How can a rational person believe in a “man in the sky”? How can modern people, with all our scientific knowledge, still believe in miracles, resurrection, and all the other incredible stories of religion without scientific proof?
Why pray, follow religious teachings, or dedicate your life to an elusive God instead of simply enjoying yourself as much as possible?
When the first Covid-19 cases emerged in Europe a year ago, I considered myself lucky to be in the Netherlands, a country where the authorities were organized and sensible, presumably well-prepared to handle such a crisis - or so I thought.
There's a shorter section-by-section version on the Why Socialism Fails mini-site.
Socialism still appeals to many today, despite the dozens of countries it has ruined over the past century. The promise of a better world, with less suffering and more fairness, is attractive to any decent, kind human being. Mesmerized by wonderful visions of prosperity and equality, it’s easy to overlook the hidden implications of socialist policies and disregard the warnings of those whose countries went through the same deception before.
Some claim immigration is good and shouldn’t be restricted, others that it’s bad and should be stopped. I think it’s hormetic. As a Romanian living in the Netherlands, I’m currently an immigrant. And I believe that understanding the benefits as well as the risks of immigration is essential if we want to prevent repeating predictable tragedies in our beloved Europe.
Without transistors, the world would look very different. There would be no internet, no personal computers, no pacemakers, no satellites, and generally no electronic devices as we know them. The transistor is perhaps the single most important invention of the 20th century. With their modest appearance and little known functionality, they impact almost every aspect of our lives.
Could it be that people fear the centralization of power in the hands of those who like to impose their view of progress on others? Could it be that some dare to think lower taxes and deregulation generate economic growth better than ever-expanding government programs? Could it be that the more individuals and organizations are dependent on state funding, the greater the risk of economic collapse and dictatorship? Could it be that recent history shows how the marxist obsession with dividing people in oppressors and oppressed and seeing everywhere inequalities that need to be corrected using state power not only fuels social tensions and violence, but leads to disaster?
There seems to be a widespread belief that automation destroys jobs, makes most people poorer, increases income inequality, and ultimately hurts both the economy and society. This belief is not new. The Luddites were 19th-century textile workers who destroyed new machinery they perceived as a threat to their jobs. But it is perhaps surprising that after centuries of technological advancements, some still fall for the Luddite fallacy—the conviction that innovation has harmful effects on employment.
The German blunders
In the spring of 1915, a party of twenty was leaving Constantinople on a dangerous mission. Led by German super-spy Oskar von Niedermayer and diplomat Werner Otto von Hentig, their goal was to survive a hazardous trip to Kabul without being intercepted and to convince the Emir to rally Afghanistan to the Central Powers’ side by attacking the British Raj in India1. Their mission was part of a larger World War I plan that the Germans pursued relentlessly, aiming to subvert British authority by calling for nothing less than a pan-Islamic jihad. Numerous efforts were made in this direction, including running a reeducation camp near Berlin for muslim POWs, where they were being taught to wage offensive jihad against Britain and France while living in relative luxury, to be then recruited into the German Army2.
In the 1770s, renowned watchmaker Pierre Jaquet-Droz created The Writer, an automaton that can write a text on a piece of paper. The mechanical boy uses a goose feather, which he inks from time to time while his head turns towards the ink pot, then shakes his wrist to prevent the ink from spilling, and continues the phrase, with his eyes following the text. It’s a 6,000-part engineering masterpiece, but that’s not all: a set of replaceable cams define each letter, making the machine programmable and allowing for any text to be written. The Writer is considered an ancestor of the modern-day computer.
The Left is good. It stands for progress and equality for all. The Left is youthful, kind, and well-intended. It’s rebellious, smart, and cool. The Left doesn’t believe in incentives, efficiency, free prices, or supply and demand. Instead, it thinks the economy can be nicely planned. It fights discrimination, except against its critics and the prosperous, who deserve to be silenced, plundered, and punished. The Left promises to impose perfectly self-defined fairness and social justice, while not judging or harming anyone. It’s intellectually and morally superior, and the times it ends up controlled by ruthless, incompetent dictators are just unfortunate derailments from its bright path. The Left aims to eliminate social hierarchies, through violence if needed, because it doesn’t believe performance has to be rewarded. Instead, it promises jobs and quality education, housing and healthcare, for free, to everyone. It is a way towards a glorious future, “a brotherhood of man.”