‘Socialism’ Is Inevitable In 1st World Societies

Whenever I see complaints about the “nanny state” or lines such as:
“It’s not the role of government to intervene in our lives/free enterprise/families etc.”

I realize am seeing the words of people who have totally failed to understand where social change has taken us.
I don’t necessarily disagree with their stance. I don’t want impersonal state bureaucracies running my life either. I don’t want to just be a number in the system.
But I understand that our personal preferences are irrelevant here.

These “big government” critics hold close the values of a past citizenry that relied primarily on community and the family for support, sustenance, and employment.

In our present society, however, the traditional family has effectively ceased to exist as a defining institution. Adults live in the world as atomized “individuals” moving wherever their jobs send them. Their lives regularly carry them hundreds of miles away from friends and family and effectively uproot any new friendships they might form.
Next-door neighbors often don’t even know one another or otherwise have minimal contact.

Each ethnic group and economic class within each ethnic group live in separate worlds.

In particular, members of the lesser nobility sequester themselves in gated communities and only shop in upscale stores. They do not suffer themselves to be seen by their inferiors.

Little sense of social unity or collective responsibility exists.

Everyone does what they want without regard for any community or shared purpose.

The result: a jungle defined by zero sum competition.

Under these circumstances, society can only continue to exist so long as some ponderous leviathan keeps order.

Thus modern mass industrial societies are inevitably pulled towards a ‘socialist’ system whether the citizenry likes it or not.

In a society that fails to maintain its own clan and family support networks, the government has no choice but to step in. Otherwise there’s millions of excluded, hungry people who are going to going to have bread riots in the streets.
An atomized society cannot exist without some kind of welfare program to keep the ‘losers’ of relentless zero sum gaming placated for another month.

If people are unwilling, unable, too busy to take care of aging family members, the government has to step in and confiscate enough of the society’s wealth to ensure that grandma doesn’t live her last years in a cardboard box.

When traditional systems of social shaming break down because of general social anonymity, criminals cannot be discouraged by the mere disapproval of others or antiquated humiliation punishments such as tarring and feathering.
When millions of dysfunctional single parent ‘families’ fail to socialize their children and churn out bumper crops of criminals…
If the people can’t keep lawbreakers in check or control their own children the state has to step in and do it for them.
Millions of people get locked up in publicly funded prisons.

In a society in which everyone must work just to pay the bills, schools become daycares run at public expense. Otherwise millions of aimless youths would swarm the streets.

When the wealthy classes forswear their responsibilities to the society that gave them their wealth. The government has no choice but to chase them down and extract a pound of flesh just to keep their paradise playgrounds protected from the underclasses for another day.

We can’t just “have it all” in real life.
Those who endlessly decry ‘socialism’ have failed to understand:
In a society where we want complete ‘freedom’ without caring about the consequences, someone has to clean up after us.
And they can’t do that for free.


4 responses to “‘Socialism’ Is Inevitable In 1st World Societies

  1. Yes, so many of the complaints about our “civilizational decline” fail to recognise that our “values” of freedom and rugged individualism are what caused decline in the first place. Everyone bemoans the death of the “nuclear family” but do they realise the nuclear family itself was the result of a death of the larger extended family, one that provided free childcare, counseling and policing all in one when needed? The next step after the nuclear family is of course, the single parent family. After that? No family at all. You can’t have one without the other.

  2. I get were you are coming from, and agree that the individualism that exists today did not to the same extent exist in the past, but really support networks do exist for most people. And for those people that truly do not have anyone, those who come from broken homes, single parents, and what not, the rise of people in their situation is not completely unrelated to the welfare state. And it’s probably different in different parts of the country but in my neck of the woods in MN there really are a lot of private charities that do cater to people who have issues with housing, food, education, ect.

  3. This is a reply to most ‘Tea Party’/anti-socialism (without understanding the system at the most basic level) demonstrators and people who ridicule the less advantaged. We are all so wired to succeed that we fail to see that one man’s success is another man’s failure.

  4. Pingback: Decline & Collapse « Manosphere Links

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s