The Problem with Socialism - Thomas J. DiLorenzo
Shared by:alnilam
Written by
Read by Bob Souer
Format: MP3
Bitrate: 64 Kbps
Unabridged
Length: 3h 51m ● mp3 chapters
“DiLorenzo’s book is a pleasure to read and should be put in the hands of every young person in this country — and elsewhere!” —Former Congressman Ron Paul
“It is a worthwhile investment for parents with college-age children to buy two copies of The Problem with Socialism — one for their children and one for themselves.” —Walter E. Williams, John M. Olin Distinguished Professor of Economics, George Mason University And Nationally Syndicated Columnist
“Ever wonder what one book you should give a young person to make sure he doesn’t fall for leftist propaganda? You’re looking at it.” —Thomas E. Woods, JR., host of The Tom Woods Show, author of the New York Times bestseller “The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History”
What’s the Problem with Socialism?
Let’s start with… everything.
So says bestselling author and professor of economics Thomas J. DiLorenzo, who sets the record straight in this concise and lively primer on an economic theory that’s gaining popularity — with help from Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders — despite its universal failure as an economic model and its truly horrific record on human rights.
In 16 eye-opening chapters, DiLorenzo reveals how socialism inevitably makes inequality worse, why socialism was behind the worst government-sponsored mass murders in history, the myth of “successful” Scandinavian socialism; how socialism is worse — far worse — for the environment than capitalism, and more.
As DiLorenzo shows, and history proves, socialism is the answer only if you want increasing unemployment and poverty, stifling bureaucracy if not outright political tyranny, catastrophic environmental pollution, rotten schools, and so many social ills that it takes a book like this to cover just the big ones.
Provocative, timely, essential reading, Thomas J. DiLorenzo’s “The Problem with Socialism” is an instant classic comparable to Henry Hazlitt’s “Economics in One Lesson.”
In the words of Thomas E. Woods — “Dance on socialism’s grave by reading this book.”
01 The Problem with Socialism
02 Why Socialism is Always and Everywhere an Economic Disaster
03 Egalitarianism versus Human Reality
04 Islands of Socialism: The Follies of Government “Enterprise”
05 Why “The Worst” Rise to the Top Under Socialism
06 The Socialist Roots of Fascism
07 The Myth of Successful Scandinavian Socialism
08 How Welfare Harms the Poor
09 How Socialized Medicine Kills the Patient and Robs the Taxpayer
10 How Socialism Causes Pollution
11 Karl Marx’s “Progressive” Income Tax
12 Minimum Wage, Maximum Folly
13 How Socialist Regulation Makes Monopolies
14 Destroying Capitalism by Socializing Capital
15 Is Socialism Really the Best Way to Organize Schools?
16 Socialist Myths and Superstitions about Capitalism
| Announce URL: | udp://tracker.torrent.eu.org:451/announce |
| This Torrent also has several backup trackers | |
| Tracker: | udp://tracker.torrent.eu.org:451/announce |
| Tracker: | udp://tracker.opentrackr.org:1337/announce |
| Tracker: | http://tracker2.dler.org:80/announce |
| Tracker: | udp://exodus.desync.com:6969/announce |
| Tracker: | udp://tracker.tiny-vps.com:6969/announce |
| Tracker: | http://tracker.internetwarriors.net:1337/announce |
| Tracker: | udp://tracker.openbittorrent.com:80/announce |
| Tracker: | udp://tracker.leechers-paradise.org:6969 |
| Tracker: | udp://tracker.coppersurfer.tk:6969 |
| Tracker: | udp://tracker.open-internet.nl:6969/announce |
| Tracker: | udp://open.demonii.si:1337/announce |
| Tracker: | udp://thetracker.org:80/announce |
| Tracker: | http://open.trackerlist.xyz:80/announce |
| Creation Date: | Thu, 10 Jun 2021 13:32:48 +0200 |
| This is a Multifile Torrent | |
| cover 1.jpg 248.99 KBs | |
| cover 2.jpg 409.17 KBs | |
| cover audio.jpg 74 KBs | |
| DiLorenzo, Thomas J - The Problem with Socialism (2016).epub 1.23 MBs | |
| The Problem with Socialism 01.mp3 8.71 MBs | |
| The Problem with Socialism 02.mp3 8.62 MBs | |
| The Problem with Socialism 03.mp3 7.18 MBs | |
| The Problem with Socialism 04.mp3 4.81 MBs | |
| The Problem with Socialism 05.mp3 6.67 MBs | |
| The Problem with Socialism 06.mp3 7.06 MBs | |
| The Problem with Socialism 07.mp3 3.81 MBs | |
| The Problem with Socialism 08.mp3 4.36 MBs | |
| The Problem with Socialism 09.mp3 7.52 MBs | |
| The Problem with Socialism 10.mp3 9.27 MBs | |
| The Problem with Socialism 11.mp3 8.15 MBs | |
| The Problem with Socialism 12.mp3 5 MBs | |
| The Problem with Socialism 13.mp3 6.37 MBs | |
| The Problem with Socialism 14.mp3 6.72 MBs | |
| The Problem with Socialism 15.mp3 4.82 MBs | |
| The Problem with Socialism 16.mp3 8.13 MBs | |
| Combined File Size: | 109.13 MBs |
| Piece Size: | 64 KBs |
| Comment: | Updated by AudioBook Bay |
| Encoding: | UTF-8 |
| Info Hash: | 71738190e2ca4173483a64a197906430e8a9ce7f |
| Torrent Download | Torrent Free Downloads |
| Tips | Sometimes the torrent health info isn’t accurate, so you can download the file and check it out or try the following downloads. |
| Direct Download | Start Direct Download |
| Tips | You could try out alternative bittorrent clients. |
| Secured Download | Download Files Now |
| Ad |
|
This post has 100 comments with rating of 4.6/5
June 10th, 2021
kinda funny how scary the S-word is to right-wingers. “How Socialized Medicine Kills the Patient and Robs the Taxpayer” lol, ok…seems to work pretty good in Canada, UK, etc.
June 10th, 2021
The problem with socialism is that the CIA eventually run out of South and Central Americans to kill which makes it very difficult to demonstrate the evils of socialism.
June 10th, 2021
… to say that the CIA and the KGB engage in similar practices is the equivalent of saying that the man who pushes an old lady into the path of a hurtling bus is not to be distinguished from the man who pushes an old lady out of the path of a hurtling bus: on the grounds that, after all, in both cases someone is pushing old ladies around.
—William F. Buckley, Jr
CIA here is “force for good”, and KGB here is “force for evil” — there are superficial similarities, and also there are fundamental differences (or used to be)
June 10th, 2021
Tyrit, The fact that they needed to murder hundreds of millions in the USSR and China to suppress opposition to their stupid amoral ideas should have been enough to demonstrate the evils of socialism, no? The lesson should have been learned more than 50 years ago!
“The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again but expecting different results.” - A. Einstein
June 10th, 2021
This book is a great introduction to the socialist economic ideas in practice.
June 10th, 2021
> kinda funny how scary the S-word is to right-wingers
kinda funny how not scary the S-word is to left-wingers
(UTOPIA, FLYING UNICORNS, something truly wonderful, just not seen anywhere before)
June 10th, 2021
>kinda funny how not scary the S-word is to left-wingers
Kinda funny how it tends to be the “I wont live my life in fear” crowd that tend to be so afraid of words and dependent on guns.
And no, the CIA is NOT a force for good. It’s a force that’s wielded by people who don’t care for the opinion of the general public. Which makes them above the law and untouchable, something libertarians are supposed to be against.
June 10th, 2021
> Kinda funny how it tends to be the “I wont live my life in fear” crowd that tend to be so afraid of words and dependent on guns.
“Afraid of words”: it’s not as much about “words” as about “concepts” behind those words that knowledgeable people are reasonably and justifiably afraid of (especially where their fear is supported by mountains of historic evidence).
“Dependent on guns”: there’s nothing wrong about being “dependent on guns”, especially in light of historical facts where “disarming the population” was followed by mass incarcerations and murders of people by governments, no longer afraid of the armed resistance.
June 10th, 2021
This book is like a guy wooing a woman by telling her all the reasons why the other dude is wrong for her. Maybe it’s true, but then again, that doesn’t mean you’re the right guy for her either. It only shows you’re a dick.
June 10th, 2021
lol and by the way, answering back every comment in here doesn’t change the mind of the liberals and miraculously turn them into Republicans. It only shows you’re triggered.
June 10th, 2021
> This book is like a guy wooing a woman by telling her all the reasons why the other dude is wrong for her.
Or maybe it has nothing to do with the man-woman analogy, and more like “warning people about the mortal danger ahead”, in case the society won’t change the course. I definitely like the lighthouse analogy more.
June 10th, 2021
Cool it with awkward similes! I’m Caesar, and I endorse this message.
June 10th, 2021
“The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money”.
Margaret Thatcher
June 10th, 2021
Thatcher was a dull,hypocritical woman who never spoke a word that wasn’t written by somebody else, except perhaps ‘there’s no such thing as society’. Ronald Millar, Hugh Simmonds, John O’Sullivan and many others penned speeches for which she was happy to take the credit. Not to be taken as an authority on anything but lauded to the utmost by the rightwing press.
June 10th, 2021
Even a stopped clock is right twice a day. (But a sundial can be used to stab someone, even at night.)
Although, admittedly, this was written by somebody else.
June 10th, 2021
I think if you went on Amazon and saw twenty-plus reviews (any given product) and ALL of them told of unmitigated failure and bad result; you probably wouldn’t consider buying it for a moment.
Progress or change is one thing.
Please, if you think the way we are doing it is wrong, at least propose a solution that hasn’t been tried over and over and always resulting in disaster. (some of the most egregious in history)
Most “things” with a track record that bad would be taken off the shelves for good.
June 10th, 2021
But, Redwall, I think you’ll find that it hasn’t been tried yet! (Damn, no one buys that spin anymore.)
Okay, try this then - America! Or something…
June 10th, 2021
Conservatives like to compare Socialism with failed states like Natzi Germany, USSR, and Venezuela. They forget to mention the successful states like Denmark, Sweeden, and Finland. Those failed states failed because they were lead by fascists dictators like Stalin, Hitler, and Maduro. Donald Trump fits that fascist title.
June 10th, 2021
Think I’ll skip this one.
June 10th, 2021
Once again, we don’t have socialist countries in the EU. Those countries - and the others - are market-oriented. That’s how we pay for social programmes; through sustainable taxation, and market facilitation/incentivisation.
Just so, the full ideological madness does lead to failed states like Natzi Germany, USSR, and Venezuela, and full-spectrum human rights abuses. We don’t go that route because it just doesn’t work.
June 10th, 2021
The Problem with Socialism is the same as with Capitalism - the state. Where there are vertical structures of power and the violence machine upholding them - there will always be victims. The only difference is that in the State Socialism with one Socialist party rule (like in Soviets and China) all the power and violence can openly gather under one controlling structure, and in the State Capitalism the Capital has to play éminence grise with public representatives as its puppets.
June 10th, 2021
TURD
June 10th, 2021
It’s often said with no credibility whatsoever, that Nazis were left wing socialists. That’s rewriting history for the social media age. The USSR under Stalin wasn’t either, though much curled lip service was paid to the notion. And Venezuela ia on its economic knees mainly due to American sanctions. So the current canards have Nazi Germany, Stalinist Russia and Venezuela as bad examples of socialism when the reasons each failed were entirely different and only tangentially related to left wing philosophy.
June 10th, 2021
Fascism and Nazism are Leftist, not “Right-wing” Philosophies; Conservative = “Right-wing” is another Big Lie https://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-reviews/R14RH35E1F2U0V?ASIN=1621573486
The absurd claim that fascism and Nazism are not socialist movements owes it origin to the hideous reputations those leftist regimes earned after World War II. How could progressives expect to thrive in America if the Holocaust and other atrocities were linked to its political relatives? Consequently, a gigantic lie was perpetrated by leftist intellectuals and slavishly spread by a sympathetic media — namely, that fascism was a movement of the “far right” and that conservatives were also on “the right.” This “big lie” has long been a staple of Democrat propaganda and the basis for the absurd notion that President Trump is a fascist — not his violent, GOP-assassinating, speech-suppressing, “Antifa” opponents.
Most conservatives are aware of links between fascism and socialism. After all, the term “Nazi” refers to a “National Socialist” party. What many of them, and certainly most Americans, don’t know, thanks to a mendacious media and institutions of advanced deception, are the countless ties (centralized government, racism, eugenics, state-sanctioned violence, and enforced cultural uniformity) that link fascists and even Nazis to the progressive movement.
June 10th, 2021
America’s fault! I knew it!
And it hasn’t even been tried yet! I knew that, too!
Nazism/Socialism/Marxism operated the same sleazy, centrally planned, state-controlled apparatus of power & oppression. In each toxic iteration. No matter how far, and in what direction, we expediently attempt to transport the goalposts (”Come back with those goalposts!”).
Each time it fails (which is each time) it must be opportunistically relabelled. Without fail.
June 10th, 2021
Oh so our dead grandparents were fighting socialists in Germany…and it was the fake socialists who came down from Russia to kill the real socialists who ran death camps for minorities and agitators that were really new social programs dreamed up by fake progressives and it was all committed by CNN to dupe us into believing that nature is collapsing when the real socialists, the scientists, used a time machine to project a false future narrative dreamed up by Bill Gates about how the patriots were fighting for freedom of speech by wearing socialist symbols like the swastika which was seen doodled into an original copy of the communist manifesto by Hitler who was Marx actually its a little fuzzy here one night on a spacecraft. And if the rest of the world disagrees with us we’re gonna build a wall and guess who’s gonna pay for it??? That’s right…Karl Marx…
June 11th, 2021
Thanks for this up. Looks like a great read.
June 11th, 2021
Looking at that impeccable reference, “Rational Wiki” we see:
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Thomas_DiLorenzo
“Thomas DiLorenzo (1954–) is an Austrian school economist and pseudohistorian who holds a post as a professor of economics at Loyola College, Maryland. DiLorenzo is a fellow at the Ludwig von Mises Institute and formerly worked for the neo-secessionist League of the South Institute. DiLorenzo’s revisionist history has made him a popular “scholar” within libertarian circles and among some of the nuttier Teabaggers.
He is one of the foremost proponents of neo-Confederate thought. His body of work is something of a synthesis of the alternate universe histories put forth by neo-Confederates, laissez-faire fundamentalists, and libertarians, all in one package.
As if to underscore what an expert for hire he is capable of being, in the mid-90s DiLorenzo worked at not one, but two “public policy think tanks” that churned out propaganda for the tobacco industry.
DiLorenzo has long been an opponent of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution with its pesky stuff about citizenship, due process and equal protection clauses.”
A real charmer.
June 11th, 2021
This guy is a grifting creep.
June 11th, 2021
@Gweilo
(i) RationalWiki — seriously? Those charming leftist NGO fellas, pretending to be rational pro-science and anti-fundamentalism thinkers, while demonstrating apparent dehumanizing and demeaning attitude towards their political opponents? (”DiLorenzo, bug just arrived in ass, at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington, DC” — referring respectively to T.J. DiLorenso and the conference, on the same page under the photo).
(ii) Is it just me, or you are trying to shift readers’ focus and attention from the actual lighthouse-danger MESSAGE (”What is socialism”) to MESSENGER (”Who is the book’s author”), using Goebbels-Alinsky tactics “dehumanize, polarize” etc? (Radicals #13: pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it). In other words, “The author is a bad person, and bad persons cannot write good books”.
June 11th, 2021
Dead link forces me to pay?
June 11th, 2021
Quote: ‘The absurd claim that fascism and Nazism are not socialist movements owes it origin to the hideous reputations those leftist regimes earned after World War II’
Nice try. Even Goebbels couldn’t have got away with that one.Both Hitler and Mussolini hit trade unionists hard. It’s stretching credibility to say the right loves unions.They’ve always been damned as ‘leftists’.
Just because Hitler called his party National Socialist don’t make it so. He was known to lie.
One particular unassaiable difference between Fascism as practised in Germany - seeing as we’re lookin at the particular and not generalising - and Communism as practised in Stalin’s Russia is that the first was avowed Christian and the second was atheist. A pretty fundamental difference even you might have to accept.
June 12th, 2021
This issue of separating the ideologies is notoriously problematic. On the point of the division & contradiction betw Judeo-Christianity & National Socialism, the ground is clearer.
Considering the particulars (generally such regimes are quite identical - the only real difference was blood & soil, although Marxists also leveraged nationalism) there were some Nordic pagan strands, & regime-supporting, anti-Christian esotericism.
The National Socialists did not explicitly reject Christianity, because they wanted to win power through the ballot box; and for their elevation to be consonant with law. Hitler had been baptised Catholic, and would publicise this. However, Catholic regions did not vote for Hitler or his Nazis, because “He was known to lie.” They prudently did not trust his public declarations.
He repeatedly rejected Judeo-Christianity as the residue of “Jewish poison.” And he had his brutal revenge on the Catholics & Catholicism. True, the Marxists were also barbarically murderous towards Christians. To Albert Speer, Hitler said that a different major religion would have been more congruent with the “Aryan warrior spirit.”
They also associated capitalism with the Jews, and blamed both for Germany’s economic & social travails.
Alfred Rosenberg, the principal philosopher & chief ideologist of National Socialism, was known to hate Christianity. Some of his works: “The Crime of Freemasonry: Judaism, Jesuitism, German Christianity” and “Immorality in the Talmud.” Hitler’s speeches were ad idem with Rosenberg’s views, rejecting traditional Christianity as a religion based on Jewish culture, preferring an ethnically and culturally pure “Race” whose destiny was supposed to be assigned to the German people by “Providence”.
After Hitler’s assumption of power he moved to reassure the Protestant and Catholic churches that the party was not intending to reinstitute Germanic paganism. He placed himself in the position of being the man to save Positive Christianity from utter destruction at the hands of the atheistic antitheist Communists of the Soviet Union.
Nazi leaders, such as Martin Bormann, were virulently anti-Christian and sympathetic to Rosenberg. Once in power, Hitler & most Nazi leaders sought to unify the Christian denominations in favor of “positive Christianity”. Hitler & Goebbels agreed that after the Endsieg (Final Victory) the Reich Church should be pressed into evolving into a German social evolutionist organisation proclaiming the cult of race, blood and battle, instead of Redemption and the Ten Commandments of Moses, which they deemed outdated and Jewish.
Heinrich Himmler’s views were among the closest to Rosenberg’s, however, while Rosenberg thought Christianity should be allowed to die out, Himmler actively set out to create countering pagan rituals to undermine Christianity.
Rosenberg rejected Christianity for its universality, its doctrine of orig sin (at least for Germans who were born noble), & for its teachings on the immortality of the soul. Publicly, Rosenberg affected to deplore Christianity’s degeneration owing to Jewish influence. Rosenberg stated that “The general ideas of the Roman & of the Protestant churches are negative Christianity and do not, therefore, accord with our (German) soul.”
In Jan 1934 Hitler had appointed Rosenberg as the cultural and educational leader of the Reich. The Vatican condemned Rosenberg’s “Myth of the 20th C” for scorning and rejecting “all dogmas of the Catholic Church, indeed the very fundamentals of the Christian religion”. During WWII Rosenberg outlined the future envisioned by the Hitler government for religion in Germany, with a 30 point programme for the future of the German churches. Among its articles: the National Reich Church of Germany would claim exclusive control over all churches
publication of the Bible would cease
crucifixes, Bibles and saints were to be removed from altars
Mein Kampf would be placed on altars as “to the German nation and therefore to God the most sacred book”
the Christian Cross would be removed from all churches and replaced with the swastika.
At Nuremberg, Rosenberg was condemned for, inter alia, “facilitating the persecution of Christian churches and the Jews in particular.”
As we know from the factual historical record, the Nazis were diametrically opposed to the central Christian principles of love, charity, compassion & forgiveness, as they promoted abortion, practiced euthanasia, eugenics, and genocide. They divided (& slaughtered) families. The family is at the heart of Christianity. Soviet Russia had been the first country to legalise abortion. Marxism has an equally “complex” relationship with the family, as I’m sure you know. (Intended destruction of the family unit.)
Lebensborn was enacted on the same day as the Nuremberg Laws. Lebensborn (”Fount of Life”) was a state-supported, registered association with the goal of raising the birth rate. The programme was led by Himmler. Women were recruited from the Band of German Maidens, the female wing of the Hitler Youth. (their breeding roster”).
Males were typically partnered with multiple girls/women, sleeping with them at a time scheduled to match their peak ovulation.
Women could join the program whether they were wed or unwed, though Himmler stopped advertising that fact after the Germans protested the immorality of babies being bred out of wedlock.
The babies born to the mothers were quickly weened and placed in the care of the SS.
There was an even darker side to the programme. Potentially hundreds of thousands of children deemed “racially pure” were kidnapped from countries conquered by the Nazis and sent to Lebensborn houses where they were indoctrinated to be German and then adopted out.
Children who refused to believe that they were abandoned by their parents or who refused to identify as German were beaten. If they continued to resist, they were sent to concentration camps and eventually killed.
As I’m certain you can appreciate, none of this is what we could refer to as excessively, uh, Christian.
Ultimately, the ideologies were ad idem on this point also.
June 12th, 2021
On Goebbels specifically, he represented the more revolutionary side of National Socialism: bitterly opposed to the aristocracy and the bourgeois world & its values, proud of his shabby poverty, and aggressively vocal in his belief that it was the socialism in National Socialism which took precedence above all else.
“To be a socialist means to let the ego serve the neighbour, to sacrifice the self for the whole. In its deepest sense socialism equals service. The individual refrains and the commonwealth demands.”
National Socialist & Russian systems of socialism had in common the fact that the government has full control of the means of production. It decided what shall be produced and how. It allots to each individual a share of consumer’s goods for his consumption. There were no longer entrepreneurs but only shop managers (Betriebsführer).The government, not the consumers, directs production.
On 16 Jun 1941, 5 days before Hitler attacked the Soviet Union, Goebbels exulted, in the privacy of his diary, in the victory over Bolshevism that he believed would quickly follow. There would be no restoration of the tsars, he remarked to himself, after Russia had been conquered. But Jewish Bolshevism would be uprooted in Russia and “real socialism” planted in its place (“Der echte Sozialismus“). Goebbels was certainly a liar, but it’s tough to explain why he would lie to his diary. And to the end of his days he believed that socialism was what National Socialism was about.
Goebbels was by no means alone among the National Socialists. Ferdinand Zimmerman, who worked as an important economic planner for the Nazis, had been before their rise to power a contributor under the pen name Ferdinand Fried to the journal Die Tat, edited by Hans Zehrer, and a leading member of a group of nationalist intellectuals known as the Tatkreis. Fried also strongly opposed capitalism, analysing it in Marxist terms.
June 13th, 2021
Caesar you are really verbose in showing your inability to structurally critique something. Also, you just don’t read the books. Its sad.
June 13th, 2021
Sometimes, ya gotta refute, toad. It is sad that it’s necessary. What is less sad is correcting error.
June 13th, 2021
you didn’t refute anything. you picked anecdotes and called it an argument.
June 13th, 2021
Example your overly-broad ass-ertion, I prithee. Or u refute yourself.
June 13th, 2021
Please speak as if you have an interest in communicating rather than jerking it over your own intellect. It’s neither endearing or frustrating, it’s pathetic. You owe yourself to not be such a cringe inducing person.
Again, can’t make an argument. Umberto Eco has 14 points of Urfascism. Do you disagree with any of them? Will you engage with them at all? Or are you just going to continue to be a literal historical revisionist pissbaby every time you see the words socialism or Marx.
June 13th, 2021
There is no argument you made to refute. Fascism does not arise out of the left wing. An anecdote from goebbels diaries does not an argument make.
June 13th, 2021
You don’t even read the books. How can you argue about the worth of an idea if you refuse to engage with it in the first place. My god man. Figure yourself out. You can say “oh i’ve read many books” as much as you want, I have no reason to believe you until you actually demonstrate an understanding of the contents of said book or a genuine understanding of theory applied within it. You constantly harp on about military history and love your little flourishes of english language but as far as I can actually tell your area of expertise on here are sex fetishes and google translating poorly your screeds into Spanish and Portuguese. This site will never be your conservative paradise and people will post more marxist stuff out of spite. You need to learn to cope.
June 13th, 2021
Yes, yes - you’re appallingly stupid; I’m terribly mean; just take it for granted that the incredibly impressive emotional stuff has already been accomplished. Don’t merely use it as a farcically transparent distraction ruse to try to conceal the weakness of your points, & the absence of any substantive argument. That train has sailed.
Once again, you could provide no support for your assertion. Also, you plainly didn’t read/understand what I said. I never said that Nat Socialism arises specifically from the left. I did say that the issue of separating the ideologies is notoriously problematic. In practice, the extremes use the same apparatus of oppression & genocide; centrally planned, state-controlled. And following each instance of failure, ideologues opportunistically rush to engage in a relabelling/rebranding effort.
Again, are the Nuremberg trials mere anecdote? The controlling vision of the state evinced by Goebbels, Himmler, Bormann, Hitler, Heydrich, et all? Whether in actions, writings, dialogue or speeches?
That they associated capitalism with the Jews, and blamed both for Germany’s economic & social travails? That the Nazis hated Judeo-Christianity? That, like all authoritarian regimes, they sought to control or destroy any alternative centre of influence - especially if sourced from outside their sphere of power? There’s even ample precedent for that elsewhere in German history, with Luther, and later, Bismarck (Kulturkampf).
And Goebbels’ notoriously bitter opposition to the aristocracy and the bourgeois world & its values; being proud of his shabby poverty, & aggressively vocal in his belief that it was the socialism in National Socialism which took precedence above all else? From speech by Goebbels: “To be a socialist means to let the ego serve the neighbour, to sacrifice self for the whole. In its deepest sense socialism equals service. The individual refrains & the commonwealth demands.”
And Alfred Rosenberg’s plans for the Nat Socialist state? The cooperation of the Nazis & Soviets in invading & dividing up Poland?
That the Nat Socialist & Soviet systems of socialism had in common the fact that the govt has full control of the means of production? It decided what shall be produced and how. It allots to each individual a share of consumer’s goods for his consumption. There were no longer entrepreneurs but only shop managers (Betriebsführer). The govt, not the consumers, directs production?
So all “inconvenient” (and well known/established) chronicles from the factual historical record must always be mindlessly & opportunistically dismissed as anecdote, revisionist, and “Fake Nooze” as you guys have it, because you’re emotionally tied to a narrow ideological outcome. You start with a doctrinaire conclusion, and then obliviously proceed backwards, desperately distorting as you go. That’s hysteria, not history.
June 13th, 2021
I’m in Canada, we have socialized healthcare. I had an infection in my testicle. The most expensive part of going to emerge, spending most of a day there, getting an ultrasound, a doctor, multiple nurses, an injection, some pills and a prescription … the cab ride home.
The cab home was my most expensive part. at ~$8.50 + tip.
June 13th, 2021
@audiobayyz - We have that in Ireland, too. It’s great.
June 14th, 2021
Caesar, your ability to draw parallels between the manifestations and mechanisms of different economic systems and forms of government is not an argument. Nazism and stalinism were both totalitarian. Big whoop. Project a little less, have a read through Eco’s 14 points of ur-fascism, and eat a slice of humble pie. You come off as someone incapable of imagining yourself wrong. Just incredibly pompous. As an irishman myself, you sound like you’d be at home tossing off at eton college over imaginary culture wars with the other landed tans.
June 14th, 2021
More diverting abuse; still no support for your assertions. So, all the established ideological similarities “is not an argument” - how convenient. However, weren’t the similarities the point? Yes, those were very real parallels betw the Nat Socialist & Soviet economic systems. Here’s a suggestion: try proposing actual, concrete differences, as possible counters to the myriad analogues.
For inst, you imagine that Goebbels’ diaries have no historical value? The actual thoughts & ideas of one of the most powerful & influential Nat Socialists? Within the discipline of history, diaries - if they can be procured at all - have enormous value, and give untold insight.
Also, consult the definition of anecdote; a collection of diaries, or a chronicle of events, does not constitute an anecdote. Moreover, these also reflect his explicit, public statements, as I indicated. Ironically, given your unsupported complaint, you demonstrate no knowledge whatsoever.
That brutal Nat Socialism & every blood-soaked iteration of implemented Marxism were all brutally totalitarian doesn’t seem to interest you, it doesn’t distract one iota from your ideological infatuation. “Big whoop” you say. Tell it to the countless victims, toady.
You claim to be Irish (lwr case, I see?); so where’s the wit; intelligence; scepticism - partic of ideological bumf; sense of irony; the appreciation & knowledge of history? You have all the historical acumen of a sassenach, which is the real truth here, I think.
Try to read the factual historical record, rather than hysterical, ideological tracts, and begin to formulate independent judgments.
June 16th, 2021
Your ability to notice insults to your person is not that phenomenal. Yes, i am insulting you. Buck up chum. Ideological similarities are not an argument no. Both the Quakers and ISIS hold a faith in a personal supreme being and a requirement to manifest the will of that being in the world as central to their beliefs. Ipso facto: they’re the same hurr durr.
That you think Irishness has anything to do with intellectual and attitudinal traits is weird pseudo eugenics and you should check yourself for perhaps investing too much in ethno nationalism. Are you an actual blood and soil type? You’re cringy.
I DO read the factual historical record. I just don’t do what you do, which is extrapolate meaning from and amplify the significance of things that point to my biases and fit in well with my ideological blinders to the point you’re and actual historical revisionist. “Nazism wasn’t fascist it was marxist because (insert a Goebbels diary entry), checkmate!”
Is the ‘factual’ historical record just the historical record that you have cherry picked and parsed to the point it says what you want?
I don’t have to defend my claim to irish ness by doxing myself you incredible gowl.
Nazim and stalinism both being soaked in blood is not a compelling enough point of commonality for me to conflate the two in spirit and purpose and fundamental motivations, no. That would be a distinctly stupid thing to do.
You can trill and throw in whatever flowery language you like but your ignorance is showing, like a bare ass, that you’re a conservative chud talking out your hoop. You would blame the victims of the croke park massacre for being dangerous agitators who deserved what they got, and point to a diary entry where one of them said they didn’t like protestantism as justification. Disregard any and all things that point against your reading, thats just left wing nonsense right, thousands upon thousands of scholars who all came to the opposite conclusion as you.
You throwing the definition of an anecdote back at me doesn’t legitimise your argument one iota and it shows you know exactly what i meant.
“Within the discipline of history, diaries - if they can be procured at all - have enormous value, and give untold insight.” - is what you would say if your entire thesis depended on siding with your
biased reading of one excerpt of Goebbel’s diary and you desperately wanted to legitimise it as somehow running counter to…almost a century of study and analysis on the nature of the third reich as being fundamentally fascist. You don’t
even understand fascism. One piece of data, contextualised by you to service your underlying argument (nazism/fascism rooted in marxism and not right wing or conservative) is weak, not compelling and wilfully ignorant of virtually all other academic understandings of the nature of fascism and marxism.
You revel in your ignorance like a swine sir.
Oh but the implications of a lowercase ireland! Conspiracy is afoot!
June 16th, 2021
Well, that was…utterly demented, toady. More luxuriating in mindless abuse rather than offering (or understanding) an argument (so distracting!). Yet again, no support whatsoever for your assertions; and not a single coherent point. No actual, concrete differences offered. And it’s probably your most hysterical rant thus far.
Nope, eugenics & genocide is ur lot, remember? You mustn’t have ever travelled or read a book if you haven’t noticed the existence of predominant, cultural traits. What u present here is a false dichotomy: merely because one culture exhibits a set of characteristics, does not exclude the possibility of those qualities from the rest of the world, no.
You can’t be Irish if ur entirely ignorant of Irish history; the scepticism regarding toxic ideologies (of course you’d hate that one!), the avoidance of polit extremes? Yeah, u have not displayed any wit; intelligence or sense of irony. Moreover, you have all the appreciation & knowledge of history of a particularly braindead Brexiteer. Of course - ur as Irish as the Cliffs of Dover & directed famines! Be honest, at least with yourself.
While you couldn’t bring yourself to capitalise “Irishman” you had no problem capitalising Nazism & Fascism. Toxic ideologues, all the bloody (& soiling) same. You can’t blame others for your own educational failings.
And insult yourself to the point of premature orgasm again, toady, have a messy ball; point is that u spill all of these attacks because u have no argument. It’s transparent as ur hist/polit/economic ignorance.
“I DO read the factual hist record” - No, u don’t. Not even slightly established.
“I don’t do what u do, extrapolate & amplify the signific things point to my biases & fit in well with my ideologi blinders to the point you’re & actual hist revision.” - That’s precisely what you’re doing.
“Nazism wasn’t fascist it was marxist because (insert a Goebbels diary entry)” - No truth in this misrep; more hysterical imaginings.
“Is the ‘factual’ hist record just the hist record that you have cherry picked and parsed to the point it says what you want?” - No, it’s the hist of the 20th c; the age of ideology, dictatorship & genocide - y’know, all the objective events which u never learned about (too complicated for ya), & now emotionally reject (too inconvenient).
“Nazim & stalin both soaked in blood is not a compelling enough point of common for me to conflate the two in spirit & purpose and fundam motivations, no.” - Weak straw man, you’ll never learn anything by relying on those lads. And each iteration of toxic ideology resulted in same disaster, not just two.
“That would be a distinctly stupid thing to do.” - Hasn’t prevented you so far - why stop now?
“a bare ass” - I suspected that was ur sole method of cognition & communication. Put it the eff away, for the love of ur queen!
“You would blame the victims of croke park (sic, totally sic) massacre for being dangerous - deserved they got…one of them said they didn’t like prot as justification.” - This is what’s known as reductio ad absurdum. An invalid argument - and a particularly stupid one, at that. But you toxic ideologues do become aroused at the merest mention of massacre, that is true.
Your “Quakers & ISIS” catastrophe is another reductio (goin’ for a record there, toady?). A reductio with its “bare ass” hangin’ out - just like your Lady Godiva legend over in blighty. And the very ambitious use of “ipso facto” doesn’t save it, but dammit, yer tryin’ yer hardest (”Look ma, no brain! Ipso facto!”).
“Disregard any & all things…left wing nonsense right, 1000s upon 1000s of scholars who all came to the opp conclusion as you.” - This beauty just seems to reflect an argument betw your disturbed voices. Like your other extravagant (medicated) assertions, it doesn’t represent lived reality.
“You throwing the defin of anecdote back at me doesn’t legit ur argument iota & it shows you know exactly what i meant.” - Now this is spectacular. So, your failure to understand basic words - and your own points which the words are supposed to manifest - is my fault, because I know what’s really going on in ur head, without u possessing an elementary ability for clear/adequate expression? I know what your voices are really saying - about the reptile conspiracy, is it? Now we know how utterly barking mad your “Utopia” is going to be. And you’ll probably b one of the leading bloody intellectuals. “We’ll have to run that new genocide proposal by ole toady.” You did place a great deal of stress of that whole “anecdote” point, now that I recall. (Why did you leave this madness so close to the end of your toxic spill?! It’s ur Killer paragraph.)
You imagine Goebbels’ diaries - the thoughts of one of the most evil phuckers in hist - amount to “a short amusing, interesting story about a real incident or person,” or a bit of a rumour? That just about shows where your moral compass is at. “A short amusing” plan for mass murder. And this was your “killer” point? Truly extraordinary, prof. A eureka moment for u & your insistent voices. No wonder u fail to understand anything else that’s been written. And that only intensifies the hysterical hatred & acting out. When you obviously don’t know, why do u want to share that so “badly?”
“is what you would…depended on siding with your biased(!) reading of one excerpt of Goebb’s diary…running counter to…almost a century of study & analysis on the nature of the third reich as being fundamentally fascist.” - Ah, here. Run-on sentences indicate that you haven’t a clue what you’re saying, so you mash it all together. Again: you haven’t understood even the simplest points (r u phucking concussed, or something?). Just as a diary is not an anecdote(!) his documented thoughts & ideas on socialism reflect his explicit, public statements. Speech by Goebb: “To be a socialist means to let the ego serve the neighbour, to sacrifice self for the whole. In its deepest sense socialism equals service. The individual refrains & the commonwealth demands.” Directly mirroring his diseased thoughts.
You do realise that you’ve directly contradicted yourself? Again? You placed sweaty reliance on Umberto Eco’s “14 points of ur-fascism” (not actually the name of ‘95 essay). You must have been merely namechecking it, hoping that it supported your congealed farrago of nonsense.
This is you: “almost a century of study and analysis on nature of the 3rd reich as being fundamentally fascist.”
Whereas Eco entirely distinguishes Nat Socialism: “There was only one Nazism.” On Franco’s Spain: “We cannot label…Falangism as Nazism” and furthermore: “Nazism is fundamentally anti-Christian.” Also, the key insight of the essay is that fascism, and the underlying mode of thinking that gives rise to it, are impossible to clearly define, because they embrace many contradictory elements. “Fascism was a fuzzy totalitarianism, a collage of different…ideas, a beehive of contradictions.”
On his 14 features: “These features, cannot be organized into a system; many of them contradict each other, & are also typical of other kinds of despotism or fanaticism. But it is enough that one of them be present to allow fascism to coagulate around it.” And, “the fascist game can be played in many forms.”
You either didn’t read it, or you didn’t understand it. A distinction sans a difference. None of this helps you. There is abundant scope for crossover betw the toxic ideologies, as Eco makes clear; and as I have maintained from the beginning. You sunk yourself, and u still can’t grasp that fact.
“You don’t even understand fascism.” - You really don’t, but u seem to embody it, nonetheless. You’re the one defending genocidal regimes & their ideology here, remember. I’m saying phuck them all, wherever they come from.
“One piece of data…your underlying argument (nazism/fascism rooted in marxism and not right wing or conservative) is weak,” - And yet again, not even my argument. You still didn’t read/understand what I said. I never said that Nat Socialism is rooted specifically in Marxism. You said that. I did say that the issue of separating the ideologies is notoriously problematic (which u continue to prove). And you’re erroneously using “nazism/fascism” as mere synonyms of each other, which tells me that you can’t even echo Eco accurately.
“not compelling & wilfully ignorant of virtually all other acad understand of the nature of fascism & marxi.” - The subject (again) is correspondences betw Nat Socialism & socialism. You fail to even get the terms right!
Yeah, once again, the myriad, practical, ideological similarities were the original point. They are the argument. It was the point I was responding to from Webby. They are a central theme of the upload. (Any of this ring anything inside that hollow chamber u call a head?) Unfortunately for you, you can’t wish that - or objective reality - away.
The similarities incl, but are not restricted to: economic strategies; (disastrous) central planning; absolute state control at the expense of the individual; full-spectrum repression/surveillance; oppressive apparatus of power; materialism; utopianism; imperialistic expansionism; rejection of objective ethics & civil, political, legal & human rights; racism; distortion & weaponisation of history/fact for expedient, ideolog/propaganda purposes; hatred & rejection of liberal democ & capitalism, etc.
I offered you the strongest diff betw the ideologies, and you’re still too “obtuse” to recognise it. WT actual F? You’re just guessin’ - that’s all that’s coming across.
Toodles, ol fruit. At least, yer good for a giraffe, as u guys say.
June 17th, 2021
repeating yourself doesn’t make a thing true amigo
June 17th, 2021
Factual history is cool. Check it out! It’s never too late.
June 17th, 2021
“objective ethics”
My dude.
June 17th, 2021
Doesn’t incl your ideological genocide.
My dood.
June 17th, 2021
“ideological genocide”
You just keep them coming. Don’t stop and explain, just keep the zingers coming.
June 17th, 2021
The Holodomor, in Ukraine? The Holocaust, & wider Nat Socialist genocidal programmes? Mao’s forced famines (”Great Leap Forward” & “Cultural Revolution”)? Pol Pot’s Killing Fields?
Oh, sorry, that’s the factual historical record. I forgot, not yer “thing” in Blighty.
June 17th, 2021
Hey Caesar. The Nazis were right wing. Fascism is right wing. You’re right wing. Your culture war revisionist nonsense doesn’t wash. I hope you feel anxiety about that, i hope that keeps you up at night. Go bald.
June 17th, 2021
I’m not a disgusting brit, nor am i some deranged tankie. Yet you seem unable to comprehend any pushback against your worldview coming from anyone but. Interesting. Sad. :(
June 17th, 2021
Corrected again on, objective ethics; again on ideological genocide; corrected on each foundational issue & fact; quick! No counter argument! Pivot away!
Why are you trying to “revise” the Holodomor; the Holocaust; Mao; Pol Pot, etc?
As Eco said: “There was only one Nazism.”
Right or left wing insanity, it’s the same result. Your result, baldy?
June 17th, 2021
“disgusting brit?!” - Isn’t that racist/nationalist? Do u want to “liquidate” them, too?
Why are u unable to comprehend any pushback against your insane, ideological worldview?
June 17th, 2021
You’re ascribing a lot to me that i have not agreed to or stated or even gestured at. Almost like you’ve gone so deep into projection you don’t even know who you’re going at. They should make a biopic about you and call it ‘Boxing with Strawman” about a pub talker who just gets into petty arguments that slowly but surely devolve into attributing his opponent with responsibility for literally everything he thinks is bad.
Here is a dumb dumb thesis so you can parse it. Genocide bad. Nazis right wing. Communists left wing. Marxist ideas not in and of themselves evil. Fascist ideas in and of themselves evil. Stalin evil. Lenin evil. Hitler evil. Goebbels evil. Pol pot evil. Same brand of evil each time? No, not the same.
‘Objective ethics’ are not a thing. Objectivist ethics are a school of ethics but i’m not a subscriber nor are most people alive, even if they insist they are. I don’t see the relevance either way. Seems to be a trend. You drag in like 20 other irrelevant things to muddy the waters, seem to get frustrated half way into the rant and then just attribute all things you don’t like to people you don’t like. It’s lazy.
June 17th, 2021
WHAT IS MY WORLDVIEW OH CAESAR. TELL ME. PLEASE.
June 17th, 2021
cue some more bs about denying history from the literal revisionist. Incoherent cladhaire
June 17th, 2021
All u presented (as evidenced above) were straw men, false dichotomies, fallacious arguments from emotion; reductio ad absurdum, etc.
Yet I’m projecting.
‘Objective ethics’ are not a thing. Oy.
Have you ever heard of the Nuremberg Trials? (It’s another history thing.) Objective ethics, derived from Natural Law principles are what its jurisdiction was founded upon. Nothing else offered a solid foundation. National Positive Law was clearly out, because it was seen to operate clear injustices & atrocities, in the 30s & 40s.
June 17th, 2021
You citing natural law is the funniest thing yet.
Natural law. From God?
June 17th, 2021
No, they’re all evil.
“Marxist ideas not in and of themselves evil.”
You’ve clearly never read Marx.
The ideological programme could not be achieved without “Concentrated terror” as he explicitly said himself. Well, we certainly had a surfeit of that sleazy garbage. You want more of it, do you?
You’re the one who started arguing with me, you clown.
June 17th, 2021
“WHAT IS MY WORLDVIEW” - Well, we may derive it from the genocidal ideologies which you yourself chose to defend. And it doesn’t look too pretty…
June 17th, 2021
You’ve clearly never visited a coop. They’re definitely vile dens of marxist vice for sure, producing goods and all that. Oh yes. Meanwhile, we’ve got geniuses like you making appeals to natural law. Keep the langers away from your prostate boys, its against natural law! Don’t even look at a condom! Natural law is it?
June 17th, 2021
Where did i defend genocidal regimes. Citation required.
June 17th, 2021
You’ve never heard of/don’t understand Natural Law either?
It’s what the courts based their jurisdiction upon (they had to refer to Aquinas’ articulation of it).
That’s how the then novel offence of “Crimes against Humanity” was derived & discovered.
Natural Law is what human rights law (& wider rights law) is all based upon.
When we refer to “justice” we are referring to Natural Law, not positive law. How else do we make the determination that a law/act/event is unjust, in & of itself? This is truly basic stuff.
June 17th, 2021
Mr Aquinas, I bid you adieu.
June 17th, 2021
Appeals to natural law are fkn absurd and i cannot believe you would cite it. You can’t imagine a notion of justice in this world without an appeal ‘natural law’? I can’t. Just ridiculous. Yes natural law, the right of the tiger to prey on the goat yes? Natural law! Bums were made for pooing, keep the boys out now! Natural law!
June 17th, 2021
Please tell me you mean a co-op, and not an actual coop? Human beings have always beneficially co-operated, traded, and utilised markets. No need to stigmatise natural human behaviour with genocidal ideological systems & regimes.
Aren’t you defending genocidal Marxist & socialist regimes, and saying how “different” & “not the same” they were to the other genocidal regimes? Thick back, y’know, to everything you actually said yourself.
June 17th, 2021
You seriously don’t understand Natural/positive law jurisdiction? How & where are human rights & rights law/language derived? (Hint: it’s not your prostate, although you seem to get your all your other ideas from that locale.)
June 17th, 2021
You saw what i was saying as a denial of genocide. They’re literally different systems, doing different things for different reason. If the end result is mass death that is a horrible thing and to be condemned, but the holocaust and the cambodian killing fields occurred for different reasons in different places with different rationales and your inability to grasp that is frankly embarassing mr Aquinas. Natural law! Objective morality! Silly man.
June 17th, 2021
And note, the acknowledgment that these are different things with different contexts is not in and of itself a defence of those things. Jesus wept boy. Figure it out.
June 17th, 2021
When we refer to “justice” what’s our source for that? It clearly pre-exists & is prior to textual or legislative sources; indeed, these sources instead refer to it?
When Plato, Aristotle, jurists, constitutional lawyers, etc. refer to the domain & jurisdiction of Natural Law as opposed & distinct from to positive law, in simple terms now, what do you think they mean?
June 17th, 2021
Why do u insist on learning nothing from the disgusting, failed ideologies of the past? “Let’s try again! Kill the rest of ‘em!”
Why are elementary ideas (such as, hilariously, Natural Law) & established facts impossible for u to comprehend?
June 17th, 2021
You’re saying to me is that there can’t be human rights without god and conflating the project of communism with what i want to see in the world for no reason other than you’re battering at imagined people. You’re a silly person and probably should have died young. Theres still time.
June 17th, 2021
‘muh established facts like objective morality and the obvious divine origins of all justice and the evil of market socialism and equivocation between every despotic regime ever in function form and intent’
fkn lol.
June 17th, 2021
“If the end result is mass death” - what the phuck do you mean “If?!” You know no history whatsoever. That is humiliating.
On Natural/positive law: have you ever read an introductory philosophy text, such as Bertrand Russell? Or even, uh, seen a youtube video with shmart lads talking? Even wikipedia? I’ll get u a link, but it’s your job to understand basic concepts, baldy.
June 17th, 2021
Riddle me this mr aquinas, is it wrong for someone to play with their prostate?
June 17th, 2021
My god you are so smug. I am familiar with philosophical frameworks. Again, you attributing ignorance and attitudes to me that i’m literally not expressing. It’s sad. It’s really sad.
June 17th, 2021
Appeals to natural law. What next. The divine right of fkn kings? Manifest destiny? You’re not an ayn rand guy are you? My god.
June 17th, 2021
“I am familiar with philosophical frameworks” - You are self-evidently not. You don’t understand Natural/positive law, or rights frameworks. You’re making everything up.
No, I think you’re playing with your prostate right now?
June 17th, 2021
I’m done. I really can’t. You aren’t worth it. You’re a ridiculous gowl and you should neck yourself before you actually harm the world any more. Man making appeals to natural law and justice on a fkn torrent site in the comments of a book he refuses to read. You’re a pig of a person. and i hope you die alone in the woods.
June 17th, 2021
Back to your coop & lonely prostate. There to burn books. Try readin’ ‘em!
June 17th, 2021
“try reading books” - man who refuses to read book
June 17th, 2021
He thinks Nat Law automatic implies God. No derivation. And when we refer rights, the framework? Like all else - too complex for ya.
Judging from your cognitive inability, u may have died already.
You’ve “read” this bk, have ya? You’ve read Marx?
June 17th, 2021
:( look at the sad man
June 17th, 2021
I’m lookin’ - and it’s not an attractive display, toady - renowned author of the monograph “Natural Law implications & philosophical perplexity of prostate manipulation, coop edition.”
June 17th, 2021
So smug and verbose and yet saying nothing.
June 17th, 2021
You’re terminally online. sad
June 17th, 2021
Kill yourself.
June 17th, 2021
“You’re terminally online” - Basic self-awareness wholly absent there, my unhappy troll chap.
“Kill yourself” - Clear indication that you’ve, uh, “won” the exchange, eh? A “victor’s” sentiment? Your prostate would even have to hide away in humiliation.
June 18th, 2021
It’s funny that people who argue for free healthcare , don’t move to Cuba or Venezuela, or wherever they have free healthcare.
I wonder why everyone from socialist countries want to move to those crazy capitalist ones. Don’t they know that there is no free healthcare there?
July 11th, 2021
Yet another fiction novel claiming to be nonfiction. These books, including this one, never have an citation annex or referenced sources to back up their claims. They just release their emotions and feelings onto the page without any evidence or study to back it up. Typical.
October 7th, 2021
“There is no difference between communism and socialism, except in the means of achieving the same ultimate end: communism proposes to enslave men by force, socialism – by vote. It is merely the difference between murder and suicide.”
— Ayn Rand
October 13th, 2021
I’m downloading this thanks to the spicy comment section.
Chill out guys
April 11th, 2023
The laziest, most shallow piece of pro corporate propaganda I’ve ever had the misfortune of listening to.
October 8th, 2024
Great book.
February 22nd, 2026
Longest comment section on abb :)
Thanks for the upload
Add a comment (please log in before commenting)