We Need More Time - The Collectivist Battle Cry
I have heard it over and over. Excuses about why a
collectivist society has always failed miserably. I have heard it so
often that I have named it the "We Need More Time" excuse. "That wasn't
true communism/socialism. If (insert excuse here) than it would have
been a utopia." Well guess what, it wasn't a utopia and its very nature
is flawed. Any process aimed at removing individual ownership of
property or self is destined to the same outcomes as Russia, East Germany, Cuba or China. Before any of you collectivists try to point to China as an example, you better think twice. China
has been doing better (but they have a long way to go) since they have
introduced more of a free market approach. The Chinese Communists have
NEVER exercised much control over rural areas of the country, of which
nearly the entire country is made up of. China as a whole has been redirecting their resources largely based on the success of Hong Kong, which we all know, was probably the greatest free-market society that existed in recent times. If you need more proof of China's changing attitudes, look no further than the visit last year of the President of China to the US. Did he seek out his counter-part in the US government upon his arrival? Hell no, he went to see Bill Gates first, one of the most successful CAPITALISTS of all time. China has learned a lesson that you other collectivists have seemed to miss, your ideas don't work. So, if you want to point to China, at least admit we know where you really stand.
So the battle cry of the collectivists is "We Need More Time." Well, times up. It has been tried. It is a failure. Get over it.
The basis for collectivism is the divestment of capitol. The collective
ownership of property. The very thing that it seeks is its downfall.
Capital consists of ALL RESOURCES. Think about the automobiles you see
in collectivists society and use them as an example. Where are the new
cars, the new designs, the improvements in their production? They don't
exist. Some people might argue that they don't exist because they are
an unnecessary commodity. Than why do they continue to produce them in
collectivists societies (if those societies at any time were able to
produce them. Cuba
has a bunch of old American cars that they just keep working on.)? The
reason is obvious to anyone that is able to offer an objective
response. The need to move people from one area to another is necessary
in any society. To do that efficiently, we use automobiles. They still
exist in collectivists societies for that very reason. So why haven't
they evolved from their pre-collectivist conditions? Because the
process of building them, the machines used, are capital. When you have
a business, the means of production represent capital in the business.
If your philosophy eschews capital, than you don't give a *** about
the means of production. The tools used in production are of no
importance. As a matter of fact, you might pride yourself on having
older tools and point to them as a sign of your disdain of capital
(either consciously or unconsciously). And there is your downfall.
As society grows (as they are likely to do) the amount of capital
remains static in a collectivist society. The need for production
rises, but the means of production remains static. Add to that the
(ever increasing) amount of resources necessary to maintain a
government (which despite any claims otherwise can never evolve past
state-capitalism, might as well admit it) and your left with a
shrinking resource pool, better known as LESS CAPITAL. Without
increasing wealth and developing capital, the needs of a non-static
society can never be met. The idea of "from each according to his
ability, to each according to his needs" can never be reached.
Eventually even the most basic of needs will not be able to be met by
the quickly evaporating pool of capital.
yell from the rooftops that you need more time. I will laugh at your
ignorance. You have had centuries to do it and it is an impossible
fantasy. Some collectivists societies bite the dust quickly, others
take more time, but in the end, the results are the same. Good luck
The No Name Group Project