Obama's view of the future of America - Socialism which is the next step to Communism!! He admitted to Joe the Plumber than he wanted to spread the wealth! He said that he wanted to make everyone equal! Is America ready for Socialism? The Iranian president, Ahmadinejad, said today that he is glad to see the end to capitalism in America!! Are you glad?????
====================================================================================================
Under socialism a ruling class of intellectuals, bureaucrats and social planners decide what people want or what is good for society and then use the coercive power of the State to regulate, tax, and redistribute the wealth of those who work for a living. In other words, socialism is a form of legalized theft.
The morality of socialism can be summed-up in two words: envy and self-sacrifice. Envy is the desire to not only possess another's wealth but also the desire to see another's wealth lowered to the level of one's own. Socialism's teaching on self-sacrifice was nicely summarized by two of its greatest defenders, Hermann Goering and Bennito Mussolini. The highest principle of Nazism (National Socialism), said Goering, is: "Common good comes before private good." Fascism, said
Mussolini, is "a life in which the individual, through the sacrifice of his own private interests??realizes that completely spiritual existence in which his value as a man lies."
Socialism is the social system which institutionalizes envy and self-sacrifice: It is the social system which uses compulsion and the organized violence of the State to expropriate wealth from the producer class for its redistribution to the parasitical class.
Despite the intellectuals' psychotic hatred of capitalism, it is the only moral and just social system.
Capitalism is the only moral system because it requires human beings to deal with one another as traders--that is, as free moral agents trading and selling goods and services on the basis of mutual consent.
Capitalism is the only just system because the sole criterion that determines the value of thing exchanged is the free, voluntary, universal judgement of the consumer. Coercion and fraud are anathema to the free-market system.
It is both moral and just because the degree to which man rises or falls in society is determined by the degree to which he uses his mind. Capitalism is the only social system that rewards merit, ability and achievement, regardless of one's birth or station in life.
Yes, there are winners and losers in capitalism. The winners are those who are honest, industrious, thoughtful, prudent, frugal, responsible, disciplined, and efficient. The losers are those who are shiftless, lazy, imprudent, extravagant, negligent, impractical, and inefficient. [What about the role of luckbeing in the right place at the right time or the wrong place at the wrong time? R. R. Pope}
- 1
- 2
The Leadership Lid
Email To A Friend
Please fill in the following information and we'll email this link.
Women are half the population and, on average, only 20 percent of the nation's leaders, in business, in journalism, in politics. In many cases they have been becalmed at this level for years while other countries moved ahead. Based on the number of women in the House, we've dropped down the world's ladder of female political representation to the 69th spot, behind such luminaries as Iraq and North Korea. At big law firms, one study showed women were a measly 12 percent of the partners in 1993. Today, that number is up to a whopping 18 percent. Oh, how they must trot those few partners out to prove the fallacy that women are well represented in leadership of the law. Hearts and minds have been won, but bodies in the boardroom have not followed.
In an article in the Harvard Business Review, two researchers, Alice Eagly and Linda Carli, described what they called a "labyrinth of leadership" that was "full of twists and turns" for women. Undoubtedly some of that has to do with the disproportionate, often sole responsibility that women—waitresses and judges, opinion columnists and housecleaners—shoulder for their home and family lives. But it's more than that. When the Pew Research Center asked about the signal traits for leadership, including integrity and intelligence, survey respondents ranked women superior to men in almost every way. Yet when the same people were asked about leadership in general, the majority said that women and men are equally qualified to lead. Men are judged by a male standard of control and strength; female leaders are judged by that standard and also by a separate stereotypically female standard that assesses everything from bringing people together to projecting approachability.
It is almost humorous watching the Republican leadership discover this two-tiered vetting in Governor Palin's case; now that the folksiness factor is a known property, voters have moved on to judging her record, her positions and her ability to articulate both intelligently and clearly. Many women voters will also judge her by another sex-specific standard, and that is whether she has cleared a path through the thicket of obstacles for other women. The governor has not distinguished herself in that way, personally or legislatively. Sadly, one of her most conspicuous contributions at the moment is to illustrate how the dearth of female leaders results in certain women being moved too far, too fast, to fill a vacuum for the convenience of men. We 20 percenters are familiar with that phenomenon, and with the fall that sometimes follows. If McCain loses, there's no question that Palin will be assigned lots of blame. If he wins, there's no question she'll be assigned little to do. She's there to make a spurious point, not policy.
What if we had an oil shortage but were using only 20 percent of the oil at our disposal? Wouldn't that seem stupid and shortsighted? "Focusing on bringing women into leadership in this critical time is not a distraction from solving our problems, it is solving our problems," says Marie Wilson, who runs The White House Project. The other day I heard a woman with a proven track record as a leader in the financial industry say that she would never again work on Wall Street because it was lousy with misogyny. The great banks and brokerage houses were crumbling around the ears of their male executives; the market was tumbling and Americans were peering, panicked, into their wallets and their portfolios. And I had to wonder: if women made up half the leadership of that industry, half the members of Congress, half the overseers in government agencies, might it have ended differently? If women led in proportion to their numbers, would things be better? After all, at the moment it seems they can be hardly be worse.
© 2008
- 1
- 2
My Take
Each Newsweek reader is different—and now your Newsweek can be, too. Use this page to create a experience that's personalized for you and your interests. My Take: it makes Newsweek whatever you want it to be.
Discuss