PDA

View Full Version : The Perspective Of A Russian Immigrant



DarrinS
07-09-2010, 11:13 AM
http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=505730




In the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, I was taught to believe individual pursuits are selfish and sacrificing for the collective good is noble.

In kindergarten we sang songs about Lenin, the leader of the Socialist Revolution. In school we learned about the beautiful socialist system, where everybody is equal and everything is fair; about ugly capitalism, where people are exploited and treat each other like wolves in the wilderness.

Life in the USSR modeled the socialist ideal. God-based religion was suppressed and replaced with cultlike adoration for political figures.

The government-assigned salary of the proletariat (blue-collar worker) was 30%-50% higher than any professional. Without incentive to improve their life, professionals drank themselves to oblivion. They — engineers, lawyers, doctors, teachers — earned a government-determined salary that barely covered the necessities, mainly food.

Raising children was a hardship. It took four to six adults (parents and grandparents) to support a child. The usual size of the postwar family was one or two children. Every woman had the right to have an abortion and most of them did, often without anesthesia.

There is a comparative historical reality that plays out the consequences of two competing ideologies: life in the USSR and in America.

When the march to the worker's paradise — the Socialist Revolution — began in 1917, many people emigrated from Russia to the U.S.

In the USSR, economic equality was achieved by redistributing wealth, ensuring that everyone remained poor, with the exception of those doing the redistributing. Only the ruling class of communist leaders had access to special stores, medicine and accommodations that could compare to those in the West.

The rest of the citizenry had to deal with permanent shortages of food and other necessities, and had access to free but inferior, unsanitary and low-tech medical care. The egalitarian utopia of equality, achieved by the sacrifice of individual self-interest for the collective good, led to corruption, black markets, anger and envy.

Government-controlled health care destroyed human dignity.

Chairman Nikita Khrushchev released facts about Stalin and his purges. People learned of the horrific purge of more than 20 million citizens, murdered as enemies of the state.

Those who left Russia found a different set of values in America: freedom of religion, speech, individual pursuits, the right to private property and free enterprise. The majority of those immigrants achieved a better life for themselves and their children in this capitalist land.

These opportunities let the average immigrant live a better life than many elites in the Soviet Communist Party. The freedom to pursue personal self-interest led to prosperity. Prosperity generated charity, benefiting the collective good.

The descendants of those immigrants are now supporting policies that move America away from the values that gave so many immigrants the chance of a better life. Policies such as nationalized medicine, high tax rates and government intrusion into free enterprise are being sold to us under the socialistic motto of collective salvation.

Socialism has bankrupted and failed every society, while capitalism has lifted more people out of poverty than any other system.

There is no perfect society. There are no perfect people. Critics say that greed is the driving force of capitalism. My answer is that envy is the driving force of socialism. Change to socialism is not an improvement on the imperfections of the current system.

The slogans of "fairness and equality" sound better than the slogans of capitalism. But unlike at the beginning of the 20th century, when these slogans and ideas were yet to be tested, we have accumulated history and reality.

Today we can define the better system not by slogans, but by looking at the accumulated facts. We can compare which ideology leads to the most oppression and which brings the most opportunity.

When I came to America in 1980 and experienced life in this country, I thought it was fortunate that those living in the USSR did not know how unfortunate they were.

Now in 2009, I realize how unfortunate it is that many Americans do not understand how fortunate they are. They vote to give government more and more power without understanding the consequences.

Svetlana Kunin, Stamford, Conn.

Editor's note: Mrs. Kunin, an IBD subscriber, is a retired software developer. In the Soviet Union, she was a civil engineer.

DarrinS
07-09-2010, 11:19 AM
The Perspective of a Russian Immigrant (Part 9)




In May 2008, Sen. Barack Obama delivered a commencement address at Connecticut's Wesleyan University that called for sacrificing in order to build a fair and socially just society.

"We may disagree on certain issues and positions," he said, "but I believe we can be unified in service to a greater good. I intend to make it a cause of my presidency.

Two years later, at this month's commencement at the University of Michigan, President Obama talked about the role of government as a solution to the problems facing America. He complained about a lack of civility in our public debate.

"Throwing around phrases like 'socialist' and 'Soviet-style takeover' and 'fascist right-wing nut' may grab headlines," he said, "but it also has the effect of comparing our government, or our political opponents, to authoritarian and even murderous regimes."

The president's rhetoric mesmerized the students at Wesleyan and persuaded supporters to join his cause for change. But to me and other immigrants from socialist countries, this rhetoric sounded familiar.

American college students, in awe of their new leader and excited about ideals such as social justice, a fair society, equality and the transformation of greedy capitalist systems in which workers are exploited, do not realize these progressive ideas are identical to what students in socialist countries were taught 40 years ago in required classes such as "political economics" and "Marxist-Leninist dialectical materialism."

The pleasant platitudes that make up leftist rhetoric are not new.

The policies and actions of this government are almost identical to what took place in countries moving toward socialism throughout the 20th century.

Government appropriation of banks, other financial institutions, medical care, education, natural resources and regulation of speech is what came of centralized power in young socialist societies, leading to totalitarian regimes such as those in the USSR, China, Cuba and North Korea.

When House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, other Democrats in Congress and the media portray critics of this government as racists, right-wing nuts, Nazis or terrorists, it is more than lack of civility; it is a deliberate, Soviet-style authoritarian tactic to impose conformity on people who happen to disagree with the government's definition of the greater good.

In the Soviet Union, those who dared to criticize the government were called vragy naroda, which translates as enemies of the people.

At his commencement address in Michigan, Obama said we have the option to get our information from any number of blogs, Web sites and cable news shows. This of course requires that we all agree on a certain set of facts to debate from, and that is why we need a vibrant and thriving news business that is separate from opinion makers and talking heads.

At his next commencement address at Hampton University in Virginia, Obama further aired his concerns about uncontrolled information, which: "becomes a distraction, a diversion. It's putting new pressure on our country and on our democracy."

It was much easier to manipulate and direct public opinion in the Soviet Union, where the state apparatus had complete control of all sources of information. Centralized government propaganda and draconian suppression of free speech created an enforced conformity no one could escape.

That is why Obama wants to regulate the Internet and cable news shows so they are "neutral" as defined by the government. The Soviets demonized the opposition as enemies of the people; American leftists simply define any opposition to them as racist or extremist.

"The press should be not only a collective propagandist and a collective agitator, but also a collective organizer of the masses," said Vladimir Lenin. "He who now talks about the freedom of the press goes backward and halts our headlong course toward socialism."

Young, educated graduates, born in the freest society, figure Obama is not a socialist; he is something new and somehow uniquely qualified to enact tired, old ideas that will result in a new, fair and equal society.

The Rev. Al Sharpton, in a recent sermon in Danbury, Conn., summed it up well: "Dr. King's dream was not to put one black president in the White House. The dream was to make everything equal in everybody's house. President Obama is in the White House to help us get there, but we're not there yet."

An old Soviet joke defines socialist equality as follows: If your neighbor has a cow and you do not, kill your neighbor's cow.

George Gervin's Afro
07-09-2010, 12:43 PM
so? what's the point of thread?

boutons_deux
07-09-2010, 12:58 PM
Come on, George, do you really expect there is a point, or an answer?

George Gervin's Afro
07-09-2010, 12:59 PM
I can't figure out if darrins likes russia or if he is fond of immigrants..

Winehole23
07-09-2010, 01:06 PM
Agony column-style letters to the Ed. combining bald appeals to emotion and experience with weaselly language linking Bolshevism to the Democratic Party platform, were already old by the time I learned how to read 35 years ago; the continual references to the USSR mainly serve to highlight the anachronism.

I'll start taking it seriously when I see the GOP take hammer and tongs to the federal bureaucracies that manage/adminster everyday life in the US.

Until then, I would include it too in the judgment passed on the Dems in the OP and the knock-on. The US government did not get smaller at any time during my lifetime, even though nearly every GOP president promised us it "needed to."

boutons_deux
07-09-2010, 01:14 PM
"GOP take hammer and tongs to the federal bureaucracies"

they did a great job of under funding SEC, EPA, etc. of stuffing lobbyists and Repug operatives into regulatory roles, etc.

and of starting and botching 2 wars to transfer taxpayer $$$ to the MIC

Winehole23
07-09-2010, 01:17 PM
they did a great job of under funding SEC, EPA, etc. of stuffing lobbyists and Repug operatives into regulatory roles, etc.Sure. Elections matter; appointees and priorities change.

Did the public sector get smaller, or did it grow overall, was my point.

Winehole23
07-09-2010, 01:19 PM
and of starting and botching 2 wars to transfer taxpayer $$$ to the MICSo, we've got that going for us too. A massive public subsidy for permanent war.

Wild Cobra
07-09-2010, 01:44 PM
If you guys don't already understand the simple implications of the story, then why should anyone waste their time explaining?

Winehole23
07-09-2010, 01:48 PM
Lay it out for us then. What say you, WC?

George Gervin's Afro
07-09-2010, 01:54 PM
If you guys don't already understand the simple implications of the story, then why should anyone waste their time explaining?




I would love to see the evidence that propaganda piece uses.

boutons_deux
07-09-2010, 02:17 PM
Go Glenn BeckKK for us, and "connect the dots", since we're as ignorant and gullble as BecKKK's viewers.