General discussion

Locked

Do Americans Understand What Socialism Is? Well; do they???

By sleepin'dawg ·
.
.
The ?instant-on? protestations of Obama, his campaign, and his Obamabots, indicate one of three things:

1) They are angry that someone has finally had the nerve to call them out on the inequitable practice of wealth redistribution; rewarding the non-productive among us with other people?s hard earned wages.

2) They are arrogantly over-exposing their penchant for playing the race card whenever someone doesn?t immediately roll-over and give them exactly what they want, degrading the hardships, sacrifices and accomplishments of generations past.

3) They have absolutely no clue as to what Socialism is.

Socialism, according to the Merriam-Webster dictionary is defined as:

?Any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods; A system of society or group living in which there is no private property; A stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done.?



During a campaign stop in Richmond, Virginia, Obama scoffed at the charge that his economic policies were born of Socialist ideology and the Marxist influence predominant among the adults who surrounded him in his youth, calling the use of such "implausible" arguments an, "indication they have run out of ideas."

A barrage of callers to conservatives talk radio programs ? not surprisingly the overwhelming majority of them Black, took an indignant tone calling any and all criticism of Barack Obama?s economic policies ? and for that matter any criticism of Barack Obama at all ? as an emanation of the underlying racism that exists in each and every Caucasian heart in the United States...not among other races, not among the Black population, just the Caucasian race.

One Kansas City Star editorialist, Lewis Diuguid, concurred with the talk radio program callers in declaring, albeit in that publication?s blog and at great homage to the art of ?spin,? that those noting the similarities between ?spreading the wealth around? and wealth redistribution are ?racist.? We are, of course, well within our purview in declaring that the mainstream media has become increasingly irrelevant in matters of fact and honesty, especially where the 2008 election is concerned.

Socialism promotes increased government control over the private sector, both socially and in business. It is achieved by instituting a system that redistributes wealth in an effort to artificially equalize wealth in society, regardless of productivity. When a politician says ? in no uncertain terms ? that he believes it is a good thing to excessively taxing the productive only to redistribute those extracted taxes to the non-productive, exclusively for the sake of altering the social status of individuals, he possesses a Socialist ideology.

The belief that government has the authority to take a citizen?s earnings, no matter what the amount, to bestow it upon another citizen in a quest to socially engineer a more equitable society is squarely rooted in Socialist dogma. This belief is championed and possessed by Barack Obama and is proven beyond doubt in his statement to Samuel Wurzelbacher:

?It?s not that I want to punish your success. I just want to make sure that everybody who is behind you, that they?ve got a chance at success too. I think that when you spread the wealth around it?s good for everybody.? (Emphasis mine).

The complete text of Karl Marx's Critique of the Gotha Program statement is as follows:

?In a higher phase of communist society, after the enslaving subordination of the individual to the division of labor, and therewith also the antithesis between mental and physical labor, has vanished; after labor has become not only a means of life but life's prime want; after the productive forces have also increased with the all-around development of the individual, and all the springs of co-operative wealth flow more abundantly?only then can the narrow horizon of bourgeois right be crossed in its entirety and society inscribe on its banners: From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs!?

Some say that Barack Obama is a great orator. Other say he reads the teleprompter pretty well. And still others think that he is simply a political con-artist specializing in bovine feces. But after comparing Marx?s Critique of the Gotha Program statement and Obama?s ?Joe the Plumber? statement I think it is safe to say that Barack Obama is, simply put, a well-marketed Democratic Socialist peddling a pathetic and failed ideology under the guise of ?hope? and ?change,? just like Fidel Castro circa 1959.

And there?s nothing ?racist? about that.


Dawg ]:)

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

54 total posts (Page 1 of 6)   01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05   Next
| Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

Yours

by santeewelding In reply to Do Americans Understand W ...

Is not an offhand question needful of a flip answer.

Or is it?

We elderly pause at such things.

Collapse -

One major flaw

by IC-IT In reply to Do Americans Understand W ...

Had this been said then perhaps your argument would have some merit.

"When a politician says ? in no uncertain terms ? that he believes it is a good thing to excessively taxing the productive only to redistribute those extracted taxes to the non-productive, exclusively for the sake of altering the social status of individuals, he possesses a Socialist ideology."

Now contrast it to what has been said.

"It?s not that I want to punish your success. I just want to make sure that everybody who is behind you, that they?ve got a chance at success too. I think that when you spread the wealth around it?s good for everybody"

That does not indicate that the "Non-productive" will benefit at all, only that the opportunity will be there to succeed should the neccessary effort be put forth.

The disparity is also contrasted in the uneven rewards for hard work and the pay scale between upper management and the laborer. Often in todays society the workers life force is sucked out of them by the need to work long hours or a second job in order to provide for their basic needs. (Which ironically is pushed higher due to those large salaries). This leaves little to no quality time for growth or family developement. A point often glossed over by those with no concept of having to struggle.

Collapse -

Well said

by jck In reply to One major flaw
Collapse -

Ill take a stab....

by ---TK--- In reply to Do Americans Understand W ...

You are just now figuring this out...? America has always had socialistic fundamentals. This is nothing new...

"Socialism promotes increased government control over the private sector, both socially and in business." Sometime parts of the private sector needs to be put in their place.

Look at our economy right now. I believe one (of the many) reasons we are in this situation was when Bush lifted the restrictions of the credit companies. The companies then raped the citizens.... And I would be one of them... One check got lost in the mail, and every single company raise my APR to the max. I LOST EVERYTHING because of that. Now if those restrictions were still in place I would have been fine. I am now just getting back off my feet.

"The belief that government has the authority to take a citizen?s earnings, no matter what the amount, to bestow it upon another citizen in a quest to socially engineer a more equitable society is squarely rooted in Socialist dogma." Now I do believe that there needs to be a limit on what % the Gov. should be able to TAX. But what do you think welfare is? Thats the Gov. giving/helping those that need help (from taxes), unfortunately its often abused, and that aspect def. needs to be monitored. But how bout you tell my girlfriend this! That people shouldn't get welfare. FYI she lived off Welfare for many years, then placed into foster care... So if it wasn't for the socialistic part of this country, she would be still living off the streets.... O BTY She has a Masters in Nursing, and makes more money then me... And helps every person she can... Redistributing her wealth... She is a prime example a person who has made something from nothing!

So you ask, Do we know what it is? Yes most of us do. Anything in moderation is ok, You just have to keep a close eye things...

Collapse -

That is incorrect

by NickNielsen In reply to Ill take a stab....

America has always had socialistic fundamentals.

Socialism advocates that the ownership and control of businesses, money, and property be vested in the community as a whole. This has never been a fundamental American value and is quite the opposite of the quintessentially American statement "to each his own."

Up until the creation of welfare, temporary assistance was provided by private agencies and charities, most of which based this aid on the condition that you get and hold a job. Welfare killed that by providing the assistance without strings or limitation, in some cases even rewarding fertility and longevity on the welfare rolls. In fact, by essentially limiting eligibility to single mothers, the only thing welfare discouraged was marriage.

I believe one (of the many) reasons we are in this situation was when Bush lifted the restrictions of the credit companies. The companies then raped the citizens.... And I would be one of them... One check got lost in the mail, and every single company raise my APR to the max. I LOST EVERYTHING because of that.

If the increase in minimum payments resulting from maximum interest rates on all your accounts caused you to lose everything, you were going to lose it all anyway, you just didn't know it yet. That you fight your way back onto your feet is a credit to you.

But how bout you tell my girlfriend this! That people shouldn't get welfare. FYI she lived off Welfare for many years, then placed into foster care... So if it wasn't for the socialistic part of this country, she would be still living off the streets...

Did she make those choices or were they made for her? There's a difference. The welfare system in the USA used to reward both longevity and procreation; it no longer does so. As I read this, your girlfriend was dumped on the foster care system when her mother could no longer get enough money to make keeping her worthwhile.

...She has a Masters in Nursing, and makes more money then me... And helps every person she can... Redistributing her wealth...

But that's her choice. If the government takes that same money, even for the same purpose, she's no longer being given a choice. My question for you is this: Who is most qualified to determine who receives that assistance and how much? Is it your girlfriend who knows the people she is helping or some desk jockey in some other city who can't even find the neighborhood on a map? Who knows more about conditions in your area?

She is a prime example a person who has made something from nothing!

My congratulations to her for her success.

edit: splel

Collapse -

(parenthetical)

by santeewelding In reply to That is incorrect

Class act, Nick.

Collapse -

lol....

by ---TK--- In reply to That is incorrect

It appears to me that you are arguing in Black and white, and fail to see the shades of gray.


Go from an APR of 2.5 to 29.99. Also I was making payments far above min.

Collapse -

Lots of gray out there

by NickNielsen In reply to lol....

Do I think you were screwed by the credit card companies? Yes. Was that the point of my reply? No. My point was that you were not managing your debt properly in the first place. You don't say it, but I suspect at that time you were credit-shopping for the lowest rates. 2.5% is usually an introductory rate with a limited time length; after the introductory period, rates usually increase to prime plus some percentage. In all the credit offers I got, the minimum rate after the introductory period was usually 13.99%-17.99%.

I'll say it again: if your balance was such that an increase in interest rate from 2.5% to 29.99% resulted in your inability to make the new minimum payments, you were going to lose it anyway and just didn't know it yet. I've been there, done that, and learned that as long as I have everything I need I can live without everything I want.

And when it comes to somebody else deciding to do something with my money, there is no gray area. My money, my decision. There have been stupid decisions in the past, but they were still my decisions.

edit: clarify

Collapse -

Im done....

by ---TK--- In reply to Lots of gray out there

I'm dropping this, you are starting to **** me off.

Collapse -

Your assignment of responsibility

by santeewelding In reply to Im done....

Is what may have gotten you into your fix in the first place.

Back to Windows Forum
54 total posts (Page 1 of 6)   01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05   Next

Related Discussions

Related Forums