My rose colored glasses broked

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
This ain't about politics, I promise, but it uses politics to get to the point.

Back when I was young, stupid and probably should have been shot (and was shot, but that's another story), I was a socialist. Really.

I really believed in socialism. My dad thought this was amazingly funny and offered to debate with me any time I wanted to. I declined. Being a young teenager, I knew everything and so knew that my Dad would trot out some tired ancient fallacies and I just wasn't interested in listening.

Now that I am older (and recovered from being shot), I am not a socialist. I admit the theory of socialism is awesome and wonderful and etc. But like so many theories, it gets bitch-slapped by reality.

Socialism won't work because there are homeless crackheads in your community. That may not make sense right now. Keep reading. I explain.

Socialism is supposed to mean equality. That sounds absofragginlutely perfect.

I still love the idea, until I think about it.


"There is no greater inequality than the equal treatment of unequals."

Socialism et al means lowest common denominator. This applies to all the other forms of economies and governments that are on that end of the political spectrum, Everything must be equal to the lowest. Nothing can be greater.

Equality means you suffer equally with everyone.

Think about all the people you know. Now think about the least intelligent one. Everyone must operate on that level of intellect.

Do you want this person to be a surgeon to operate on you?

Think about the poorest person you know. Likely you know a homeless crackhead. Everyone must function at that level of the economy.

Got your cardboard box picked out?

Someone is going to argue that I am wrong. The above examples cannot be used. The first can't be used because people who who are mentally retarded can't help it. The second can't be used because the person chose to spend all their money on crack and become homeless.

Someone met Mr. Reality and got slapped.

If that's your argument then you are arguing for inequality. That flies in the face of socialism et al. Equality for all means exactly that. It means the crackhead can be a brain surgeon. It means the brain surgeon can be homeless and addicted to some kind of narcotic.

I admit the above is equality of results, but that is what the socialists aim for.

Take off the rose colored glasses and have another look.

What about equality of opportunity? I have far less problem with this, but I still have some reservations.

Where do you draw the line to say, "this person did not succeed?" In other words, where does the opportunity begin and end? Would you let someone with an IQ of 50 apply to medical school?

Why or why not? In a completely open system of equality of opportunity, you'd have to let the person apply. How many times can they apply? In an open system, they can apply until they die.

In a system based on reality, the person could never apply to med school because he'd never meet the prerequisites, a high school diploma, undergraduate degree from college, etc.

Well, hard to argue with that.

I'm close to arguing for a merit-based system, but I also have some minor issues with that.

Correction. I have some major issues with it. The same issues I have with any other political-social-economic system. People are pretty much infinitely flexible and will warp themselves out of the necessary-to-the-plan shape just because they can.

I am not arguing for anarchy because it too is rife with problems.

What am I advocating then? Reality. There is no one-size fits all in reality. We just have do the best we can.

Now lemme shift gears to politics before I close with a non-political thought.

The following comes from an apocryphal thread when you can find on my Facebook page. While it's aimed at the current president, it applies to all the presidents for the past 80 years because all of 'em have attempted to do it.

1. You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity.

2. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.
 
3. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.
 

4. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it!
 
5. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that is the beginning of the end of any nation.

If all you ever do is reach for a hand out, you'll never get any farther than the arm the hand is attached to.