Not a member? Join for FREE here. Existing members login below:

It Is S.A.D.: The Leftist Brain Exposed

Middle 1/3. If he or she does they will fail. Such a candidate has to go for the automatic
1/3. That is they have to declare they are Leftist or Conservative. Then the trick is to try
and pick up enough of the others to win. Sometimes there is a lot of misleading going on.
The most notorious example today is Candidate Obama, saying he would not raise taxes
on certain folks, and he represented Change. Somehow he failed to mention the Change
was to Socialism. He won partly because his opponent refused to say or do the things to
keep his 1/3 in line.
Socialism/communism are names given to the Leftist of today. There is a slight
difference in the two. In Socialism there can exist private property. In Communism, at
least in theory, no private property beyond your personal effects can exist. In other words
Communism is simply the ultimate togetherness.
The concept and definition of Socialism as we know it did not exist until well into the
Industrial Revolution. There is no agreement as to the exact year the Industrial
Revolution began, but it is agreed it started in England and Scotland and then spread to
Europe and America. It began sometime in the 1700s and ended in the late 1800s. What
caused it were the major changes in agriculture, manufacturing, mining, and transport.
The change had its linchpin in harnessing energy to multiply a man‘s labor and change
materials from one form to another. It was not wind, hydro, or solar power that supplied
the energy, but coal and gas. Fast, efficient, and affordable.
During these dramatic changes in how we did things, cultural shock took its toll. No
longer were we land bound. We had to gather in places of industry and travel became
common.
What happened to our families and the general conditions of labor were extraordinary
and certainly never experienced before.
There was no history to fall back on. There was no real comparison to ancient empires,
such as the Roman, Greek, Egyptian, or Assyrian. This was different and many strains
and sprains occurred. Certainly one of them was the relationship between the business
owner and the worker. The owner capitalized and invented the business, and developed
the network of supply and demand. The workers came to make it happen. Their goals
were not the same and the advantages and disadvantages were likewise askew. In some
places the conditions of the worker were ignored by the owners. Many times the workers
lack of cohesiveness and togetherness was taken advantage of by some.
In one place a new concept grew where the owners would act like government (there was
very little Government in those days) and provide better conditions for the workers. Now
this should not surprise you. Some owners would surely realize that if the workers were
happier they would work better.
Understand government in those days did not provide much oversight, sanitation, etc.
Governmental responsibility seemed to end with the fall of the Roman Dictatorships. If
workers were to have a better place to live, raise a family, educate the kids etc., the
Governments of the 1700s were not going to do it.
Private enterprise was the only one which could, financially and through leadership.
Remove