The Solution: Small Government and Free Enterprise

[sandorski]

Empty Slogans seem to have become the Promised Land.

 

[manimal]

He thinks the 19th century economics and society were just peachy. You know, the Cowboy Way is the law of the land.

Practical theory vs Theory in practice....



Take an impractical theory-privatized social security for instance-and apply it in practice. What is the outcome?


Take the outcome of the recent financial collapse, bad, now take the recent financial collapse and apply privatized social security. The best case scenario is that payments drop considerably for the short term and return to current levels after a protracted time frame. In the short term the seniors would eat cat food, lose their homes, cash out severely undervalued investments instead of taking the long view...

 

[BoberFett]

Empty Slogans seem to have become the Promised Land.

Hey, it works for the Democrats.

 

[PJABBER]

I see a lot of abuses from the late 19th and the early 20th century being posted as a response to the call for a smaller government and a re-invigoration of private enterprise.

Let us consider one of the most "successful" attempts at big government that was contemporary to this time frame and the actual costs in human life that were incurred. At another time we can address the economic productivity failures that were also so characteristic.

I don't think anyone can argue that communism, in all of its "progressive" variants, is the modern practical antithesis to small government and private enterprise. It posits central economic control, full regulation, the subsuming of individual enterprise, the dominance of the state in all matters of importance.

Communism, and all of its big government variants, was tried in a number of different countries all over the world over a very long time, an eternity for many millions of people. I can comment on the working conditions that were found in each of these places, but this post would then run to dozens of pages.

Why don't we just recount these places where a strong government and a virtually non-existent private sector were characteristics. The death toll that strong central governments imposed in trying to mold their population to the theoretical ideal, and utterly failing in the end, is beyond full comprehension.

Joseph Stalin, the first General Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, was quite the wit in describing the joy of the system he helped propagate.

One of his best -

What would happen if capital succeeded in smashing the Republic of Soviets? There would set in an era of the blackest reaction in all the capitalist and colonial countries, the working class and the oppressed peoples would be seized by the throat, the positions of international communism would be lost.

Communist Body Count

Scott Manning
December 4, 2006

The following estimates represent citizens killed or starved to death by their own Communist governments since 1918. These numbers do not include war dead. The governments are sorted by body count (highest to lowest).

All numbers are mid-estimates.

While this list is as complete as I have been able to determine, it is evolving. Some numbers are incomplete and there are still five Communist countries that have the potential to kill more of their citizens. Over the next year, each government will be profiled in detail on this website.

A detailed bibliography is listed at the end of this page.

Communist Body Count: 149,469,610

Rank

1. People's Republic of China

Body Count: 73,237,000
1949-Present (57+ years and counting)
​

R.J. Rummel originally estimated China's body count between between the years of 1949-1987 to be 35,236,000 (Rummel 1994). This excluded 38,000,000 million that died of famine during the Great Leap Forward. After the release of Mao: The Unknown Story, Rummel became convinced that the Chinese government was directly responsible for the famine, thus increasing his original estimate by 38,000,000 (Rummel 2005). 1,000 was added for Tienanmen Square in 1989 (Courtois 1999).

2. Union of Soviet Socialist Republics
​

Body Count: 58,627,000
1922-1991 (69 years)

The body count only covers the years 1923-1987 (Rummel 1996).

3. Russian Soviet Federated Socialist Republic
​

Body Count: 3,284,000
1918-1922 (4 years)

This body count does not include the 6,210,000 killed in the civil war (Rummel 1996).

4. Democratic People's Republic of Korea
​

Body Count: 3,163,000
1948-Present (58+ years and counting)

1,663,000 is attributed between 1948-1987 excluding the Korean War (Rummel 1994). 2,500,000 is the mid-estimate for those who starved to death between 1995-1998 (U.S. Committee for Human Rights in North Korea 2006).

5. Cambodia
Body Count: 2,627,000
1975-1987 (12 years)

The body count estimate is complete (Rummel 1994). The offical country name was Democratic Kampuchea during Pol Pot's reign and then known as People's Republic of Kampuchea afterwards.

6. Democratic Republic of Afghanistan
​

Body Count: 1,750,000
1978-1992 (14 years)

The body count estimate is complete (Courtois 1999).

7. Vietnam
​

Body Count: 1,670,000
1975-Present (30+ years and counting)

The body count covers the years 1945-1987 for Vietnam/North Vietnam and excludes 1,062,000 from the Vietnam War (Rummel 1994).

8. People's Democratic Republic of Ethiopia
​

Body Count: 1,343,610
1974-1991 (17 years)

The body count includes 10,000 political assasinations during 1977-1978, 1,000 children killed in 1977, 110 massacred in an Orthodox church in 1975, 80,000 during the civil war between 1978-1980, 250,000 that died in 1982 through Transit Camps, and 2,500 killed in a bombing raid (Courtois 1999). Another 1,000,000 is added for the famine during 1984-1985 (BBC News 2000).

9. Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia
​

Body Count: 1,072,000
1945-1992 (47 years)

The body count only covers the years 1945-1992 excluding 100,000 from the Tito Partisans between 1941-1944 (Rummel 1994).

10. Chinese Soviet Republic
​

Body Count: 700,000
1931-1934 (3 years)

The body count only includes the Jiangxi and Fujian provinces (Chang 2005). Although Mozambique has 700,000 to its name, the Chinese Soviet Republic produced more bodies in a shorter time period and the estimate is low.

11. People's Republic of Mozambique
​

Body Count: 700,000
1975-1990 (15 years)

100,000 civilians murdered between 1986 and mid-1988 (Young 1991) and 600,000 starved to death between 1975-1985 (Courtois 1999).

12. Socialist Republic of Romania
​

Body Count: 435,000
1947-1989 (42 years)

The body count only covers the years 1947-1987 (Rummel 1997).

13. People's Republic of Bulgaria
​

Body Count: 222,000
1946-1990 (44 years)

The body count only covers the years 1948-1987 (Rummel 1997).

14. People's Republic of Angola
​

Body Count: 125,000
1975-1992 (17 years)

The body count only covers the years 1975-1987 (Rummel 1997).

15. Mongolian People's Republic
​

Body Count: 100,000
1924-1992 (68 years)

The body count only covers the years 1924-1987 (Rummel 1997).

16. People's Socialist Republic of Albania
​

Body Count: 100,000
1946-1991 (45 years)

The body count only covers the years 1944-1987 (Rummel 1997).

17. Republic of Cuba
Body Count: 73,000
1961-Present (45+ years and counting)

The body count only covers the years 1959-1987 (Rummel 1997).

18. German Democratic Republic
Body Count: 70,000
1949-1990 (41 years)

The body count only covers the years 1948-1987 (Rummel 1997).

19. Socialist Republic of Czechoslovakia
Body Count: 65,000
1948-1990 (42 years)

The body count only covers the years 1948-1968 (Rummel 1997).

20. Lao People's Democratic Republic
Body Count: 56,000
1975-Present (31+ years and counting)

The body count only covers the years 1975-1987 excluding 47,000 war dead (Rummel 1997).

21. Hungarian People's Republic
Body Count: 27,000
1949-1989 (40 years)

The body count only covers the years 1948-1987 (Rummel 1997).

22. People's Republic of Poland
Body Count: 22,000
1948-1989 (41 years)

The body count only covers the years 1948-1987 (Rummel 1997). Excludes 1,585,000 from ethnic cleansing between 1945-1950 (Rummel 1994).

23. People's Democratic Republic of Yemen
Body Count: 1,000
1969-1990 (21 years)

The body count only covers the years 1969-1987 (Rummel 1997).

References

BBC News (2000, April 6). Flashback 1984: portrait of a famine. Retrieved May 7, 2006, from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/703958.stm

Chang, Jung, & Halliday, Jon (2005). Mao: the unknown story

(1st American ed.). New York: Alfred A Knopf.

Courtois, S., Werth, N., Panne, J., Paczkowski, A., Bartosek, K., & Margolin, J. (1999). The black book of Communism: crimes, terror, repression

. United States: Harvard University Press.

Rummel, R. J. (1994). Death by government

. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.

Rummel, R. J. (1996). Lethal politics: Soviet genocide and mass murder since 1917

(1st paperback ed.). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.

Rummel, R. J. (2005, November 20). Reevaluating China's democide to be 73,000,000. Retrieved April 5, 2006, from http://freedomspeace.blogspot.com/2005/11/reevaluating-chinas-democide-to-be.html

Rummel, R. J. (1997). Statistics of democide: genocide and mass murder since 1900

. Charlottesville, Virginia: Transaction Publishers.

U.S. Committee for Human Rights in North Korea (2006). Failure to protect: a call for the UN Security Council to act in North Korea. United States: DLA Piper.

Young, Lance S. (1991). Mozambique's sixteen-year bloody civil war. Retrieved November 1, 2006, from http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/report/1991/YLS.htm

 

[Bateluer]

Yes, the Iraq war was a massive failure of small government...

Err, no. GWB doubled the size of the government over his 8 year presidency, thats not small government. And a BIG reason why people are so infuriated with their government today, both parties.

 

[manimal]

I see a lot of abuses from the late 19th and the early 20th century being posted as a response to the call for a smaller government and a re-invigoration of private enterprise.
[/I]

So any dead, oppressed, exploited, tortured, and otherwise are justified if their less then your enemy? This is the kind of thinking that led us to the current international political landscape.

Veiled justification smells like veiled justification...

 

[PJABBER]

So any dead, oppressed, exploited, tortured, and otherwise are justified if their less then your enemy? This is the kind of thinking that led us to the current international political landscape.

Veiled justification smells like veiled justification...

If you watch the video referenced in the OP you will see the link to my last post.

If you want to highlight the problems of capitalist societies, then you should also be aware of the actual results in centrally controlled economies.

These are not societies that exist(ed) in some theoretical vacuum. These are societies that chose to try the alternative.

The deaths are real. They are the price that these societies paid for the chance to experience central planning.

Are these extreme examples? Not at all. They are typical examples and they are from all over the world.

 

[SamurAchzar]

Big government vs. small government is just the product of the question, "what does the country get to regulate". Answer that and you'll know what kind of government you need.

 

[OrByte]

wow that video is horrible.

The idiot starts out with the classic persecution complex perfected by Sarah (Lamestream Media) Palin.

and it goes downhill from there.

The idiot in the video frames the "progressive" agenda in such a way that even a Progessive would find offensive. Who the HELL wants an "ALL POWERFUL STATE,that thinks it is entitled to as much of YOUR money as it wants, and can make whatever laws it sees fit to impose with or without your consent" Come on OP....SERIOUSLY!?! Name me one Progressive on the Ballot in November anywhere in the Country that would stand up and advocate for a Government like that? its bullshit.

OH and the US can NEVER become communist RUSSIA, or CHINA, or CUBA. It is a classic strategy of the wingnuts to instill this fear that the USA, under the control of Democrats, will turn into Communist Russia.

That is just plain stupid and you will win no arguments with such ridiculous remarks.

Its a fallacy of association and slippery slope, it defies logical reasoning (that the political, economic, and social circumstances in current day America can ever be analyzed to the point where such conclusions can be made with any degree of certainty)

Of course, if you ask a WINGNUT about it...they all know for sure! In the case of this OP (and the idiot in the video) there are soo many absolutes within their argument, that they bury themselves with their complete bullshit. I am not surprised this OP falls for this melodramatic nonsense in the video...the video is made specifically for mental lightweights.

 

[PJABBER]

OH and the US can NEVER become communist RUSSIA, or CHINA, or CHILE. It is a classic strategy of the wingnuts to instill this fear that the USA, under the control of Democrats, will turn into Communist Russia.

That is just plain stupid and you will win no arguments with such ridiculous remarks.

Its a fallacy of association and slippery slope, it defies logical reasoning (that the political, economic, and social circumstances in current day America can ever be analyzed to the point where such conclusions can be made with any degree of certainty)

I listed many nations besides the two Russian states. Perhaps at some point you can study the history of these countries? You might be surprised to see what their governmental and economic systems were, what economic conditions existed before they embarked on their experiments in strong central governance and centrally planned/regulated economies.

No society will exist in perpetuity. Nor will America. My intent is to perpetuate the American experiment for as long as possible. I do this because I have seen the antithesis up close and personal. It is not ancient history to me. And it should not be ancient history to you, either.

The "progressives" and the liberals here have stated over and over again that the America that has prospered by being a limited government + private enterprise nation is no longer a valid proposition. They claim modern times require a government that is involved in every aspect of life, for our own good. They advocate a strong government grow even stronger at the same time as they argue for the suppression of the private enterprise impulse. They do this for any number of reasons they consider of benefit to American society. How is this different than those who advocated the same in any of those societies I list above?

"Progressives" and foolish liberals ignore and summarily dismiss the examples of those societies that have chosen the path they advocate for so vehemently. Like you, they say it can't happen here.

I argue the opposite and offer philosophical and practical examples to buttress my case.

I challenge you to pick any of the centrally planned/managed societies that have existed and still exist and detail how their choice has benefited anyone other than a small elite that lives on the bodies of those they control.

 

[OrByte]

I listed many nations besides the two Russian states. Perhaps at some point you can study the history of these countries? You might be surprised to see what their governmental and economic systems were, what economic conditions existed before they embarked on their experiments in strong central governance and centrally planned/regulated economies.

No society will exist in perpetuity. Nor will America. My intent is to perpetuate the American experiment for as long as possible. I do this because I have seen the antithesis up close and personal. It is not ancient history to me. And it should not be ancient history to you, either.

The "progressives" and the liberals here have stated over and over again that the America that has prospered by being a limited government + private enterprise nation is no longer a valid proposition. They claim modern times require a government that is involved in every aspect of life, for our own good. They advocate a strong government grow even stronger at the same time as they argue for the suppression of the private enterprise impulse. They do this for any number of reasons they consider of benefit to American society. How is this different than those who advocated the same in any of those societies I list above?

"Progressives" and foolish liberals ignore and summarily dismiss the examples of those societies that have chosen the path they advocate for so vehemently. Like you, they say it can't happen here.

I argue the opposite and offer philosophical and practical examples to buttress my case.

I challenge you to pick any of the centrally planned/managed societies that have existed and still exist and detail how their choice has benefited anyone other than a small elite that lives on the bodies of those they control.

ok. So you are saying that if we continue down the Progressive path, that America will see 10's maybe 100s of millions die...like the guy in the video says right?

I mean, cover it up with as much rhetorical bullshit as you want, thats what your argument boils down to.

LOL!!!


don't you think thats being just a weee bit dramatic? maybe just a little...extreme?

The "progressives" and the liberals here have stated over and over again that the America that has prospered by being a limited government + private enterprise nation is no longer a valid proposition. They claim modern times require a government that is involved in every aspect of life, for our own good.

who claims that? do you have names? maybe some quotes?

OP, you just like to type.....maybe in real life, you like to listen to yourself speak. I have to thank you because it's very entertaining...but ultimately it's shallow shrill partisanship, and I always have to come back to this point, whenever you are involved...

no one takes you seriously.

 

[OrByte]

No society will exist in perpetuity

I totally agree with that. But you don't see me doing my best Chicken Little impersonation in the hopes to sway mental midgets to vote on my side of the aisle? Like this dope in the video you linked. Like you try to do at every opportunity.

I argue the opposite and offer philosophical and practical examples to buttress my case.

No, you don't actually. If anything you wax poetic about your friends, and your high profile lifestyle in DC...and then link us to wingnut bullshit.

 

[PJABBER]

no one takes you seriously.

You take me seriously. You go out of your way to post in most every thread I have started here. That's as serious as it gets on a discussion board.

 

[PJABBER]

No, you don't actually. If anything you wax poetic about your friends, and your high profile lifestyle in DC...and then link us to wingnut bullshit.

I live a quiet life in immediate proximity to the nation's capital where the people you see in the news are my next door neighbors.

I do admit that I can be poetic at times. Let me see if I can think one up for you in response to your next personal attack! :awe:

 

[OrByte]

You take me seriously. You go out of your way to post in most every thread I have started here. That's as serious as it gets on a discussion board.

I take you serious enough to thank you for your entertainment.

I look forward to many more of your posts!!

 

[OrByte]

I live a quiet life in immediate proximity to the nation's capital where the people you see in the news are my next door neighbors.

I do admit that I can be poetic at times. Let me see if I can think one up for you in response to your next personal attack! :awe:

For OPs that are full of logical fallacy and with no substance, I'm sorry...there is nothing left to do but provide personal attacks.



You can handle it though. You are made of sturdy stuff!

 

[PJABBER]

You can handle it though. You are made of sturdy stuff!

I am not as sturdy as Munchkin, who offers you a little poem.

Munchkin Reciting A Poem About Government

 

[sMiLeYz]

THIS IS AMERICUH, LOVE IT OR LEAVE IT.

 

[ElFenix]

Practical theory vs Theory in practice....



Take an impractical theory-privatized social security for instance-and apply it in practice. What is the outcome?


Take the outcome of the recent financial collapse, bad, now take the recent financial collapse and apply privatized social security. The best case scenario is that payments drop considerably for the short term and return to current levels after a protracted time frame. In the short term the seniors would eat cat food, lose their homes, cash out severely undervalued investments instead of taking the long view...

i really need to do the math on this...

 

[Red Dawn]

Small government would work if the US were to be broken up into smaller autonomous countries bound in a Federation. Of course the South East probably wouldn't fair to well but the West, North East and Texas probably would do great.

 

[zsdersw]

We are facing a significant choice this election cycle.

No, it is not the choice between Republicans and Democrats.

It is the choice between a large and controlling government that will intrude itself into every aspect of life and a small government that sticks to the essentials we need government for and private enterprise.

Actually, no, we're not facing that choice this election cycle. This election, like every other, will merely be a choice between which set of rhetoric and spin sounds better to enough of us to put someone in (or out of) office.

What has yet to be demonstrated and will, in my estimation, never happen is significant action to bring "small government" off of the pages of theory and into the spotlight of reality.

Anyone counting on the Tea Party and their "favorite sons" to end the era of big and oppressive government is placing way too much faith in a system that has repeatedly demonstrated why it deserves none.

 

[bamacre]

He thinks the 19th century economics and society were just peachy. You know, the Cowboy Way is the law of the land.

The 19th century wasn't a paradise for anyone anywhere. But it was capitalism that got us out. Child labor, bad working conditions, all those things were common not just here but everywhere during those days. Your implication that we somehow lose all of our progress and modern technology by going to a sounder monetary system and having less regulation stifling new businesses and innovation is absurd. Freedom and free markets aren't yesterday's thinking, these are modern ideas. It's your ideas of central and fractional reserve banking that are old ideas, they're so old we don't even know how old they are. But the bankers love them, so it's no surprise you do, too.

 

[Ancalagon44]

Small government and free enterprise would be nice, except that neither of the two major parties actually believes in them. Both of them are in bed with Big Business, and want to change the law to suit Big Business at your own expense. Both of them are quite fine with expanding government as long as it suits the goals of both the party and their investors.

The voting public takes last place in importance.

So, nice idea in practice, politics make it unworkable.

 

[bamacre]

So did slavery, terribly abused immigrant labor, child labor, 90% elder poverty, no unions, and many other terrible things we don't want to bring back that provide 'cheap labor'.

Can you tell me what the child labor statistics looked like when child labor laws came into existence? How about 20 years prior?

Do you know why we had child labor? Do you think we just had a lot of bad parents in those days? What about outside the US where child labor is still abundant? Think it's because of a bunch of bad parents? No, they work because they have to support the family, because their parents don't make enough money. And that's why we had an abundance of child labor in our past. Regarding slavery, I'm not sure why it's relevant here. Slavery wasn't the result of free markets, that's absurd, slavery had been around a long time before that. Slavery was the result of ignorance and tyranny. Slavery is an idea in opposition to the basic principles of freedom, that you own your life, your body, and the fruits of your labor. Of course, you Craig, are also in opposition to those ideas. You want to manage my life, what goes into my body, and certainly don't believe I own the fruits of my labor. Of course you don't see your ideas as tyrannical, because it's all for my own good, right?

 

[werepossum]

It seems to me like Republicans and Democrats both want to control certain parts of people's lives...just different parts.

True, and with a buttload of overlap too.

I too think government is far too large, powerful and intrusive. A majority of people think this. However a majority does not agree on which parts need to go. Tea Party folks think it's perfectly fine for the government to decide who can and can't marry; the progressives think government must allow (even subsidize) all behavior (except dissent with progressive policies and opinions), but also thinks that government has a perfect right to take whatever portion of your labor it wishes. Under either scenario we are not free beings. Unless and until we can build a majority that agrees on an individual's rights over government and what limits should be placed on government (rather than what limits government should place on individuals), we are screwed. I suggest the best foundation would be to move to the FairTax, eliminating the federal government's ability to choose winners and losers, to take something from one group to curry favor with another, larger group of voters, and to reward or punish using the tax code (what bill ever goes through without something to reward a particular company or industry?) Then we all give up laws and regulations against things that offend us, but don't actually materially harm us. At that point we should be able to look intelligently at government and decide what needs to be regulated (and to what extent) and what needs to be free.