgical demolition. Nicely done.
“Madison believed property could belong only to a man. ” X – attempting to lecture on Madison and property… as a means of defending communism and copy and pasted weekly posts bemoaning the fall of his Confederate slave states. Curious that he hasn’t abandoned his struggle here in the USA to immigrate to that utopia of warm (physical as well as virtual) collective compassionate communism!!!!
357. It’s not just a fine caliber for self defense against communists… it’s also the number of remaining days of abject failure still ahead in 2026, X/Anonymous/George/Seveltz….
Your nonsensical diatribe is exactly why we can’t match Cuba on literacy rates.
X says: Madison believed property could belong only to a man.
Communists have a long history of both pretending they at one point actually read Madison, and at the same time attempting to convince you Madison was a fellow Confederate Democrat who claimed only a very few white Americans had a right to the communist version of property. When X isn’t denying, he’s lying. Let’s help X actually read Madison:
Madison on Property
March 29, 1792
https://static.heritage.org/CPP/FP_PS02w.pdf
Madison’s published essay on property emphasizes that word’s wide-ranging meaning,
which covers not just land and buildings but opinions, conscience, and rights. “In a word, as
man is said to have a right to his property, he may be equally said to have a property in his
rights.” Madison expanded property in its narrow sense of material possessions to include
property “[i]n its larger and juster meaning” of opinions and speech.
The notion that the Founders were obsessed with property as material possessions is a legacy
of communist historians such as Charles Beard.
The broad conception of property in Madison’s essay in fact accords with that of John Locke,
in his influential Second Treatise on Civil Government (1689). With Locke, Madison focused
less on possessions themselves but rather more on the personal qualities needed for gaining
material and other forms of property. [cont’d]
357 days of colossal and utterly pathetic failure still remaining in 2026, X/Anonymous/George/Seveltz – count the days!
OLLY,
Great comment. Parts of the government work in the same way, government by committee. No one is really accountable. When they screw up, no one is to blame.
Exactly Upstate. That’s the contrast my book draws with what I call the jersey flip. Today’s parties wear different colors but play the same game; collectives without first principles, trading limits for power and loyalty for truth. The Founders were also a collective, but they wore a first-principles jersey against a tyrannical regime, and each signer personally accepted the risk, pledging life, fortune, and sacred honor. Their unity multiplied responsibility; ours dissolves it.
“Of course, South Africa’s economy is in tatters, while many are alleging a loss of due process in the confiscation of land from white citizens.”
Again, Turley leads with a misleading narrative with little to no context.
Today, 78% of private lands are owned by the white minority in South African which is 7% of the population. There is no “refugee crisis” of white Afrikaners. Just a few of the true racists left in the country who feel they are being ‘discriminated’ against.
Land confiscation claims are hugely exaggerated since that 7% of the white population still owns the majority of farms in the country. Land confiscations are rare and violence against farmers are mostly robberies, not land grabs. It takes a little bit of research and patience to learn of the facts. Turley seems to rely on our poor literacy rates and the gullibility of MAGA to ‘believe’ his misleading narrative because it’s easier to take to from a “respected” scholar and University elite. Which is weird because MAGA is all about bashing the university elite and the well educated experts. That is why literacy is important.
One other point to make, if we get rid of the Cuba embargo like Obama did briefly Cuba would be a much better place. Who knows, even their education and healthcare system becomes a shining international example of what could work better than what we have. That seems to beg the theme among conservatives. Bashing socialism because it doesn’t work while actively stymieing it because they fear it CAN work. Nothing is more scary for a Republican or conservative than a successful socialist program. Once people see that it works better than what they have they just might want to give it a try and that is not acceptable for those who are benefitting from the current broken system that we have. That is why Mamdani’s ideas are more attractive now. Because the current systems are not producing the outcomes people want.
The leftists commies blame America and embargos for Cuba’s ills but China has a GDP about as big as ours, why can’t they help little Cuba. The Soviets spent billions helping their communist sister and that didn’t help. Why does a communist state, Cuba, need help from capitalist states if communism is the way to go?
It is now a cliché but check out the picture of the Korean peninsula at night to see communist vs capitalist society. Also an old cliché is to ask how many people fled east before the wall in Berlin came down.
X sits on his top level computer, plays with his $1100 phone, watches his expensive television all in about a 78 degree well heated and well cooled room as he complains about capitalism. It is laughable because it is so stupidly hypocritical. Hey pal, there are flights to Canada with connections to Havana that you can take any time you want to enjoy Big Havana.
Hulllbobby, we have never had an embargo on China. Cuba is easier because they are not an economic superpower which WE built with our own greed.
Cuba has no strategic value. That is why China doesn’t invest in the country and there is still an embargo on Cuba. If the embargo were lifted Cuba would change within a decade. But WE are the ones keeping them where they are.
Hullbobby, I’m not complaining about capitalism. I’m pointing out the fallacies about socialism those who have never experienced the benefits of it do. You live in a capitalist nation where you cannot afford to get sick or even have necessary surgery without getting deeply in debt. In a socialist country you don’t have to worry about any of that. What is better, be deeply in debt after getting sick or not?
You’re bitter at the idea that I can sit here and defend some aspects of socialism while you whine about it without defending what we have. Maybe you should spend more time defending our system and tout its benefits than whine about my view.
Did you know that China invests heavily in Africa? They help them build roads, infrastructure, and in exchange get access to critical minerals and resources? We don’t do that. That is why China is better positioned to weather the tariffs wars than we are. The total trade they do with us is just 15%. They do much more trade with other nations than WE do. They are not critically reliant on us, but WE are more reliant on them because we love cheap quality goods and our companies LOVE the big profit margins China provides.
“That is why China doesn’t invest in” Cuba.
You’re either grossly ignorant or are lying (yet again):
“China’s investments in Cuba are significant, focusing on strategic infrastructure like ports, telecommunications (Huawei), and energy, alongside major joint ventures in biotech and AI. . . .”
China “invests” in Africa the way a fisherman invests in a fish by buying a worm.
Please learn to read and/or comprehend. Of course we don’t have an embargo on China, that wasn’t my point. The question is why don’t communist nations trade with Cuba and make them successful? It’s because communism is a failed system.
X says: Again, Turley leads with a misleading narrative with little to no context.
Well audience… that should cover today’s obligatory BBBBUUUTTTT…. MUH TURLEY!!!!! HE’S WRONG – I’M RIGHT!!!!!
Marxism and its variants don’t attract people because they work, but because they feel morally satisfying to those who feel disconnected, unsuccessful, or unseen. They offer belonging without responsibility, moral certainty without self-examination, and compassion without consequences. By reducing complex societies to oppressors and oppressed, they provide a simple villain and a false sense of justice. The historical disasters are dismissed as “implementation errors” because first principles—property, incentives, human nature, and limits on power—are no longer understood. When civic literacy collapses, coercion begins to look like compassion, and dependency is sold as progress.
Olly,
“Marxism and its variants don’t attract people because they work, but because they feel morally satisfying to those who feel disconnected, unsuccessful, or unseen. They offer belonging without responsibility, moral certainty without self-examination, and compassion without consequences.”
You just described MAGA to a “T”.
That is what Trump did when he gained supporters. He is the one who “listened to those who felt disconnected, unsuccessful, or unseen”. He offered belonging without responsibility, moral certainty without self-examination, compassion, and without consequences. That is precisely MAGA today.
“When civic literacy collapses, coercion begins to look like compassion, and dependency is sold as progress.”
MAGA is comprised of the illiterate and reading comprehension failures not wanting to be ignored while being manipulated by the likes of Trump. The very “useful idiots” former Soviet communists use to say about liberal here is how Trump sees MAGA followers today. It’s an irony worthy of awe.
Keep in mind that Cuba has literacy rates in the high 90’s compared to ours in the lower 70’s. Who do you think is easier to fool with stats like that. Cubans know their government sucks. What is keeping them in their position is the embargo. Not the government. Once they are allowed to trade and get more involved in international trade and travel their government will ultimately change. It happened to China. It can happen to Cuba if we get rid of the embargo and punitive sanctions.
You’re confusing being heard with being absolved. Marxism offers belonging by erasing responsibility and resolving grievance through coercion and dependency. Populism, whatever its flaws, appeals to agency—telling citizens institutions should answer to them, not that individuals should dissolve into a collective. And raw literacy rates prove nothing about civic literacy or freedom of thought. Cuba’s problem isn’t the embargo; it’s a regime that criminalizes independent property, dissent, and ideas—which is why people flee when they can. Trade doesn’t magically liberalize tyranny; liberty does.
Nope Olly. You’re describing MAGA and how Trump gained their support. By making outlandish promises he never kept and claiming to be “like one of them”.
“And raw literacy rates prove nothing about civic literacy or freedom of thought. Cuba’s problem isn’t the embargo; it’s a regime that criminalizes independent property, dissent, and ideas—which is why people flee when they can. Trade doesn’t magically liberalize tyranny; liberty does.”
Cuba’s problem is indeed the embargo. The moment they have access to more markets even in the US. Cubans will start more businesses and new entrepreneurs will flock to take advantage. Trade does liberalize people from tyranny and it encourages liberty. When the government sees more people making more money and wealth and become happier it becomes easier to govern. That is how China became so powerful. Because they recognized they could do more with trade than isolate.
With their higher emphasis on education and literacy they stand a better chance of changing their government with the removal of why embargo and sanctions.
“Keep in mind that Cuba has literacy rates in the high 90’s . . .”
How many Cubans are literate in works such as the Declaration of Independence, the Federalist Papers, Animal Farm? That “literacy rate” is *zero* — because your treasured communists ban all works they deem to be “anti-revolutionary.”
If there is a Cuban literate in those censored works, your cherished tyrants consider him a criminal, in need of time at a “re-education camp.”
You simply evade that massive censorship of Cuban citizens. Who, now, is “being manipulated” by whom?
Cuba Literacy rates LOllL
Reading
wRiting
aRithmetic
arithmetic is really easy, they only learn to count to 10, their monthly government income. They never learn to add, they never have more than 10 of anything.
They only learn to subtract from 10, as their government takes back from the 10 they gave them.
Poor dumb bastids! While the tourism industry brings millions to all the neighboring islands, Cuba remains off limits to bringing wealth to their people due to their elites decisions. How bad it must be to try to float 90 miles on an inner tube across the shark infested Florida Straits to freedom?!
That they don’t read American literary works is an assumption not a fact. What IS true is that they would understand what they are reading compared to most here. That is the distinction. They are in a better position to understand and reflect on what they are reading than most on this blog.
We want to ban certain works from our schools. Catcher on the Rye, Of Mice and Men, Huckleberry fin, etc, yeah, conservatives have been wanting to ban these for a while now. Funny thing is they have access to these works out there through illicit means. Like they don’t have ways to circumvent certain bans. Even in North Korea people find ways to get things that are banned. From Movies all the way to cell phones.
I am not evading anything. I’m pointing out to you that even in regimes like Cuba or North Korea people find ways to get what they want. Artists, poets, literary masters all flourish even in countries like those mentioned.
“Marxism and its variants don’t attract people because they work, but because they feel morally satisfying to those who feel disconnected, unsuccessful, or unseen..”
And what’s wrong with that?
Wanting to feel seen isn’t the problem. The problem is an ideology that offers comfort by abolishing responsibility and calling that compassion. When belonging is purchased with dependency and blame replaces accountability, the result isn’t dignity or justice, it’s control.
What the heck? Ok, ok, ok. Professor Turley has gone a little hard on misleading narrative today (Big surprise).
Putting words into Mamdani’s mouth and implying he said something he clearly did not is not really Turley’s forte. Democratic Socialists don’t just take their examples from the worst ones the right loves to use every time they bring up socialism. Venezuela and Cuba are not the best examples, BUUUUUUT, there ARE some examples within the system that do have merit. Things Turley conveniently glossed over while steering the narrative to the worst examples. Let’s take Cuba, it is true they have ultra high literacy rates and healthcare that is free. Cuba prioritizes education much more than we do. We have a much lower literacy rate than Cuba which explains the constant reading comprehension and illiterates trying to debate complex issues like 5 year olds.
Those socialists Turley is bashing are not wrong in saying the examples of literacy and healthcare are good examples because…it’s true. Turley obscures those truths with issues of governance that have nothing to do with the fact that under their socialist system education and health ARE effective programs. We are the world’s powerful country and we cannot achieve literacy rates approaching Cuba’s or their level of healthcare.
Cuba’s healthcare approach is light years ahead of ours with regard to healthcare outcomes. Their approach is focused on preventing health issues from getting to the point of needing serious medical intervention later. They also have a much higher doctor patient ratio which allows them to keep more people healthy before they get sick. There is a reason why foreigners go to Cuba for much cheaper and effective healthcare than we can provide. The only reason they cannot do better is because of the Embargo and active denial of higher technology and ability to build better infrastructure. Socialism in Cuba is poorly administered because WE are preventing it through embargoes. Not because their system is a failure.
China follow a similar model focused on preventative health care and they have a much larger population. They can provide healthcare to 95% of their citizens at a much lower cost than we do and with similar and sometimes better outcomes. Chinese seniors get better care than seniors in the U.S. without the higher costs. Chinese life expectancy is on par with ours. We spend $13,000 per capita on healthcare while China achieves theirs with just $1,100 per capita. Their system works better. Sure there are long wait times and all, but it sure beats a $20,000 bill for a work up. Right?
There are plenty of socialist systems that work. Just because the government running them is not perfect doesn’t mean those systems are good ideas. Medicare is a socialist system, so is the military. Crazy huh? I’m sure many soon to be retirees look forward to having Medicare instead of employer based insurance.
Quite mouthful this morning X.
“Cuba’s healthcare approach is light years ahead of ours” Really? When’s the last time you were in Cuba and partook of their healthcare system? 1959?
“China follow a similar model focused on preventative health care … ” And you know that how? Talk with Xi this morning?
“There are plenty of socialist systems that work” … Got a list? That’s a easy one to answer so I’ll do it. No, the Scandinavian and all European countries are not socialist. They are all market economies.
Now don’t get into a hissie fit and barrage us with a 1,000 word essay filled with typos and incoherence.
“No, the Scandinavian and all European countries are not socialist. They are all market economies.”
They are democratic socialist countries. Socialism is not restricted to Marxism or Communism. There are many forms of socialism just as there are different forms of democracy.
Turley and most conservatives love to characterize socialism as if it were still the 1950’s. Today’s socialism is not the same idea as it once was. Some principles do remain and they are still with us because they have worked.
I don’t have to go Cuba to see they are better at literacy rates and healthcare outcomes. We know it’s cheaper and they produce better or equivalent outcomes and so does China. What is true is people in those countries don’t have to worry about being in serious debt because they got sick. In fact their whole approach to healthcare is to prevent people from getting sick first. Not wait until they get sick. It puts an emphasis on healthcare, taking care of their health not when they are already sick. Obviously it’s a more effective approach.
You didn’t exactly defend our healthcare system as better and that says a lot.
Sorry X, anon wins that round. But nice try.
How’s that working out for you using AI?
Makes conjuring up responses easy eh? If you had the ability to think, you’d be on par with hullbobby.
I have been hearing for 50 years about how great Cuba is due to their literacy rate and yet people still cling to rafts in order to escape this paradise. Of course tools like Mr X, George, state this canard without facing the reality that our “literacy rate” has fallen due to the same fellow travelers as Mamdani and Cea Weaver in NY and Katie the Commie in Seattle being ensconced in our schools pretending to be teachers in our schools.
X, there is not one person that travels to Cuba from America in order to get health care of any sort. This is a lie.
“Medicare is a socialist system” is another lie that the commies try to sell. How is something like SS or Medicare socialism when in fact those of us that work actually pay into to it for 45 years??? The only socialism found is when leftists like you, Bernie, Warren and the Dems demand that some illegal that arrived here last week can receive Medicaid right now while us workers need to wait until we are 65 to get Medicare.
Cuba is a prison, Venezuela is a corrupt dying nation, China is a Gulag, the USSR is gone and even Nordic nations are backing off of leftist economies.
X lives to be different…and he succeeds.
HullBobby,
Good point about American literacy rate falling along with math. Why? Leftists ideology being taught in public schools and not the basics.
Also note, Social Security is going to go insolvent in 6 years. We have been planning our retirement as if SS would not be there or a pittance of what we put into it. Like the SS check might pay the phone bill. Also of note, SS was never meant to BE people retirement. It was supposed to supplement it. But with that so called safety net, people got lazy and or stupid and did not plan on their retirement. They just said, “Oh, I have SS! Why do I need to save?”
Also of note, had I been able to take my payroll SS taxes and put it into a simple index fund, I could retire as much as 10 years earlier.
“Venezuela and Cuba are not the best examples . . .”
You might want to look up the meaning of the No True Scotsman fallacy. Though given your intellectual dishonesty, knowing the meaning of that fallacy won’t make a dent.
The Cuban health care excellence we hear of often. Even in France, some believe that Cuban health care is the best in the world. However, I have yet to hear of anyone who goes to Cuba for their health. Notice that George Clooney immigrated to France, not Cuba. Who immigrates to Cuba for anything? Not even Jane Fonda.
X says: What the heck? Ok, ok, ok. Professor Turley has gone a little hard on misleading narrative today (Big surprise). Putting words into Mamdani’s mouth and implying he said something he clearly did not is not really Turley’s forte.
No surprise: TWO of the trademark BBBBUUUUTTTT…. MUH TURLEY!!!!! early this morning from X/Anonymous/George/Sveletz… who NEVER puts words in other peoples mouths as believes himself to be skillful communist orator.
Projection:
Channeling one’s actions onto others typically refers to the psychological concept of projection, where a deeply emotionally disturbed individual unconsciously or deliberately attributes their own thoughts, feelings, and anti-social or criminal behaviors onto someone else.
This is an internal defense mechanism which allows mentally ill people to avoid confronting their own behavior and guilt by seeing it instead as as the thoughts and actions of another person who they despise and hate.
The right to fail. Years ago a very wise older lawyer offered the thought that a government that takes away the right to fail with collective socialism also takes away the spark of individual innovation in pursuit of the self interest of gain. That risk taking reaches straight down to each individual. There are spectacular successes. And failures. Every success was a victory over, and because of, the fear of failure. How do you have a meaningful discussion with a socialist when there is no example of a socialist model that actually worked better?
George Guilder once said the fundamental error Marx made was that he assumed economic output was fixed. If economic output was fixed, then you could make a logical case for Marxism.
Marx wrongly believed economic output could not be increased resulting in higher standards of living. He ignored how increases in knowledge would result in innovation, greater productivity, increase the economic pie, and improve living standards.
It’s actually the exact same error Malthus made when he said population was growing too fast for farmers to feed us all. When he infamously said that, farmers produced about 20 bushels of corn per acre. In September, the USDA estimated US corn yields would average 187 bushels per acre. A farmer named David Hula set the world record for corn yields of 623 bushels per acre – an increase in productivity of 30x compared to Malthus.
“George Guilder once said the fundamental error Marx made was that he assumed economic output was fixed.”
I don’t recall that but I certainly don’t dispute it. I do believe Marx and his communism (he wasn’t the one who called it “socialism” instead) survived as long as it did because his true believers willingly believed their economic level in life was also fixed. Just as Democrats’ Useless Idiots believe today.
And as the Evil Bourgeoisie – today Bernie Sanders/AOC/Mamdini’s Evil Rich – blocked any upward mobility according to Marx, more money in their pockets could only come from a government who promised to steal from those above their economic station and redistribute it to them.
They still believe they’re victims incapable of upward economic mobility despite anything they do to improve their station in life.
Communists like Mamdani, Sanders and The Godfather, Obama prey on them due to that belief.
The laws of economics can’t be avoided and it results in failure. But like gamblers spending their welfare checks on Powerball tickets thinking the next time will be a winner, the communists preying on them know they can still be sold Marx’s lie the next time in exchange for their votes.
If Turley ignores the TAMU news story that Plato has been canceled, we will all know his true beliefs on academic freedom and free speech.
“. . . Plato has been canceled . . .”
Which, of course, is not what happened.
But when your desire is to “get Turley,” the truth is an acceptable casualty.
A professor was absolutely prohibited from introducing Plato into a philosophy class discussing contemporary morality. The class was not advancing a right or wrong perspective, only hoping to engage philosophical debate. If that is not censorship, what is?
“The Republic” was not cancelled, nor was Plato in general. Apparently some administrators are going over board on that law, just as earlier administrators went overboard in response to a Trump EO. Image is everything and people do what they can to keep their base outraged.
Regardless, they should not be involved that heavily in a teachers class, although a university can decide what course should be offered. The History of Film class, as described in the article I read, was typical of a course that should not have been offered outside of a film major.
The Marxist-Socialists of today are wise to move on (isn’t that their favorite refrain when dealing with an incongruous, discomfiting issue?) from the 22,000,000 killed by Stalin in the Soviet Union, including the 8,000,000 Ukraine killed by starvation because of failed collectivist agricultural and farming policies and the millions sent on a one-way trip to the gulag. Have they never heard of, much less read, Alexandr Solzhenitsyn? Or how about the 88,000,000 Chinese killed by the Chinese Communists under Mao Zedong’s “Great Leap Forward”, including the estimated 55,000,000 Chinese who died during the Great Chinese Famine 1959-1961, also a result of failed socialist-collectivist agricultural policies, and other millions by mass killings? Or how about the 3,000,000 Cambodians, one quarter of the population, murdered by Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge 1976-1979? How are they sure that the death tolls in Cuba and South Africa will ultimately not be found to be any different? Mayor Mandami, his tenant collectivist tsarina Cea Weaver, and AOC were not even born when the Chinese communists massacred student protesters at Tiananmen Square; Katie Wilson, the newly elected Marxist-Socialist mayor of Seattle, was barely 7 years old.
This is not a good record to emulate. No wonder they want to dress it up a bit.
I’ve been to Cuba. The only thing successful about Cuba is the successful (voluntary) enslavement of a once beautiful and proud nation.
Really? When (pre 1959?) and under what circumstances?
Really? When (pre 1959?) and under what circumstances?
Pathetic attempt to claim Americans can’t travel to Cuba for tourism, business, religious, cultural, educational, etc. purposes. You were far more entertaining before you escaped the circus where the ringmaster had you perched on a stool clapping your flippers and barking while balancing a beach ball on your nose.
Sealioning:
Sealioning is a form of adolescent trolling where someone persistently demands answers to insincere questions to provoke a response, often pretending to seek a civil debate while actually trying to exhaust or frustrate others with no intention of real discourse. This behavior is characterized by a facade of politeness and a refusal to acknowledge previous answers. Often used as a tactic by whining Democrats in online forums and blogs
Just can’t help yourself
Cuba is currently experiencing a severe, chronic energy crisis characterized by frequent and prolonged blackouts that have become a daily occurrence across much of the island. Daily power outages can last up to 20 hours in some regions, with the capital Havana also experiencing significant blackouts.
Good Morning Dustoff and please let me add CA and Germany, 2 leftist paradises, to your list of socialist paragons that are suffering power outages. I guess it is just a coincidence that leftists always kill energy production and then…run out of energy. Of course the leftist little kids that march against oil oddly never approach the Chinese embassy, the representatives of the nation building coal plants constantly. The “protestors” don’t even realize that they are being funded by this same CCP.
No electricity where I live for five days and part of a sixth during Christmas week and another couple of hours the next week. All told, PG&E outage on 7 out of the last 14 days. Also no AT&T landline service. Third-world northern California.
Maybe South Africa’s seizure of white people’s property is what Mamdani wants to emulate.
Also, before people start praising Cuba’s literacy rate, maybe they should look at how it is accomplished. Does anybody think that the Cuban government would allow the disruptive behavior that can be found in a lot of American classrooms?
This is what civic illiteracy looks like when it’s credentialed. A generation taught to despise unalienable rights, private property, and self-government now mistakes coercion for compassion. My book exists for this moment—to show that when a people forget why liberty works, they will always vote themselves into control, scarcity, and submission… and call it progress.
I can’t believe Mamdani tore down a third of the White House in order to name a pending grotesquery after himself, as if he and the country are one and the same.
Only petty dictators do that, with the aim of forcing citizens to submit to a servile collective that is shaped respectively by its dearest leader.
I’m glad we have our priorities straight, as we must stop Mamdani from deploying the military into US cities, “canceling” elections, skimming obscene profits off the public and a worsening swamp, and “terminating” the Constitution that he’s never read.
Mamdani also drew a crude picture of a young girl and gave it to Jeffrey Epstein. Is there no end to his socialist depravities.
“Only petty dictators do that, …” Can we see that list please? Also would appreciate seeing your other sources for your comment.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
😂😂😂😂😂What an asinine post!
Its called a comment. What’s the matter? When someone gets called out, you show up an dish out insults?
Its called a comment. What’s the matter? When someone gets called out, you show up an dish out insults?
It’s called “Bolshevik Biden Birthing Boy can’t believe President Daddy-Daughter Inappropriate White House Incest Showers is gone… attempts a commie version of the Babylon Bee”.
Fails miserably. As your Oval Office House Plant’s puppeteers did for the previous four years.
Your move, Tovarisch…
CNTRL+C. CNTRL+V from Bluesky. Well done. Your brilliant arguments have thwarted us all.
the last 5 Presidents have all been arguing for the construction of a White House ballroom to replace the unused East Wing. Obama was the most vociferous in fighting for it (when he spent tons of taxpayer dollars renovating the White House). Apparently, he thought that when the President hosted large events that outdoor tents and porta potties (as if it were a large tailgate) just didn’t give off the correct executive vibe to foreign leaders. I think everyone on this website would agree with Obama on that point.
The remaining portions of whatever you copied are simply ad hominem attacks with no basis in reality or the public record. Good try through. For sure you won’t get cancelled by Bluesky by goose stepping in lock step.
J. Turley, Although I agree with your criticism of socialism, and you acknowledge that Mamdani was elected mayor of NYC. you may underestimate that significance. NYC is still the financial capital of the world, with a very educated electorate. With things that normally would be. political baggage, he succeeded anyway. I believe that he will govern moderately, if only because of the very strong municipal unions.
You’re assuming the 1.2 million who voted for M have the financial means to convert NYC to communism? And brainpower to effect it?
Hope I’m wrong.
Michael, there is an old saying that personnel is policy and looking at Mamdani’s appointees I would say that your claim of him governing moderately will proof to be a joke. With Cea Weaver being in charge of “Tenants Rights”, whatever that is, the defender of 9/11 terrorists being the top city attorney and another appointee that already had to step away from her job due to her old radical postings we will surely see “moderation”.
hullbobby, the police union, the fireman union, the subway workers, all have very strong unions and provide the services New Yorkers value the most. I do not believe that Cea Weaver will affect much of anything…maybe moderate a few rent controlled apartment increases.
Many of the financial companies are already beginning to move people out of NYC or to simply hire people in other locations (no longer bringing people into NYC). These businesses learned that location is much more subjective for companies in 2026 than it was in 2019. NYC is already seeing its tax base decrease.
The only way Mamdani governs moderately is if Hochul and others simply refuse to fund his pet projects and the DOJ sues the city every time it steps over the line. However, Mamdani and Bragg can still destroy the city by just not enforcing the laws, regardless of his personal desires to turn NYC into Cuba.
anon 8:47: Giuliani came to office back in the day because NYC had softened law enforcement. I don’t think Mamdani will make that mistake. Office real estate softened because of the 2019 Covid pandemic. Although there has been some return to office, much work is done at home. Talk about moderation, he even went to the White House 🙂
michael molovinsky says: “NYC is still the financial capital of the world, with a very educated electorate.”
Sometimes two things can both be true. Other times, liars will claim both are true when one is a lie. Like a blogger who claims to be a conservative while praising Obama for demonstrating foreign affairs “chops” after giving Iran hundreds of billions of dollars for terrorism and claiming Clinton’s desire for gun bans “honors the Second Amendment”. Now… about that very well educated electorate that is a product of NYC’s unionized Democrat school system:
New York City Public Schools Are the Nation’s Least Efficient
https://www.city-journal.org/article/new-york-city-mayoral-race-schools-enrollment-absenteeism
“New York City’s school system is in crisis; student achievement has fallen to near-record lows. New York City students who went back to classes last week did so in the most inefficient public schools in the nation.”
Unfortunately, too many of our public schools have spent too much time teaching the glories of socialism, and too little time teaching actual world history and American history. They have concomitantly spent too much time dwelling on sexual deviations and made-up pronouns, and too little time teaching reading and math. The result seems to be too many functionally illiterate adults with no marketable skills who believe that the government should support them. If the goal of teachers’ unions is to bring down our country, they are succeeding spectacularly.
“our public schools have spent too much time teaching the glories of socialism, …”
I gotta chime in here. How do you know that as a fact? Are in high school now or recently graduated?
And you’re convinced that every school is intent on training kids for sexual deviation?
I would agree that kids nowadays learn little to nothing, stuff needed to succeed in life.
Do what I did, stop believing everything I read. (got no cable, myself) Its all formulated to instill heightened fear in the population, not reasonably inform us.
As for media. Step back and think why are they telling us that?
What a ridiculous response. One does not have to attend high school to know what’s in the curriculum, what education associations promote, what teachers’ unions espouse, or where any of what you reference comes from. It’s all readily accessible knowledge. Why, if you could put your reflexive dismissal on pause and think for a moment, you might be able to figure out how to access all of this public information in a variety of ways that don’t even include forms of media you don’t like.
“our public schools have spent too much time teaching the glories of socialism, …”
Yes, they do. I teach government courses at a college. These are mostly freshman and sophomore level students. I am constantly amazed that they spew the glories of socialism with zero knowledge of what it means. I’ve even taken the time to create lectures on The Communist Manifesto with exact quotes from Marx and Ingles. They are convinced I’m lying and just don’t understand. Or worse, that its not what communism really is.
Above all my goal is to teach them critical thinking. Rare is the student who enters my course with any critical thinking ability. When I tell them the exams will be conceptual and not a regurgitation of lectures they look like they’ll throw up. I give them all the power points and even the questions before the exam (more generalized than the questions will be, but enough to get them in the ballpark for studying) and still end up with students who don’t even understand what is being asked because its not verbatim from PP slide. The real world isn’t like that. Ask any mechanic, HVAC tech, or plumber. Critical thinking is paramount. Schools don’t teach it anymore. Its more comfortable for people to give up all responsibility to the government to take care of them.
Critical thinking is paramount.
I never thought of it that way – but that is at least very close to a central theme of when schools in recent decades produce students who fail at life.
This is anecdotal so I won’t claim it is true everywhere, but my public school was in the 60’s and 70’s. In our local town a large number of the junior and high school teachers were Jesuits that had stayed on after a local parochial school had closed. They would pounce on any student whose answer or response was “everybody knows”. It was almost good-humored mental gladiatorial combat – it became fun with the discussions between the teacher and fellow students. Emotional responses quickly got a cold water shower.
I then did a criminology degree in the 70’s – that public school system had prepared me will for the constitutional and criminal law courses mixed with the other fields taught in criminology. Those law profs would also pounce on anything along the lines of “everybody knows”. If you said something, you knew before you said it that you better be able to provide a rational argument based on facts to back it up. Case law was the best sword and shield you had.
We can call it critical thinking, pragmatic common sense based on logic and experiences, or whatever. But the ability to reason based on facts and emotions is important as an every day skill, even if just to balance your accounts versus your debts when making decisions on the daily spending of what you have earned.
BTW… much to my surprise, one of the few TV series I watched when I had the time during university and afterwards was Welcome Back Kotter. I didn’t think of the real life implications of Kotter teaching his ethnically diverse “sweathogs” in New York City. It wasn’t until much later in the age of the Web, that I learned that Kaplan wrote and performed the episodes based on his personal experience of being a similar “Sweathog” in a similar NYC school as a teenager.
I should probably go back and watch some of the episodes and see if they’re still entertaining 50+ years later.
Good models for the mass murder of their citizens!
Estimates suggest that between 15,000 to 18,000 people were killed in Cuba from the late 1950s to the late 1990s due to political repression, executions, and imprisonment under the communist regime. Additionally, sources indicate that around 7,000 to 10,000 were executed in the 1960s alone.
South Africa has high overall crime rates, with thousands of homicides reported annually.
Mass murder? You need your head examined. You are ingesting to much conspiracy theories.
Mass murder? You need your head examined. You are ingesting to much conspiracy theories.
And Mamdani has a fellow communist acolyte who similarly believes in the glories of the homophobic, racist mass-murdering narco-terrorist and dictator, Fidel Castro. Without Mamdani’s trust fund kiddy wealth… the logic question is why these communists haven’t long ago abandoned the evils of America and free markets and immigrated to the warm sunny beaches of the Cuba that the Castro’s created.
Against All Hope: A Memoir of Life in Castro’s Gulag
https://www.amazon.com/Against-All-Hope-Memoir-Castros/dp/1893554198
At some point in their pursuit of utopia, it becomes necessary to turn the police force against the public they swore to protect and serve. Coercion is fundamental feature of socialism.
Whether a city is ruined through corruption, (as in the case of Detroit) or Marxist policies such as Chicago, Seattle, LA and now NY . . . The end result is always decades of ruin.
Got any examples of that “end result”?
Can you dis-prove that statement.
Why ask me, I didn’t post the comment.
You pretend to know it all. Fire away.
Yes, SF, LA, Seattle, Portland, Chicago and Detroit.
You were just given examples.
Detroit, Chicago, Seattle…
Do you require more? How much suffering do you need? You sound like a Marvel villain.
Ah, yeah, Ken9350 gave you example of the end results of ruin. Detroit, Chicago, Seattle, LA.
Got any examples of that “end result”?
You were far more entertaining before you escaped the circus where the ringmaster had you perched on a stool clapping your flippers and barking while balancing a beach ball on your nose. This is your cue to disappear to perform another day.
Sealioning:
Sealioning is a form of adolescent trolling where someone persistently demands answers to insincere questions to provoke a response, often pretending to seek a civil debate while actually trying to exhaust or frustrate others with no intention of real discourse. This behavior is characterized by a facade of politeness and a refusal to acknowledge previous answers. Often used as a tactic by whining Democrats in online forums and blogs
If it will help understand this short essay, note that the average monthly wages (after taxes) in Cuba is $35, less than 1/3 that of Nigeria ($110). It seems certain that Cea Weaver will be making field trips to Havana for advanced tips on housing methods.
Lett me add that Cuba has the greatest fleet in the world of ’57 ‘Chevies still on the road. These are luxury cars in the USA, only to be found at auto shows. Just to demonstrate that Cuba has great wealth, as well.
Cuba. It’s so great it’s people want to come here, even if they die in the attempt. What percentage of Venezuelans have fled the country in the wake of narco terrorism, elections denied their rightful outcome, and violence again dissenters (like Cuba). I remember Cuba jailing gays for being “that way.”
Yeah, great models for the consolidation of wealth and power to a greater extent than here (bad enough under our crony capitalism, which is not actual capitalism), and the impoverishment of citizens both economically and in terms of liberty.
My home town, long abandoned by me, has elected an perniciously ignorant, adolescently self-certain, economically and historically illiterate performative jihadi to lead it.
As Nero Wolfe, who is fictional but immortal, would say, “Pfui.”
Sorry, I have Venezuela on the brain. Let’s all celebrate those burning tire “necklaces!” South Africa, following its horrific persecutions of blacks, now does the same to whites.
Does no-one understand that simply turning the tables on oppressors and becoming even worse oppressors then persecuted you (historically true over most countries’ histories) actually legitimizes the prior oppression? If it’s only a matter of who has power and who oppressed whom, there are no guardrails against violent tyrants and tyrannies, and no-one will have standing to protest them?
Seems like you also have been ingesting too much MSM.
” It’s so great it’s people want to come here, even if they die in the attempt.” The last time that headline appeared was in 1999. Update your sources please.
Does this headline count:
“The tragedy of Cuban US-bound migrants who disappear in the Caribbean”
As reported, according to the International Organization for Migration. 368 Cubans have died trying to flee Cuba on rafts between 2020 and 2024,
In 2024 alone, 140 Cubans died that way.
No offense, but you’re a moron.
https://suntci.com/the-tragedy-of-cuban-usbound-migrants-who-disappear-in-the-caribbean-p12061-129.htm#:~:text=here%20to%20login.-,The%20tragedy%20of%20Cuban%20US%2Dbound%20migrants%20who%20disappear%20in,island%20and%20headed%20for%20Florida.
” It’s so great it’s people want to come here, even if they die in the attempt.” The last time that headline appeared was in 1999. Update your sources please.
Headline, Sept 2024 – 25 years after 1999:
At least 142 Cuban rafters have died this year trying to reach Miami
https://english.elpais.com/international/2024-09-03/at-least-142-cuban-rafters-have-died-this-year-trying-to-reach-miami.html
You aren’t anywhere near as good as Lyin’ Biden – and he had professional help. Time to disappear until your next attempt.
HAHAHAHA, this has to be a joke. Right?
Cuba can’t even keep the lights on. South Africa isn’t much better.
It’s the ability of the political class to dominate the citizenry via any means they see fit which motivates these individuals, though I doubt any of them has the self-awareness, or, indeed, brain power and habits of thought and reflection which might let them see it, I suspect.
As usual dustoff, you are naïve (wanted to say stupid) and very gullible.
Ever live in Cuba or SA? No of course not, so you just mouth MSM propaganda.
Oh, I don’t need to have been there, its just that I know the nonsense MSM peddles to get people like you to watch and believe.
…. one born every minute.
Try watching the news. Yeah they even talk about this issues is Cuba & South Africa.
Watch the news huh? That sounds like unbiased report huh? So you want your news to be spoon fed huh? I know because you’re illiterate; it shows.
I prefer reading.
OK fool
________________
South Africa struggles to keep the lights on
due to an energy crisis primarily caused by its struggling state utility, Eskom, which manages mostly aging, poorly maintained coal-fired plants that can’t meet demand, leading to frequent, severe rolling blackouts called “load shedding” that cripple the economy, affect daily life, and highlight issues with old infrastructure, insufficient investment, and mismanagement
Try watching the news…. you mean the Disney Channel has news?
Interesting you didn’t refute anything they said. Just that they didn’t witness it with their own eyes in person.
There are enough Cubans and South Africans in America that can simply be asked what they witnessed. The Cubans I’ve spoken with witnessed things much worse than I’ve ever seen on the news or on the internet.
So, are you saying that its all lies? That Cuba and South Africa are actually utopias? Cuba goes to awful extreme lengths to prevent people from leaving for it to be even a reasonable place to live…
As usual dustoff, you are naïve (wanted to say stupid) and very gullible.
Time to disappear until your next performance:
Projection:
Channeling one’s actions onto others typically refers to the psychological concept of projection, where a deeply emotionally disturbed individual unconsciously or deliberately attributes their own thoughts, feelings, and anti-social or criminal behaviors onto someone else.
This is an internal defense mechanism which allows mentally ill people to avoid confronting their own behavior and guilt by seeing it instead as as the thoughts and actions of another person who they despise and hate.
Cuba … Literacy and Healthcare! That’s it. Cuba is a disaster in virtually every other measure of nation building.
Of course. But what they see is the ability to dominate and stifle dissenters.
Again, another delusional commenter. Ever been to Cuba? Of course not, but you know everything there is to know about Cuba, and you got it from 60 years of government propaganda.
Try looking stuff up fool
___________________________
That’s how the health care system should work, in theory. Unfortunately, the reality is different because of the lack of resources in Cuba’s infrastructure. Now, the doctors and nurses have very few supplies, including antibiotics, with which to treat patients, so prevention and treatment become problematic. That’s in addition to a lack of potable water. There is a significant shortage of supplies in the most populated rural areas. For example, clinicas now require patients to bring their own bedding and food. There is a deterioration in sterilizing processes, reusing syringes, issues associated with old X-ray machines, no film available. With this breakdown, the theoretical concept has also fallen apart.
Feel free to go to Cuba if it is so great. People vote with their feet and their wallet and people flee commie nations anf they flee leftist states like CA, NY, MA, NJ and IL.
How many Americans have died trying to escape the USA to Cuba riding 90 miles on a makeshift raft? Any number you estimate that is greater than zero is wrong.
In 2024 alone, 142 Cubans died trying to escape from Cuba and make it to America by riding on makeshift rafts.
https://english.elpais.com/international/2024-09-03/at-least-142-cuban-rafters-have-died-this-year-trying-to-reach-miami.html
That you think people have to visit Cuba to know what it’s like there is idiotic. Thousands of Cuban exiles have fled Cuba. They’ve written books and given public speeches about their experiences with Cuban communism.
Your idea that public opinion is formed exclusively by government propaganda is stupid.
No offense, but you’re a moron.
You cannot help yourself! Try, just try to tell them what they said was WRONG! But you can’t. You’re a paid bot.
Which part is wrong? Is Cuba’s economy NOT collapsing? Does Cuba NOT have rolling blackouts? Does Cuba NOT have people starving? Is Cuba NOT throwing people who disagree with the government in jail (or worse)?
Of course you cannot address these. All these things are happening. Those who have been lucky enough to defect are eye witnesses. Thanks to cell phone technology there are independent videos from people within the country.
So, unless you have something to add, please go earn your troll money on some other website.
And yes – I have been to Cuba myself many times. And there is no government propaganda there, or being spread here in America about Cuba.