General discussion


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 5 of 6)   Prev   03 | 04 | 05 | 06   Next
Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

I like that...

by TriDom In reply to The reverse bogeyman effe ...

...term. "Incremental Socialism". Good way of describing what is going on in our country today. Then, before you know it, everything will be run by the Federal Government, and soon after we'll be espousing the virtues of the great and loving Emperor. (:-&gt

Collapse -

I want for myself waht someone else earns ......

by Tony Hopkinson In reply to I want for myself what so ...

and I pay the government to serve as broker to get it for me, but no, that's not capitalism. Captalism is the USA thing, ya know.

To the guy on the street the guvmint taking money off him, to fund some welfare cheat, is no different to them taking it off him because of a tax cheat.

They are all dishonest gits.

Collapse -

On cheating

by maxwell edison In reply to I want for myself waht so ...

Cheating (yourself and society) to gain what someone else earns, and supporting such policies, is almost seen as noble and compassionate. Cheating (those who cheat themselves and society) to keep what one earns himself is almost seen as sinister and mean. Why can't the latter be seen as a form of noble civil disobedience?

Personally speaking, I don't disagree that there's economic inequality, and that it's something that ails society. But is seeking government solutions the best way to cure it? I think not. In fact, government's cure is worse than the disease.

Rant Warning:

What makes people think that elected government representatives - mostly lawyers, by profession - are best suited to solve society's problems? People want them to literally run our health care system? And now our auto industry? Our retirement accounts? Name one thing they've laid their grubby little hands on that they haven't totally screwed up? And people want them to get their hands on more? Geesh! Wake up, people!

End of rant.

Collapse -

Keep talking like that

by santeewelding In reply to On cheating

And you'll be underfoot alongside RoadDog.

Collapse -

One thing the government of the US has done right

by BFilmFan In reply to On cheating

Distribution of polio and smallpox vaccines eliminating that disease from the population is one thing the government has done right.

I don't think the government makes the best decisions for me on the majority of my life, but I don't think they are the active force of evil they are made out to be by the party that isn't in power at the moment either.

I see them more as a bumbling, but well-meaning person that just is damned convinced they know what they are doing, even when they don't.

Collapse -


by boxfiddler Moderator In reply to One thing the government ...
Collapse -

Uh, don't recall anyone bashing them for that.

by road-dog In reply to One thing the government ...

OK, I have to grant the fedgov kudos on smallpox and polio. I think Darpanet turned out pretty well too.

I have a serious problem with politicians of both parties. Greedy, self-serving, megalomaniacs, busybodies who are more than willing to use the constitution as toilet paper while buying another term at the trough with my money. Those con-artists that are ready to sell out 49.9 % of the population to buy the votes of the other 50.1%.

The Constitution expressly limited federal power and politicians have repeatedly played voting blocs against each other to selectively negate it.

The federal government is not the problem, the people we have elected in the last 90 years or so are.

Is that a fair distinction?

Collapse -

Can't agree

by Tony Hopkinson In reply to One thing the government ...

You are looking at them as a man in street, who thinks something should be done and living in a democracy could give me the power to do it.

They aren't. They are vetted, groomed, brain washed, and fitted into the machine as a nice gleaming cog. No matter how high their ideals were, and that's a major point of contention, they won't get to act on them unless they toe the party line.

Collapse -

What convinces them ?

by Tony Hopkinson In reply to On cheating

Are you ready for this?

It's a startling conclusion after years of thought!


So called socialists, and so called capitalists.

I'm far from believing elected government repesentatives can run anything very well, I'm also vastly unconvinced ones 'elected' by a board of shareholders can do so either.

I remain firmly convinced that both will do it for their benefit, not mine and not their party/corporation, not their members/employess and certainly not their societies/countries

Every time we choose a representative based on their self proclaimed dogma, we buy into their model, they should run things, we should STFU. Which dogma? irrelevant.

I don't believe Max, never have. You just pigeon holed me, which means you let the big government capitalists do a number on you.

Manipulated by your own prejudices, and ones they've instilled in you, as to be honest I am. We argue over the colour of the string they use to puppet us.

I'm a small government socialist. The guys who are running the show want us to argue socialist versus capitalist, so we don't realise we agree on the small government bit.

If our way of thinking took over, they'd all be screwed. They know that.

Collapse -

They DO understand

by maxwell edison In reply to Do Americans Understand W ...

But they're afraid to admit.

Back to Windows Forum
54 total posts (Page 5 of 6)   Prev   03 | 04 | 05 | 06   Next

Related Discussions

Related Forums