Soviet-Born Chess Legend Brilliantly Educates Millennials Who Approve of Communism
Chess legend Garry Kasparov, who has since become a political activist, had the perfect reaction to the alarming number of American millennials who approve of communism.
In November, MarketWatch reported on a YouGov survey that found 36 percent of respondents ages 23-38 approved of communism in some form, a noticeable increase from 28 percent a year ago.
MarketWatch revisited the findings — from a survey of 2,100 Americans between Sept. 6 and 13 — in a tweet Dec. 27.
“36% of millennials polled say that they approve of communism, which is up significantly from 28% in 2018,” it said.
36% of millennials polled say that they approve of communism, which is up significantly from 28% in 2018. https://t.co/Wtij9H8EoT
— MarketWatch (@MarketWatch) December 28, 2019
The results did not go over well with conservatives or anyone with a measurable understanding of history.
One such critic was none other than Kasparov, a Russian born under Soviet rule in present-day Azerbaijan and arguably the greatest chess player of all time.
“It’s nice they have opinions about communism now, because once you’re living in it you don’t get to have an opinion about it anymore,” he tweeted Monday.
It’s nice they have opinions about communism now, because once you’re living in it you don’t get to have an opinion about it anymore. https://t.co/YjFFwFxSFj
— Garry Kasparov (@Kasparov63) December 30, 2019
Communism generally has three types of supporters, and Kasparov was able to touch on all of them, even in such a simple response.
The most obvious pillar of support to which he referred are the people who have never experienced communism and as a result do not fully understand its horrors.
Those delusions of utopia are magnified if one is ignorant, willfully or not, of the gruesome history behind the failed marriage between the government and the economy.
Kasparov also subtly referenced a second pillar of support: those who have lived under communism for their entire lives and are similarly ignorant of other systems.
For them, top-down economic control was a given. Without the freedom to form their own opinion and weigh other systems based on merit, those living under communism can be forgiven for reverting to the default.
Part of the purpose of totalitarian communist rule is to convince the public that it is either the best way of life or the only way of life. Too often, that lie was and is believed.
That nature of communism, to produce propaganda on such a massive scale, also shines a light on the third group of supporters: the ones in control.
One of the major misconceptions among the American supporters of communism is that the Soviet Union and Mao Zedong’s China were problematic because they were totalitarian, not because they were communist.
To those supporters, totalitarianism is a bug, not a feature.
Unfortunately, that isn’t the case.
This is the real cost of allowing progressives to take over our education system. They do not educate, they indoctrinate.
— Trump is STILL your president (@DragonEmpress4) December 28, 2019
Total government control of every aspect of life, especially the economy, is not only critical to communism, it is the definition of communism.
Whether there is one man with a birthright, 100 elected officials or a violent revolution (which is much more likely), communism is totalitarian by nature.
Without the proper checks and balances, which will not exist outside a liberal republic, a government with total control can and will keep the people under its thumb.
Coupled with the fact that communism doesn’t provide an incentive to work, this type of society directs human ambition toward power and authority that only a seat in the government can provide.
And if you don’t already have that seat, good luck convincing the one who does to give it up.
Thankfully, the pro-communist 36 percent of millennials have so far not gotten their way.
And with people like Garry Kasparov around, we can help keep it that way.
Truth and Accuracy
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.
