Communism Via the Back Door: Tolstoy’s Seminal Set-Up For Marxism. Wikipedia’s True But Hidden Promotion Of Marxism

In the fable of: “How Much Land Does A Man Need” (Here), Leo Tolstoy in 1886 condemned Individual Land Ownership.

“That’s crazy O’Neill. Tolstoy wrote about Lust and shows how wanting too much of anything leads to death.”

That’s the Hidden Danger that lurks un-noticed in seemingly innocent stories like HMLDAMN. All Socialism is based on Society as being more important than any single Individual. Capitalism as a political system is based on the Individual being important. The Primacy of The Individual, aka. Individualism means that Society in not the  basis for a Culture, Nation or the World. Rather everything is judged based on the Individual. Rights? Power? Justifiable Force? War? All based on the Individual, especially Government which is the ultimate manifestation of Power against an Individual. The Knock on the door at 4:00AM and the Futility of Resistance need to be checked. The Rights of the Individual is the proper basis for the limits of Government Powers. .

There’s yet another basis for Capitalism, The Rule Of Law but Capitalism goes further than the Rule Of Law and Protection of the Individual because the basis of The Rule Of Law is Justice. That means to each individual all of the power on the earth is directed to protecting that single person from the rest of the world.

Ayn Rand covered it, brilliantly, in the following words of her famous Galt Speech.

“What fact of reality gave rise to the concept “justice”? The fact that man must draw conclusions about the things, people and events around him, i.e., must judge and evaluate them. Is his judgment automatically right? No. What causes his judgment to be wrong? The lack of sufficient evidence, or his evasion of the evidence, or his inclusion of considerations other than the facts of the case. How, then, is he to arrive at the right judgment? By basing it exclusively on the factual evidence and by considering all the relevant evidence available. But isn’t this a description of “objectivity”? Yes, “objective judgment” is one of the wider categories to which the concept “justice” belongs. What distinguishes “justice” from other instances of objective judgment? When one evaluates the nature or actions of inanimate objects, the criterion of judgment is determined by the particular purpose for which one evaluates them. But how does one determine a criterion for evaluating the character and actions of men, in view of the fact that men possess the faculty of volition? What science can provide an objective criterion of evaluation in regard to volitional matters? Ethics. Now, do I need a concept to designate the act of judging a man’s character and/or actions exclusively on the basis of all the factual evidence available, and of evaluating it by means of an objective moral criterion? Yes. That concept is “justice.”

Rands desctiption of “Justice” go deeper than any other I’ve come across. Perhaps there are other descriptions and definitions of Justice than hers but her’s goes to the character and the actions of the individual and builds from there. Socialism doesn’t do that. Marxism doesn’t do that either. Neither does The Left, the Progressives, or  the Communists. Neither does Wikipedia whose mission seems to be to support Society as the answer to all problems.  

Views: 17