Socialism leads the world in the killing of its own citizens.
(These numbers do not include military deaths and are rounded down which doesn’t seem to detract from the point.)
Mao: 50,000,000 people killed.
Stalin: 20,000,000 people killed.
Hitler: 12,000,000 people killed.
Pol Pot: 1,700,000 people killed.
Kim Il Sung: 1,600,000 people killed.
All of these leaders were “democratically” elected at some point in their tenure. This is not the definitive list… just the current leader board.
And it only accounts for intentional killing of citizens, not the death resulting from unintended consequence of Socialist policy.
So why do we keep trying to put a happy face on Liberal Socialism?
Triva question: Can you name the last free-market capitalist dictator?
makeaneffort 
July 19th, 2012 at 7:37 am
Pinochet was a dictator who seized power, but was also a free market capitalist who made tons of free-market reforms, putting the country on the path to where it is now: the most economically successful and modern country south of the US.
LikeLike
July 19th, 2012 at 8:09 am
Yes. I know who Augusto was. But using this logic the Chinese could consider themselves Capitalists (And try to with many poorly educated folks here think so.). This is a common mistake and one I want to address everytime it comes up; seperating individual rights from the free-market – it can’t be done. This misconception also leads people to beleive Fasicism is Capitalism… only today they call it Crony Capitalism. Capitalism (AKA free-market volunteerism) is a system of trade absent force. Force is government control or interference in the market of any kind other than protecting its “sovereignty”. For clarification I recommend Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal which is one of the finest discussions of Capitalism I know of. Other authors that are helpful could be Hayak, Von Mises and Milton Friedman. Locke is always a good foundation to place the others on as he clarifies individual rights and why force must be absent. So… it’s a trick question. There is no such thing as a Capitalist Dictator. There are plenty of Dictators, Thugs and Socialists who have employed what they want to define as Capitalism to benefit themselves… but the fact that they exist as Dictators, Thugs and Socialists disqualifies them.
LikeLike
July 19th, 2012 at 8:38 am
There might be an argument on behalf of Pinochet offered by Cicero which was built on Plato’s “Philospher Kings”. It could be said that in order to get to a Capitalist society (a republic is what Cicero and Plato were concerned about) you periodically needed a “Philosopher King” or in Cicero’s case a “Ceasar” with unlimited power to clease the republic and return it to it’s pristine state. This however has never worked out as “the repubic” is always assessed to need cleansing by those who annoint themselves Philospher Kings. Read ‘The Left”. Pinochet may have set Chile on a prosperous path and might claim a benevolent place in history at some point but he cannot claim the mantle of Capitalist.
LikeLike
July 18th, 2012 at 6:19 pm
Pinochet. He only killed like 1000 though.
LikeLike
July 18th, 2012 at 7:03 pm
It’s a hard sell that Chile was a bastion of Capitalism under a duly elected President. Old Augusto, if my history serves me, seized power by military coup and was usurped by the same sword. Could be wrong.
LikeLike