A National Tragedy
By now, September 24 of 2013, even the most uninformed American has at least heard a mention of the tragedy that occurred in the secured Navy Yard, in Washington, D.C. 12 lives were claimed 9 days ago, by gunman Aaron Alexis, who was himself killed by the police who swarmed the area in response.
The Problems Presented
- A lack of national security (e.g. anyone remember Ed Snowden?)
- How can security clearance to an area of such importance be given to a man of such potential danger?
- A lack of awareness for mental disorders.
- Surely if this wasn't the case, a red flag would have raised when even considering giving access to a mentally hurt person.
What if...
Hear me out now, for I know the wound is still fresh and a nation is still morning, but allow me to propose a radical idea -- a strange answer to solve all. Communism. Yes, if the nation were to follow the ideology of Communism, the shooting at the Navy Yard, the shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary, and nearly every other national tragedy could be averted! By following the code of Communism, written out in Marx's Communist Manifesto, the United States would (and I'll point out the ones only relevant to my current point, Communism is such a vast topic, one could go on forever, and ever, and ever...&c, &c.):
Communism on paper is a beautiful, Utopian paradise (and I don't mean A Brave New World sort of stuff). But if the rode to such wellness was that simple, everything would have already transitioned to such a state. Communism in practice is scary, simple because the 3 main points above have never been fully realized.
- Abolish all private property!
- Make education a national priority!!
- Abolish the state...*cough* sounds radical, right?
Bare with me. 1) If all things were public, the people themselves (and I emphasize the individuals) would make it a personal matter to uphold national security. It would be in the benefit of everyone to protect themselves, and whatnot. 2) If education was a national priority, like in the nearly-socialist Scandinavian countries, public education would be free, even up to university levels. Social issues, especially health and sciences, would would be emphasized. Most likely, people like Aaron Alexis would be helped before a crisis would erupt. 3) With the end of the State, i.e. The Man, The System, &c, the authority and well-being of everything would rest in the direct hands of the people. This in itself raise awareness on all levels, hitting a near Utopian high.
Of course, I'm a hopeless romantic...
Communism on paper is a beautiful, Utopian paradise (and I don't mean A Brave New World sort of stuff). But if the rode to such wellness was that simple, everything would have already transitioned to such a state. Communism in practice is scary, simple because the 3 main points above have never been fully realized.
Never forget Tienanmen Square.
I like how you laid out the points and the problem and such and it really seems presented well. Communism does seem logical on paper, but so do a lot of things that don't actually work in reality. It really makes me ask questions about why that is...
ReplyDeleteSteven, I like your blogs, the way you write keeps my interest. You were right when you said that the idea that communism would solve these tragedies was radical.
ReplyDeleteGuys, the reading laying out a feasible socialism is for this coming Tuesday, so at that point we can see exactly how it might work in practice. Don't worry, the whole thing will all make sense then (just kidding: well, kind of...)
ReplyDeleteSteven: "bare with me"--haha. My favorite Freudian slip of the week (you might have to Google that one).
Seriously, though, you pick up on one of the major criticisms of Marxism, but also one of its most appealing elements to its supporters: it really is a theory of everything, claiming that the vast majority of social ills can be traced back to economic injustice. I wonder if this, however, is as crazy as it looks on the surface? When we compare a society like Norway or Sweden or Finland to other parts of the world, is it so crazy to see these as really existing Utopias? The same goes with the comparison between certain parts of the US and other places in the world. Aren't so many of the differences at least related to economic differences?