Research Shows Socialism Is About Envy
Michael Shermer on the Los Angeles Times
“Would you rather earn $50,000 a year while other people make $25,000, or would you rather earn $100,000 a year while other people get $250,000? Assume for the moment that prices of goods and services will stay the same.
Surprisingly — stunningly, in fact — research shows that the majority of people select the first option; they would rather make twice as much as others even if that meant earning half as much as they could otherwise have. How irrational is that?”
And so it is shown that Socialism (American Liberalism) as the belief that societies should be fair is basically about making sure nobody earn more than you do.
No wonder “socialist economies” were unable to make the people rich: everybody’s goal was to bring everybody else down…
Written by omnologos
2008/Jan/15 at 10:31:47
Posted in Economics, Ethics, Political Economy, Politics, Sociology
Tagged with Liberals, Los Angeles Times, Shermer, Socialism
7 Responses
Subscribe to comments with RSS.
Maurizio - Omnologos 
[…] Marx and Nietzsche on Socialism and Envy Filed under: Economics, Ethics, Political Economy, Politics, Sociology — Tags: Babeuf, Communism, François-Noël Babeuf, Friedrich Nietzsche, Karl Marx, Liberals, Marx, Nietzsche, Socialism — omnologos @ 20:04:42 Follow-up to my earlier blog: “Research Shows Socialism Is About Envy“: […]
Marx and Nietzsche on Socialism and Envy « Maurizio - Omnologos
2008/Jan/17 at 20:19:11
The research sample surely included conservatives and libertarians too; you assume that every respondent was a liberal.
And the reason a real conservative would choose the $50,000 is obvious: Relative buying power twice that of your peers instead of less than half.
This is an illogical analysis to this simple experiment, and presents a simply laughable conclusion. Junk.
Joe Buck
2010/Jan/31 at 07:49:00
This is not about “socialism”, and it’s specious and facile to claim it is – what it’s *actually* about is social *standing*, because the fact is that, in our society/culture, the LOWEST social standing, and therefore the lowest social value, is given to those who have the leeast money.
k_michael
2010/Feb/19 at 21:42:59
Exactly. Ask any primate what they aspire to most…a pile of trinkets?…or Alpha status?
Patrick
2010/Oct/11 at 02:58:49
Since people do not want to be in the lowest social standing, they feel envious of those who are higher on the ladder. Those who are too incompetent or lazy to move up the ladder would prefer a system like socialism that brings everybody down to the same level and remove the traces of their inadequacies by redistributing the wealth of the more competent. Biologically, it makes sense; it is a survival and reproductive strategy. Those on the lowest level are less valued and are usually provided with less assistance and support from the community in their quest for survival and reproduction. If they did not use that strategy, their DNA would be purged out of the gene pool much faster. Eventually though Mother Nature wins the battle and the lesser specimens are weeded out or the whole species suffers.
Crepe_Suzette
2010/Nov/10 at 01:46:06
Some people would appreciate the goods(and lives) stolen from them through economic piracy, not socialism.
Patrick
2010/Oct/11 at 03:08:39
[…] so it is shown that Socialism (American Liberalism) as the belief that societies should be fair is basically about making sure […]
Research Shows Socialism Is About Envy | Omnologos
2012/Mar/27 at 23:59:31