What Socialists think the 1950's were like
(media.kotakuinaction2.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (66)
sorted by:
The 50's were far less idyllic than you'd expect. And the ethnic homogeneity alone is minimally relevant to its relative prosperity. I also don't think you are correct as to the motivations, however I do think you are broadly correct about the causes.
One of the principle reasons why everything seems to be more expensive nowadays is because over roughly the past century, the government has successfully been able to convince the general populace that they should be permitted to brazenly steal more and more from them (or otherwise browbeat the general populace into accepting this). Meanwhile the government does less and less actually useful stuff, instead focusing more and more of their resources on limiting freedoms (or in other words, amassing their own power).
Meanwhile socialist mental deficients will harp on endlessly about how it's all "capilatizuum"'s fault, and how we need more government theft to fix it all. The fact that modern western civilization tolerates and in some cases even respects these abject lobotomites instead of treating them with the same level of contempt and pity afforded to flat Earthers is something I will never understand. And that's to say nothing about the ones that actually know that what they're saying doesn't make sense, and are just in it to gain personal power for themselves. As a further random tangent, the fact that Nazism is somehow considered to be some massively different thing to socialism is one of the greatest political misconceptions of the modern age. And is consequentially one of the greatest failures in education in the modern age.
Then how come so many ethnically homogenous societies do so well? And how can you say there's no correlation?
How can you 'acchtually' and not mention money printers and fiat currency going brrr? That's where the real theft is occurring. Tax is terrible, government bullying it terrible, but money printers et al is where the real monetary damage is coming from. Even putting aside gold-backed currency and coins with actual silver in them, the value of money back in the 50's was, what, like fifteen times more?
There are many similarities, but also some stark differences; they are far from identical. And, if anything, I'd flip that, and say it's amazing that socialism isn't thought of as evil like fascism is. That's the real issue. They've already covered 'fascism bad.' Unless I miss your point on this.
They used nazism as a scapegoat to pin all the evils of leftism in general. "The commies fought the nazis so they were good guys".
Meanwhile blatantly suppressing every commie genocide and pushing the idea that far left socialists were right wing simply because they fought against commies. Conveniently ignoring the Holodomor, the fact that soviets and nazis were allied at the beginning of WW2. And that the real majority of what was later twisted into the modern perception of the holocaust was not in the camps, but was the combined soviet and nazi butchery of civilians (not just jews) across eastern europe.