Capitalism's money and guns saved socialism

Green Perry's mellifluous language and arguments in his letter almost makes one hope socialism does triumph globally and stops all the evils of capitalism. What a soporific. The top six countries he mentioned, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Australia, New Zealand and France, first of all, started from a higher base than most of the world — part and parcel of European Western civilization — before they embraced social democracy.

And so these privileged countries would remain in those envied positions, they had to be defended by the "gun culture" of America, three of them actually liberated from the Nazis during World War II, including France, by the blood, sweat and capitalist money of the U.S. The Nazis incidentally were national socialists. Socialism, nazism, fascism, communism are all doctrines of the left, kindred collectivist philosophies motivated by the politics of envy and the maintenance of power of the state over the individual.

It was also the American capitalist "gun culture" that protected all of Western Europe and Scandinavia from the Red Army and Soviet tanks during the Cold War, even as some of them chanted "Better Red Than Dead!" Europe has been free to pursue her pacifism, socialism and virtual pusillanimity, only because the U.S. protected (and still protects) them with our military expenditures, our goodwill and our guns.

And Perry's benign characterization of socialism would be a source of laughter to Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels, Vladimir Lenin and Fidel Castro. The soft socialism of Europe is only a passing stage of Marxist determinism — the ultimate goal is the total state run by power elites who purportedly know better than the rest of us.

Despite Perry's erroneous assertion, the last four countries mentioned, Cuba and North Korea are socialist/communist. Were he to visit the U.S.A. Communist Party website, would find Castro and Lenin used the terms socialism and communism interchangeably because, as Lenin wrote, very explicitly, "the goal of socialism is communism," in the relentless march of historical positivism and the dialectical materialism of the class struggle. Lenin called bleeding heart liberals in capitalist countries, who defended socialism purely from humanitarian concerns (but with little understanding), "useful idiots" and "fellow travelers." Guess why?

Written by Dr. Miguel Faria

Miguel A. Faria, M.D. is an Associate editor-in-chief of Surgical Neurology International and the author of “Cuba in Revolution — Escape from a Lost Paradise.” His website is and

This article was printed in the Macon Telegraph on February 4, 2016. 

This article may be cited as: Faria MA. Capitalism's money and guns saved socialism. Macon Telegraph, February 4, 2016. Available from:

Copyright © 2016 Miguel A. Faria, Jr., MD



Submitted by admin on February 3, 2016 - 3:14pm.
From the Macon Telegraph, Feb 3, 2015

"Best in the world

"I just read a letter in Sunday's paper written by Ed Norwood of Macon about socialism in which he asks the question 'Has socialism ever been successful?' No disrespect intended, but what planet is he living on?

Does he not know that of the top 10 best countries in the world to live in based on quality of life and income, the first six are all considered socialist countries: Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Australia, New Zealand and France. America comes in at No. 7 and probably because it is only one step away from being socialist as well. Surely he knows the reason the word social appears in Social Security, because Social Security and also Medicare are socialist programs.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not pushing socialism in its entirety, but the reality is most modern countries in the world today are in some form or another socialist in nature.

If Norwood would like to experience a truly non-socialist country and see how successful they are, he should visit Afghanistan, Cuba, Pakistan or North Korea, just to name a few."— Green Perry, Cochran

Submitted by Dr. Miguel A. Faria on February 5, 2016 - 11:08am.
Submitted to the Telegraph as a comment:

Jim Sandefur: First of all, only an idiot equates socialism with fascism which are opposites. Nazi Germany was no more socialist than The People's Republic of North Korea is a republic. Second, socialist guns (the Red Army) took Europe back from the Nazis. What the Americans did on the beaches of Normandy and during the Battle of the Bulge is something every American should be proud of and the American soldiers fought like heroes, BUT, by then the war in Europe had already been won. America's biggest battle was looked at as little more than a skirmish by the Russians who had been locked in a bloody slugfest with Germany on the East Front that finally destroyed Germany

Dr. Miguel Faria: The Telegraph Bully Jim Sandefur has submitted two insulting comments. The first one should not be dignified with an answer. The second one although insulting requires answers:

First, The dogmatist idiot is none other than himself, the intolerant, rabid atheist Jim Sandefur!

Second, as to right and left politics, fascism and socialism are kindred spirits, collectivist philosophies of the Left. I use the political spectrum theory that is most accurate reflecting levels of political control of the State over the individual, reflecting both political as well as economic freedom — a horse shoe configuration. The right and left terms are useful and convenient but not always accurate and subject to misuse by people like Sandefur. There are various ways of determining the confluence of political philosophies and the theories representing them:

Here is another:

And by far, here is the best:

Third, True, the Soviet-Nazi struggle was an epic struggle in the East. The battles of Kursk and Kharkov are examples. But the Russians were massive cannon fodder at least in the first part of the encounter, particularly during Barbarossa! Still the U.S. liberated Western Europe and took pressure off the Red Army in the East. The nations I mentioned were liberated by Americans, not Russians, despite Sandefur, and the West was truly liberated. The East, on the other hand, was enslaved by the Soviets behind the Iron Curtain. Moreover, Normandy and The Battle of the Bulge were no walks in the park either and should not be dismissed, as Sandefur has done, pulling the rugs from under the thousands of American heroes who died in Europe, qualifying their heroism with such asteisms, as their battles were "no more than skirmishes" and "...the war in Europe had already been won," etc. And if it was already won, why did FDR, despite the objections of Winston Churchill, insisted in sending American boys in harm's way to Normandy and counteracting Hitler's last gamble in the Battle of the Bulge? Why did thousands of Americans died leaving fields of white cruses in France and elsewhere?

And without the help in massive armaments, food, and supplies, provided overtly by FDR (and covertly by several American traitors, such as Harry Dexter White and Harry Hopkins, Soviet agents), Stalin's Red Army would have continued to be fodder (even in Stalingrad and Kursk (where even in victory their losses exceeded those of the Germans!). The fact is that without our assistance, Stalin's Russia would have been history trampled by the Wehrmacht.

But arguing with a stubborn bully is probably a waste of my time. He will always turn to illiberal orthodox dogmatism, insults, and ad hominem attacks — his well-known standard m.o.!

Submitted by admin on February 6, 2016 - 10:28am.
Submitted to the Telegraph

Douglas Harden: Great article Dr. Faria! Hats off to you!

And Regarding the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact of 1939!

Wally Walters: The war in Europe had been "won" before D-Day? There's a stretch.

But let's go with it and say we hadn't invaded and eventually the Soviets defeated Germany essentially alone on the ground. What would Europe have looked like had the Iron Curtain started at the English Channel? For one, there would have been no NATO — which countered the Warsaw Pact. Without D-Day, that might've been the Paris [another humiliating Versailles] Pact.

As it happened, per Dr. Faria, American arms and money eventually defeated the Communist/Socialist Soviets.

P.S. Don't forget that the Nazis and the Soviets started the war as allies [Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, 1939]!

Dr. Faria: Thanks Douglas Harden and Wally Walters. Great comment. In fact the Molotov-Ribbentrop Nonaggression Pact of 1939 had also a secret understanding to divide Central and Eastern Europe, which took place with the Soviets seizing the Baltic states and Eastern Poland (not frequently mentioned by the intelligentsia) and Germany having a free hand in Central and Western Europe. Fortunately the Finns dealt a crushing defeat and stopped the invading Soviet armies for several months, stopping the communist juggernaut. For their part the German Blitzkrieg was unstoppable and overwhelmed most of Western Europe and Scandinavia! The Soviets very accommodating to Hitler supplied him via the Trans-Siberian Railway with oil and raw materials needed in the war.

In fact the infamous Soviet-German (socialist-fascist) understanding was a turnoff for many socialists/communists (who left the ranks of Soviet socialism) to become social democrats and it fortified the Trotskyites in the U.S., many of whom later became NeoCons: 

And the Nazis themselves speak:

Nazi ideologue Gregor Strasser: “We are socialists. We are enemies, deadly enemies, of today’s capitalist economic system with its exploitation of the economically weak, its unfair wage system, its immoral way of judging the worth of human beings in terms of their wealth and their money, instead of their responsibility and their performance, and we are determined to destroy this system whatever happens!”

And Hitler summarized it: “Why need we trouble to socialize banks and factories? We socialize human beings.”

Your rating: None Average: 5 (3 votes)