All men are NOT created equal

Zohran Mamdani said that Egypt was robbed in their World Cup match when they played against Argentina. He said if he was in charge, he would distribute all goals equally.

Although a joke, on the Gutfeld show, the sentiments are those of a true socialist, in the belief that anything less than equal outcomes constitutes an injustice.

But here’s the conundrum. How do you end up with equal outcomes when you don’t start off with equal abilities? Like it or not, each of us is endowed by our Creator with unique and diversified talents, competence, aptitude and gifts that can neither be shared nor minimized.

That is because everyone’s gene pool is different. Some gifts and talents are inherited from previous generations, while some abilities are the result of learned skills, perfected over time, the result of hard work, practice and great investment.  

But it’s not only our skills and talents that make each of us singularly unequaled. It is also our physical appearance, our personality and interpersonal relationships which set us apart. Those qualities often determine the rise to leadership, popularity and access to opportunity, not always offered to others. 

The smartest and brightest among us are immediately noticed, placed in a special category that affords advantage. Conversely, socialism advocates for the collective, preferring a system where no one has an edge and everyone benefits equally, either through state regulation or community-based cooperatives. 

But as someone said, humans are the wrong species to pull off that kind of philosophy, because no two individuals are alike. There are reasons that people are thin, rich, good-looking and successful, and that means the opposite is also true.

While our life situation can improve by exercising discipline through what we eat, how often we exercise, how we take care of ourselves, how hard we’re willing to work, how we relate to others and by making wise decisions, not everyone is committed to those values which tend to be most responsible for providing us with a good life.

For those who make choices based on self-interest, laziness, immediate gratification or taking shortcuts, they usually come out less prosperous, less respected and less advantaged.

It is this noticeable disparity that has Democratic Socialists trying to repackage and sell a system that has never worked and will fail to work going forward. For them, the age of “participation trophies,” means that no one should feel left out or inferior. Everyone should be made to feel as if they get an equal piece of the pie.

But the only way to accomplish similar outcomes is to take from the advantaged and distribute to the disadvantaged. That requires either a willingness on the part of the winner to share their earnings with someone who didn’t invest… or forcibly have it taken in order to accommodate the flawed system which cannot succeed on its own.

The latter is exactly what the incoming Democrat Socialists intend to do, because no one is anxious to have their accomplishments, money, achievements, status or positions seized and given to those who did not put in the work that was needed to earn such distinctions.

Take the example of Democratic Socialist candidate for governor of Wisconsin, Francesca Hong. In her ideal world, there would be no prisons.  Criminals would roam free just as everyone else, while reaping the benefits of analysis, leading to the discovery of the “societal factors” that contributed to their terrible deeds.  

Promoting such positions as universal childcare, paid leave for all, fully funded public schools and taking funds from large hospitals to subsidize smaller ones, Hong is doing her part to make socialism sound as attractive and worthwhile as she possibly can. 

In a recent spoken ad, she said those values are “rooted in democracy, fairness and human rights.” But when carefully examining the track record of human rights in socialist-run societies, just how true is that claim?

Cuba, China and the former Soviet Union all tried this experiment, but it’s hard to make a case for the flourishing of human rights under those countries, because those rights include: dignity, equality, and freedom. 

The Uyghurs might have something to say about that, not to mention Cubans who are “systematically denied fundamental civil, political, and economic rights, including the freedom of expression, peaceful assembly, and association. The government maintains a monopoly on all media and restricts internet access. Independent labor unions, human rights organizations and political parties are illegal. Citizens also face significant restrictions on religious freedom and arbitrary detentions without fair public trials.”

In truth, socialism works well for those in power, but not for those who are subordinate to them. The leaders are the only ones in a position to amass great wealth, and among them, history has recorded that Fidel Castro, Hugo Chavez, Marxist co-founder Friederich Engels, Muammar Gadafi and Uzbekistan leader, Islam Karimov, were billionaires.

How did they get that way? As authoritarian leaders, they were able to amass great fortunes through corruption, the control of national industries and by stealing state resources.

While living in the lap of luxury, their people languished and suffered lack of goods, never having the chance to achieve personal wealth, unlike those who live in capitalist societies. Where is the dignity in that kind of an oppressive system?

This is what they fail to tell voters who are looking for something new.  Democratic Socialists will promise what they lack but never deliver in the end. The enticing pitch gets them into office, but once there, nothing changes for the constituents. It’s the classic “oversell” to put them in power with no Utopian results.

A recent article in The Daily Economy titled, “The Long Tradition of Wealth Extracting Socialists” expresses this best. It begins with left-wing, political influencer and millionaire, Hasan Piker, calling him “the latest in a long line of socialist figures from Marx to Lenin to Castro and Chavez, all of whom denounced capitalism while prospering from it.”

Condemning the accumulation of wealth, these men enjoyed the greatest privilege and luxury while alive. Sadly, that history is long-forgotten.  

Today’s youth might benefit from a refresher course, lest they end up like those who suffered deprivation while their leaders lived like kings. 

So long as all men are NOT created equal, socialism can never work. Not then and not now!