Archive for November, 2019

Todays apologists for socialism still wont acknowledge the lessons of the Berlin Wall – City A.M.

The media has been awash over the past week with stories about the thirtieth anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall.

My favourite vignette concerns a couple living in East Berlin who were delighted to have a telephone installed in their apartment only weeks before the Wall came down. They had been on the waiting list for 19 years.

This captures the essence of socialism. The system could generate a tolerable standard of living for citizens, but it was grossly inefficient and run for the benefit of the producers rather than the consumers.

The old nationalised industries in Britain also offered us a glimpse of what life would be like under socialism. Under British Rail, new heating stoves really were installed in station waiting rooms on the very day that the line was closed to traffic for ever.

In the 1970s, people routinely waited at least six months for the nationalised telecoms company to install a domestic phone line.

This producer-just attitude persists. Todays Labour leadership has, for example, defended firefighters in the face of the recent damning criticism of their performance in the Grenfell Tower tragedy. For Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell, the interests of the producers the public sector workers, even the fire chief who could retire at 50 with a pension of 140,000 a year come first.

Some will feel that this is unfair to socialism. Socialism in practice may have had its faults (such as the liquidation of nearly 100 million people by their own governments), but a better, different kind of socialism is apparently on offer in the future.

Remarkably, the leaders of the Communist Parties in Eastern Europe appear to have believed the same thing. The ideologists in their Politburos described countries such as East Germany as examples of actually existing socialism in contrast to the nirvana which would exist at some unspecified time in the future.

But we can only judge a system by its performance in practice, not by some Platonic ideal of what true believers imagine it might do. Everywhere it has been tried, socialism has been a failure. This simple fact cannot be repeated too often, particularly to younger generations to whom 1989 may seem as remote as the days of the Roman Empire.

Modern history has provided us with a whole series of what are termed natural experiments.

We cannot set up (as in the natural sciences) a laboratory in which one society is started up on socialist lines and the other on capitalist ones, and then observe their performances over time.

But we can observe the United States and the Soviet Union, West and East Germany, South and North Korea, China when it was purely socialist and China when it subsequently embraced a market-oriented economy.

In every single case, capitalism has delivered better outcomes: higher living standards, longer life expectancy, more holidays, more provision of health and education more of almost everything except slave labour and environmental pollution.

Capitalism can be criticised, but its faults are nothing compared to those of socialism.

Visit link:
Todays apologists for socialism still wont acknowledge the lessons of the Berlin Wall - City A.M.

30 Years After Fall Of The Berlin Wall, Socialism Is Staging A Comeback – The Federalist

This November 9 marked the 30-year anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall, a notorious symbol of the oppression of communism and socialism. Yet people who love liberty cannot yet declare victory on this day of commemoration each year, because the battle hasnt been won: socialism is staging a comeback in Western democracies, especially in the United States and United Kingdom.

Its worth looking back at how the Berlin Wall was built. After World War II, Germany was a country divided.The regions occupied by the United Kingdom, United States, and France formed the Federal Republic of Germany, or West Germany, a free-market-oriented democracy. The areas occupied by the Soviet Union formed the German Democratic Republic, or East Germany, a Socialist regime.

This division extended into Berlin, creating West Berlin and East Berlin. Thus, one of the most dramatic and consequential social experiments in human history began: capitalism versus socialism, freedom versus tyranny, a free market economy versus central planning, command, and control.

Germans on both sides of the division spoke the same language and shared the same cultural heritage and ethnicity. Both sides, prior to their separation, had suffered similar destructions of infrastructure and severe damage in the economy.

Prior to Germanys surrender in 1945, regions in East Germany retained a slightly higher gross domestic product per capita compared to West Germany. In other words, East Germany had a head start when the competition between capitalism versus socialism began, but as the chart(created by Daniel Mitchell, a libertarian economist) below illustrates, the two countries economies rapidly diverged.

B.R. Shenoy, a prominent economist in India, noticed the significant differences of the two economic models in the divided city of Berlin in as early as 1960. Heobservedthat in West Berlin,Rebuilding is virtually completeThe main thoroughfares of West Berlin are near jammed with prosperous looking automobile traffic, the German make of cars, big and small The departmental stores in West Berlin are cramming with wearing apparel, other personal effects and a multiplicity of household equipment, temptingly displayed.

In contrast, when Shenoy went to East Berlin, he saw a good part of the destruction still remains; twisted iron, broken walls and heaped up rubble are common enough sights Buses and trams dominate the thoroughfares in East Berlin; other automobiles, generally old and small cars, are in much smaller numbers than in West Berlin The food shops in East Berlin exhibit cheap articles in indifferent wrappers or containers and the prices for comparable items, despite the poor quality, are noticeably higher than in West Berlin.

Interestingly, if we leave the specification of location in this paragraph blank, what Sheony observed could have been replaced by any socialist countries mirroring the same scene, whether of China in the 1970s, or Venezuela in 2010. Socialism consistently produces similar devastating results, no matter where it has been attempted.

Shenoy wasnt the only one who noticed the drastically distinct economic situations of East and West Germany in 1960. People in East Germany were aware of their poverty and political oppression, in contrast to the freedom and prosperity their families and friends enjoyed in West Germany since as early as the 1950s. East Germans wanted out.

Before 1961, people on both sides of Berlin could still travel freely back and forth, and only East Germany soldiers and border guards patrolled the dividing line of the city and set up checkpoints. Still, they didnt try to stop people from going to the west side. About60,000East Berliners commuted to West Berlin every day to get to good-paying jobs. Consequently, an estimated 2.7 million people fled East Germany between 1949 to 1960.

Desperately trying to stop this large exodus, the socialist government in East Germany erected a 91-mile wall across the border of East and West Berlin after midnight on August 12, 1961. The Berlin Wall was enhanced multiple times in the next two decades with electric fences, watch towers, lighting systems, and even minefields to discourage people in the East from escaping. East German soldiers and border guards were also authorized from day one to shoot anyone who dared to scale the wall to reach the West. East Germany officially became a giant prison.

However, the Berlin Wall failed to deter many in the East from risking their lives for freedom and prosperity. About5,000people successfully made it to West Berlin in the next two decades. Unfortunately, close to300people died while trying. The area near the Berlin wall and the wall itself were referred to as a death line.

We all know what happened when President Ronald Reagan visited Berlin in 1987. What I didnt know but later learned from theNational Archiveswas that a career U.S. diplomat in Berlin at the time told President Reagans speech writer, Peter Robinson, that Reagan had to watch himself: no chest-thumping, no Soviet-bashing and no inflammatory statements about the Berlin Wall. The diplomat further asserted that West Berliners, had long ago gotten used to the structure that encircled them.

Robinson decided to do a little research. He asked several West Berliners on the street if they had gotten used to the wall. One man told Robinson: My sister lives 20 miles in that direction, and I havent seen her in more than two decades. Do you think I can get used to that?It turned out the American diplomat who warned Robinson couldnt have been more wrong.

Based on his observations, Robinson wrote the speech for President Reagan, including the famous line, Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall. Of course, the State Department and National Security Council rejected the line and thought it was too provocative. Despite this, President Reagan ignored them, because he held much stronger conviction about the evils of socialism than his advisers did. On June 12, 1987, President Reagan delivered the following memorable lines:

Standing before the Brandenburg Gate, every man is a German, separated from his fellow men. Every man is a Berliner, forced to look upon a scar. . . . As long as this gate is closed, as long as this scar of a wall is permitted to stand, it is not the German question alone that remains open, but the question of freedom for all mankind. . . .General Secretary Gorbachev, if you seek peace, if you seek prosperity for the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, if you seek liberalization, come here to this gate.Mr. Gorbachev, open this gate!Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!

The speech was provocative, because it challenged the Soviet leader to do something morally compelling. By calling the Soviet Union out, President Reagan gave people who were held hostage by the failing socialist regime hope and encouraged them to fight for their freedom and a better life.

After the speech, East Germany witnessed many large protests. Two years later, on November 9, 1989, East Germanys government finally announced that its people could now travel to the west freely. Soon, a large crowd of East Germans gathered at the Berlin Wall and chanted the words We want out.East German soldiers were overwhelmed by the size of the crowd, and opened the gate. People from both sides of the wall started to chisel away at the wall with any tools available. The Berlin Wall started to fall apart.

Robert Heilbroner, a left-leaning economist,wrotefor TheNew Yorkerin 1989, The Soviet Union, China & Eastern Europe have given us the clearest possible proof that capitalism organizes the material affairs of humankind more satisfactorily than socialism. He declares that the contest between socialism and capitalism is over; capitalism has won.

It would have been nice if we had buried socialism once and for all in 1989. Yet like a zombie, socialism refuses to die.

It would have been nice if we had buried socialism once and for all in 1989. Yet like a zombie, socialism refuses to die. It is staging an unfathomable comeback in West democracies, especially in the United Kingdom and United States. In the U.K., Jeremy Corbyn, a socialist who hijacked the Labour Party, is running to become the next prime minister. He promises a socialist revolution in the U.K. economy, aiming for the redistribution of income, asset, ownership and power.

In the United States, from the Green New Deal, to a hefty wealth tax and Medicare for all, the Democratic Party is now led by unapologetic socialists, some of whom are running to be the next president of the United States. They want to expand government control in every aspect of our lives, strip our freedom to choose, and radically redistribute our hard-earned wealth.

Even more troubling, according to the latestreport by the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation, 70 percent of millennials said they would vote for a socialist leader. Only 57 percent of millennials believe the Declaration of Independence better guarantees freedom and inequality than the Communist Manifesto does.

As we commemorate the 30-year anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall, we must realize that the contest between capitalism and socialism is far from over. Every one of us who cherishes our freedom and wants to preserve our republic needs to join the effort to speak up about the bloody history of communism and socialism, and help our youth debunk socialist fantasies and recognize the real dangers of such policies.

See the original post here:
30 Years After Fall Of The Berlin Wall, Socialism Is Staging A Comeback - The Federalist

London Flat Where Russian Socialist Lived in Exile Lists for 1.45 Million – Mansion Global

A London flat where the father of Russian socialism once lived has hit the market in the citys posh Bayswater neighborhood for 1.45 million (US$1.86 million).

Alexander Herzen, the first self-proclaimed Russian socialist, lived in exile in London in the 1850s and 60s, including several years in this grand Italianate mansion known as Orsett House thats since been divided into multiple apartments.

More:Mary Poppins Author P.L. Travers London Home Selling for 4.85 Million

A historic Blue Plaque, bestowed on the building in 1970, commemorates Herzens tenure there from 1860-61. It was a short but very significant time, during which Herzen saw his fight for the emancipation of Russian serfs realized through reforms by emperor Alexander II.

Indeed it was there at Orsett House that the Russian writer threw a massive party in honor of the emancipation. The fete, attended by radical European thinkers from Italian nationalist Guisseppe Mazzini to French socialist Louis Blanc, drew enough curious onlookers that a special police force was called to control the crowd, according to playwright Tom Stoppard, who wrote a trilogy for the stage about Herzen in 2002.

The quirky Victorian-era villa still sticks out on a street otherwise lined in identical terraced houses. It comes with a historic Grade-II listing for its period architecture, including a grand columned porch and leaded mansard roof, according to details from Historic England.

The available apartment, which hit the market at the end of September with estate agency Kinleigh Folkard & Hayward (KFH), spans the villas entire top floor with three bedrooms and two bathrooms.

From Penta:Second-Tier Cities Show Strong Growth on Prime Global Cities Index

Its laid out around a central great room and modernized kitchen with bedrooms arranged on either side. The home features hardwood floors and period architectural quirks, like a barrel ceiling in the kitchen and plaster moulding, according to the listing with KFH, which could not be reached for comment.

Mansion Global could not identify the owner.

See more here:
London Flat Where Russian Socialist Lived in Exile Lists for 1.45 Million - Mansion Global

Ann Coulter Vows Not to Watch Impeachment Hearings, Live-Tweets Reactions – Newsweek

Conservative pundit Ann Coulter tweeted a live commentary of the first public impeachment hearing against President Donald Trump, after earlier claiming she would refuse to watch the event.

Coulter claimed on Tuesday night that she would be taking the "honorable" position of refusing to watch the hearing, while urging others to follow her example.

"Partly for reasons of honor, mostly because it's calcifyingly boring, I'm not watching a minute of the hearings and neither should you," she tweeted.

However, when the hearing took place Wednesday morning, Coulter was apparently unable to resist. She sent out a series of tweets detailing the proceedings and later issued an admission that she had "backslid" on her earlier promise to ignore the hearing.

Coulter wrote a praiseful book about then-candidate Trump just before the 2016 election, titled In Trump We Trust, but in recent times her views on the president have soured. Most of her criticism appears to be centered on Trump's failure to complete the building of a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border.

The pundit's opinion in general seems to be heavily influenced by immigration policy. In April, she suggested she would be willing to ignore "the rest of that socialism stuff" and vote for Senator Bernie Sanders if he kept his "original position" on immigration.

On Tuesday she replied dramatically to a tweet Trump made suggesting that a hypothetical deal could be struck with Democrats to allow Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) immigrants to stay in the country.

"Okay, that does it. I give up. They can stay. You must go," she replied.

Earlier in the year, Trump responded to Coulter's criticism by calling her a "wacky nut job."

However, she appears to be largely supporting the Trump in the matter of impeachment and is clearly disdainful of Democratic efforts to move the forward with the proceedings.

During the hearing Wednesday morning, she ridiculed diplomat Bill Taylor's testimony by issuing a personal insult and suggesting that he was using patriotism to avoid scrutiny.

"QUICK SUMMARY: 1st witness pompous ass who spent 10 minutes saying no one may question anything he says," tweeted Coulter. "HE IS A PATRIOT! HIS FATHER WAS A PATRIOT! How can you question him? It would be treasonous."

Twelve minutes later, the political commentator admitted that she had failed to follow through with her pledge to ignore the proceedings.

"Okay, fine, I backslid and listened to a few minutes, but now I have the whole picture: It's a policy disagreement, featuring self-important bureaucrats telling us that their views are better than THE ELECTED PRESIDENT OF THE U.S.," she tweeted.

Later in the day, she tweeted about the hearing several more times. Coulter does not appear to have indicated whether she will be monitoring further hearings, nor has she made any suggestions on the matter to her followers on social media.

View post:
Ann Coulter Vows Not to Watch Impeachment Hearings, Live-Tweets Reactions - Newsweek

Conservative Speaker Ann Coulter to Visit UC Berkeley – NBC Bay Area

Controversy at what cost? That's what some UC Berkeley students are wondering about Ann Coulter's visit next week.

The conservative pundit was supposed to speak on campus in 2017, but the event was canceled due to security concerns.

Berkeley police confirm it will have officers on campus to back up university police.

"We're really excited," said Matt Ronnau, president of the Berkeley College Republicans. "I was a freshman when we tried to bring Ann in 2017 and didn't get to hear her speak because of problems with the university."

The Berkeley College Republicans student group invited the right-wing speaker to share her views on immigration on campus largely known for its left-wing students.

"This person's going to come and just talk about some things that are really just going to be attacking some vulnerable populations," UC Berkeley student Aldo Garcia said. "Some of these students are DACA students."

Student Ricardo Reyes thinks Coulter's upcoming visit will be a repeat of what occured when Milo Yiannopoulos visited in 2017. His scheduled speech sparked protests and series of violent clashes between pro- and anti-Trump protesters.

"We have every reason to believe this event will go off safely and successfully just like dozens of others in the last few years," UC Berkeley spokesman Dan Mogulof said.

Mogulof said UC Berkeley has hosted several conservative speakers in the years since without incident and with security costs totaling about $4 million. The university spent $800,000 on Coulter's planned visit two years ago.

"When all was said and done, the speaker decided not to come of her own volition," Mogulof said. "We regret to have had to spend that kind of money for an event that never happened."

UC Berkeley does not have an amount on how much they are spending on security for next week's visit. Some students said the money would be better spent on places to study.

The Berkeley College Republicans said the school should decrease spending elsewhere and preserve the right to free speech.

Coulter's talk starts at 9 p.m. Wednesday.

Continue reading here:
Conservative Speaker Ann Coulter to Visit UC Berkeley - NBC Bay Area