Socialism. Ain't So Bad?

 

"Rent control, no cops, city grocery stores, U-Haul trucks everywhere!"

    Much is being made about the probability, nay likelihood, of Zohran Mamdani being elected mayor of New York City.  This would be a disaster for the citizens of our largest city.  So much so that, God help me, I’m hoping Andrew Cuomo gets the gig.

I'd prefer this guy, though.
Although that hat.

    Mamdani calls himself a Democratic Socialist which, in my opinion, is an effort to woo impressionable skulls full of mush to his side.

    “Hey!  He’s using the word ‘Democrat!’  How bad could he be?”

    The answer?  Very bad.

    Ever hear of the “Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea”?  You know, North Korea.

    Yeah.

"No food for you!  Me?  I got pwenty."

    Since I didn’t want to go off half-cocked, 

"Hush your mouth!"

I looked up the definition of “Socialism” in the Merriam-Webster dictionary.  Then, just for fun, I looked up “communism.”

    Incidentally, the italics?  Yeah, those are mine.   

Socialism:

1.  Any of various egalitarian economic and political theories or movements advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods.

2.  A system of society or group living in which there is no private property.

 3.  A system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state.

Communism:

1.   A system in which goods are owned in common and are available to all as needed.

2.   A theory advocating elimination of private property.

     To me, the two look very similar.  In fact, our good friends at MW state that “communism” is a advance form of socialism.  Although, I really can’t tell the difference.  Other than it’s bad.

     As a theory, socialism would be an outstanding way to go.  In fact, it would be utopia.  “From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.”  That sounds vaguely familiar.

"Ahem."

     Can’t argue the basic fairness of that.

     The only problem is that socialism is not restricted to a laboratory.  As a way of life, it will be soured by human beings.  And human beings are notorious for being wildly self-serving.  Some (most) people will work for the betterment of their neighbors.  They believe in the family of nations.  These are good people.

     However, there are those who will question why they should have to earn what they receive from Uncle Sugar if the government is just going to hand them cash, food, housing, and a way of life.

     “Hey, let the suckers work for their money.  I’m good.”

     So, what was once a cart hauled by many eventually becomes a cart loaded with many lazy slack asses pulled by a few.

     Or, as Margaret Thatcher said, “The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other peoples money.”

"Or, as I told those punks at Jamestown, "He who shall not work, shall not eat.' 
Then, I bagged Pocahontas.  According to Disney."

Wrong Pocahontas.

     Are there people who need a hand-up?  Unquestionably.  Are there also those who will just sit on their ass, waiting for the next government check?  Absolutely.

     These are the people who laud Zohran Mamdani as the savior of Gotham.

     God help them.  

     Because this Gotham doesn't have Batman.

Even a sucky one.