How dare Time magazine link real freedom fighters of the Middle East with the sorry bunch of American “protesters” who shared Time’s Person-of-the-Year honors? Whatever happened to the Time magazine that emblazoned its cover in 1956 with the genuinely heroic anti-Communist Hungarian freedom fighters?

Protesters in Syria daily take to the streets unarmed and are daily shot dead by Assad’s military. The survivors return to the streets the next day and the next and the next with no change in the routine. Does Time detect any of that DNA among our American “Occupiers”? If our “Occupiers” were to go to charm school, fitness school and character school, and really apply themselves, they might someday become wimps. You judge heroes by the consequences their actions invite. We know what consequences those Hungarians confronted and these Syrians now face. Tear gas wears off. The most severe consequences our Occupiers seem to face is having the gourmet cuisine contributed by the left-chef movement run out just as they reach the front of the line. And maybe having a TV reporter ask a really tough question like, “What are you doing here?”

My gripe with the Occupiers has nothing to do with their being less than heroic. It’s all about their stupidity.

You’ve seen the occasional truck jack-knifed on the other side of the highway, and you know it’s going to block traffic over there for a very long time. You can imagine saying to all those drivers “parked” for miles over there, “I know a lot more about your plans for the evening than you do!” That’s the way I feel about our “anti-capitalists.”

There’ve been at least 39 countries engulfed by Marxism. Not a single one succeeded. If your cat tore up 39 sofas, would you buy him sofa No. 40 to work on? The most fascinating interviewing I’ve ever done is putting that question to those who would impose Marxism upon America. Their rationale is breathtaking. They actually say things like, “The Russians were too disorganized. The Chinese were too brutal. The Hungarians were too intellectual. The Romanians were too corrupt. The Cubans were too primitive. The Nicaraguans were too lazy,” etc.

“We, on the other hand,” this opium-dream continues, “are just right. We know what we’re doing. We have all those other countries’ mistakes to guide us. We will do it right!

I see the jack-knifed truck. They don’t!

It’s easy to understand the mindset of the American Marxist. For openers, they’re convinced they’re as smart as the multi-millionaires because they’re sure “success” is nothing but luck. Right. Success is all luck. If you don’t believe it, ask any failure.

“Who needs this rat race?” the Occupiers’ narrative continues. “You lose your soul keeping up with the Joneses. If everybody is equal, we can heal our souls, share the wealth, grow our nation together. Enjoy life. Concerts. Poetry. Sports. Long hikes in the woods. Just think of the great improvement in our physical and mental health if we could just quit worrying about all those bills forever!”

It’s seductive, until you collide with reality. There are, for example, hovels and palaces; poor housing and luxury housing. Who gets what when suddenly we’re all equal? Do our Marxists suppose there’s a lottery, a draw, a coin-flip to see who lives where? There are rusty old cars and shiny new ones. Who gets what, once equality overtakes us? It’s painful to play around with the blindness of the terminally naïve. Under capitalism, the better homes, cars, etc. go to those who are hard-working, smart, innovative and, yes, lucky; or, better yet, a little bit of all of the above. Under Marxism, the party hack and the thug harvest the rewards. Wherever the people get the good fortune to take their choice, they chose an end to Marxism. Every time. Unanimous. No exceptions.

The cardinal failure of Marxism has been the failure to breed the “New Soviet Man”; the “Comrade” who throws himself enthusiastically into, let’s say, building a bridge, not because it’s a well-paying job, but rather because “We need a bridge!” Human nature has a way of un-pretzel-ing itself no matter how absurdly you try to twist it.

A century ago, Ukraine was a breadbasket that could feed the world. Close by was another breadbasket that could feed the world, Transylvania. Communism came to both. And, guess what? They had to import wheat from the capitalists! Listen to the jokes of the former Communist captive-nations. Example:

Question: What would happen if Communism took over the Sahara Desert?

Answer: For two years, nothing. Then they’d have to import sand from the West.

Promise me you won’t waste your time trying to persuade the Occupiers with these gleaming shards of history. You’d have a better chance convincing a good-looking high school quarterback that algebra is essential to his future happiness.

Are you one of the ones who thinks “We American Marxists can finally do it right”? If so, please hurry over to your inbox. You may have an email from a Nigerian banker waiting for you.

Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.