Socialism

Custom Search

  

  

ďThe American people will never knowingly adopt socialism."

"But under the name of 'liberalism,' they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program,  until one day America will be a socialist nation, without knowing how it happened."

 

Socialist presidential candidate
Norman Thomas

 

    

 


help fight the media
  
 

 

 

 

Socialism
Nancy Morgan says, when a word comes too close to actually identifying an inconvenient reality, secular progressives spring into action.  The offending word is either redefined or reduced its first letter, thereby signifying that polite society will no longer accept it.  Youíve heard of the "N" word, the "B" word (think Hillary) and now comes the "S" word.

By its abbreviation, the "S" word, formerly known as socialism, infers a negative connotation.  A negative connotation richly deserved due to the incontrovertible fact that socialism

In a nutshell, socialism is an economic system where property is held in common, not individually, and its ideal is a centrally directed economy.  Socialism entails the substitution of group decision making for individual choice.  In this case, the "group" making the decisions are the 34 (and counting) unelected and unaccountable czars Obama is anointing.

The origins of socialist thought come directly from Aristotle.  Aristotle believed that since only actions aiming at a perceived benefit to others were, to his mind, morally approved, then actions solely for personal gain (capitalism) must be bad.

This theory of Aristotleís is the basic premise of the Obama administration.  By claiming the "moral high ground" of the "greater good" Obama and his minions have free reign to radically alter both our system of government and the hundreds of years of tradition it represents.

Under the guise of altruism and the greater good, Obama has launched a full scale attack on capitalism.  The very capitalism that has fed the world for decades.  The capitalism that has produced the highest standard of living in the freest and most productive country in the world.  But, according to the ruling elite, capitalism is bad, because it entails, gasp, "profit," and every progressive worth his salt knows profit is only possible on the backs of less fortunate.  Right?

Obama and the secular progressives who now determine policy in America pride themselves on being the intellectual representatives of modern thought and thus superior in knowledge, wisdom and moral virtue than those who hold traditional values (conservatives).  They believe their duty is to offer new ideas to the public and deride whatever is conventional and/or traditional. Newness, not truth, is their main value.

The fly in Obamaís ointment is the fact that the system of socialism isnít very good at creating wealth.  Only individuals do that.  But hey, socialism is "ethically superior" and thatís what counts.  Right?

Obama was voted into office based on his skill at selling abstract ideas like equality and justice.  Millions of Americans bought into his spiel.  Most likely the very same Americans who buy lottery tickets.  Against all reason, they were led to believe that the government can provide them a free lunch.  And there will be no cost to them.  And best of all, these moochers can also claim the moral high ground.  After all, they are victims of rich capitalists.  And thatís not fair!  And its not their fault that they havenít won lifeís lottery.

The problem with their premise can be reduced to two words -- free will.  God gave us free will -- the ability to fail or succeed based on the choices we make.  Obama proposes to do away with free will and vest those decisions in a central government.

Losers can now breathe a sigh of relief.  Whew!  Now, instead of losers, theyíre much valued victims.  And the new socialist society Obama and friends are in the process of implementing has a moral duty to shield them from the consequences of their bad choices.  But best of all, socialism allows lifeís losers the moral high ground as they systematically plunder the fruits of another manís labor.

This is socialism.  This is what Obama wants America to be.  But students of history insist on asking the question: How long can a society survive that rewards failure and punishes success?  Unfortunately, America will get an answer to that question if Obama is allowed to continue transforming our country into his "new and improved" idea of a socialist utopia.
A Lesson On Socialism
An economics professor said he had never failed a single student before but had, once, failed an entire class.  The class had insisted that socialism worked -- and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer for all, for society.  The professor then said OK, we will have an experiment in this class on socialism.

He said that all grades would be averaged and everyone would receive the same grade so no one would fail and no one would receive an A.  After the first test the grades were averaged and everyone was given a B.  The students who studied hard were upset, and the students who studied little were happy.  But, as the second test rolled around, the students who hadnít studied much for the first test had studied even less, and the ones who studied hard werenít motivated to study hard again, and they decided they wanted a free ride too; so they studied little.  The second Test average was a D!  No one was happy.  When the 3rd test rolled around the average was an F.

The scores never increased as bickering, blame, name calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for anyone else.  All failed -- and the professor told them that the socialism they wanted would ultimately fail, as they had, because the reward of success normally goes to those that work harder, but when government takes the reward away; few will try so no one will succeed.
The "S" Word
Nancy Morgan says, when a word comes too close to actually identifying an inconvenient reality, secular progressives spring into action.  The offending word is either redefined or reduced its first letter, thereby signifying that polite society will no longer accept it.  Youíve heard of the "N" word, the "B" word (think Hillary) and now comes the "S" word.

By its abbreviation, the "S" word, formerly known as socialism, infers a negative connotation.  A negative connotation richly deserved due to the incontrovertible fact that socialism

In a nutshell, socialism is an economic system where property is held in common, not individually, and its ideal is a centrally directed economy.  Socialism entails the substitution of group decision making for individual choice.  In this case, the "group" making the decisions are the 34 (and counting) unelected and unaccountable czars Obama is anointing.

The origins of socialist thought come directly from Aristotle.  Aristotle believed that since only actions aiming at a perceived benefit to others were, to his mind, morally approved, then actions solely for personal gain (capitalism) must be bad.

This theory of Aristotleís is the basic premise of the Obama administration.  By claiming the "moral high ground" of the "greater good" Obama and his minions have free reign to radically alter both our system of government and the hundreds of years of tradition it represents.

Under the guise of altruism and the greater good, Obama has launched a full scale attack on capitalism.  The very capitalism that has fed the world for decades.  The capitalism that has produced the highest standard of living in the freest and most productive country in the world.  But, according to the ruling elite, capitalism is bad, because it entails, gasp, "profit," and every progressive worth his salt knows profit is only possible on the backs of less fortunate.  Right?

Obama and the secular progressives who now determine policy in America pride themselves on being the intellectual representatives of modern thought and thus superior in knowledge, wisdom and moral virtue than those who hold traditional values (conservatives).  They believe their duty is to offer new ideas to the public and deride whatever is conventional and/or traditional. Newness, not truth, is their main value.

The fly in Obamaís ointment is the fact that the system of socialism isnít very good at creating wealth.  Only individuals do that.  But hey, socialism is "ethically superior" and thatís what counts.  Right?

Obama was voted into office based on his skill at selling abstract ideas like equality and justice.  Millions of Americans bought into his spiel.  Most likely the very same Americans who buy lottery tickets.  Against all reason, they were led to believe that the government can provide them a free lunch.  And there will be no cost to them.  And best of all, these moochers can also claim the moral high ground.  After all, they are victims of rich capitalists.  And thatís not fair!  And its not their fault that they havenít won lifeís lottery.

The problem with their premise can be reduced to two words -- free will.  God gave us free will -- the ability to fail or succeed based on the choices we make.  Obama proposes to do away with free will and vest those decisions in a central government.

Losers can now breathe a sigh of relief.  Whew!  Now, instead of losers, theyíre much valued victims.  And the new socialist society Obama and friends are in the process of implementing has a moral duty to shield them from the consequences of their bad choices.  But best of all, socialism allows lifeís losers the moral high ground as they systematically plunder the fruits of another manís labor.

This is socialism.  This is what Obama wants America to be.  But students of history insist on asking the question: How long can a society survive that rewards failure and punishes success?  Unfortunately, America will get an answer to that question if Obama is allowed to continue transforming our country into his "new and improved" idea of a socialist utopia.
The Hexagon Of Progress


    
Barack Obama -- Working Families Party -- Democratic Socialists Of America -- New Party -- ACORN -- SEIU

Folks, we are not calling Democrats "socialists." Thatís a mean, ugly word frequently used as an epithet to smear people on a personal level.  We are calling them "Democratic Socialists."

We donít mean this as a judgment.  It is simply a fact which the politicians involved with the Working Families Party group should be made to own.

Caution: This is a lengthy post, but, itís easy to follow and thereís a party favor at very end.

Letís review the facts:
At Some Point You Have Grabbed Enough Power
Scott at PowerLine blog says that given that poorer citizens always outnumber the rich, the classic political philosophers held that government based on majority rule was untenable.  They were of the view that it would lead to organized theft from the wealthy by the democratic masses.  Thus Aristotle warned in The Politics, for example: "If the majority distributes among itself the things of a minority, it is evident that it will destroy the city."

The Founders of the United States were deep students of politics and history, and they shared Aristotle's concern.  Up through their time, history had shown all known democracies to be "incompatible with personal security or the rights of property."  James Madison and others held that the "first object of government" was to protect the rights of property.  Numerous provisions of the Constitution and Bill of Rights were incorporated to protect the property rights of citizens from the power of the government.

Whatever else might be said about him, Obama operates on a different philosophy of government from that of the Founders.  As Michelle Malkin observes, he spoke the most revealing and clarifying 10 words of his administration this week: "I think at some point you have made enough money."

The Founders thought that at some point the government had enough power.  Obama, however, is a devout believer in unlimited government.  The common denominator among so-called health care reform and financial regulatory reform as well as Obama's other big proposals is the augmented power they confer on the government in general and the executive branch in particular.

Alluding to other elements of Obama's Quincy speech earlier this week, Michelle observes that Obama presumes to know when you have earned "enough," who believes that only those who provide what he deems "good" products and services should "keep on making it," and who has determined that the role of American entrepreneurs is not to pursue their own self-interest, but to fulfill their "core" responsibility as dutiful growers of the collective economy.  Michelle concludes: "That famous mock-up poster of Obama as the creepy socialist Joker never seemed more apt."

John Hinderaker adds: Federal employees now are paid much more money than their counterparts in private industry.  Is Obama willing to acknowledge that they earn "enough" and should forgo future pay increases?  Obama himself earned more than $5 million last year.  Is that "enough"?  George Soros has made countless millions from currency manipulations that many regard as little better than extortion.  Does he have "enough"?  I suspect that "enough" will prove to be a standard that is both highly flexible and intimately related to political influence.
Wake Up, America
Fred Dardick says wake up, America.  Democrats arenít Democrats anymore.  Theyíre communists.  And the so-called "moderate Democrats" are merely socialists.

It wasnít so long ago that much loved Democrat President John F. Kennedy told the nation in his inaugural address, "Ask not what your country can do for you -- ask what you can do for your country", implying a sense of self sacrifice was needed by all Americans to keep the torch of freedom burning bright in a world filled with tyranny.

An idea most could relate to regardless of political affiliation.

But times have changed and modern liberal philosophy has become almost unrecognizable to previous generations.  It can be more accurately described as: "Forget personal sacrifice, keep sitting on your behind, and let the government rob your neighbor for you."

Democrat political aims no longer share the fundamental ideals that have served this nation so well for so long.  Rather than put their trust in the righteousness of the American individual, their intention is to transfer as much power as possible to the collective, as represented by the federal government.

Barack Obama outlined his openly communist thinking at a University of Michigan commencement address this past weekend when he said "When our government is spoken of as some menacing, threatening foreign entity, it ignores the fact that in our democracy, government is us."

What is he talking about?

First off, you have to be out of your mind to not be at least a little skeptical of an entity that can force you from your home, take away your money, incarcerate you, and ship you off to warÖall for sometimes less than perfect reasons.

Thatís an awful lot of power just begging to be misused by unscrupulous politicians, and a community organizer should know it.  I seem to recall Obama having a real big problem with government not so long ago when we invaded Iraq.

Our founding fathers were right to be fearful of centralized government.  They knew from their experiences with the kings of Europe that a small number of people with unchecked power could not be trusted.  It wasnít necessarily unheard of for the ruling class to turn on the common folk and start nailing people to trees.

Obamaís statement "government is us" is likewise absurd.

Continue reading here . . .
International Socialists Behind Union Rallies
Meredith Jessup is reporting that last fall, leftist ideological groups of socialists and communists teamed up with American labor unions to march together for "One Nation."  Now, as labor leaders struggle to maintain a stranglehold on collective bargaining privileges in Wisconsin, the same groups are once again marching together under a banner claiming unions are the heart of the American dream.

As weíve reported, former White House green jobs czar Van Jones this week issued a rallying call for the progressive movement to "renew itself and become again a national force with which to be reckoned."  On Saturday, progressive groups and labor unions held marches of solidarity in all 50 states.

Here in Washington, D.C., leftist activists at MoveOn.org are co-hosting a rally Saturday with the Service Employees International Union (SEIU).  But behind the scenes, The Blaze has exclusively learned the rally has actually been organized by the International Socialist Organization.
    

According to MoveOn.orgís website, the rally is meant to fight back against Congress which has "been taken over by corporate lackeys who want to destroy the American dream."

      

"The American dream," MoveOn organizer Bill Boteler says, "is about fairness and equal opportunityÖ  Weíre standing up for the American Dream and saying that now is not the time to start slashing middle-class jobs in the middle of a recession, in Wisconsin, or anywhere in America.  Be there to tell the politicians: Before you shut down the government and punish middle-class working Americans, why not first make the richest of the rich pay their fair share in taxes, just like everyone else."

 

Despite MoveOn.org and SEIU taking a leading role -- along with a number of other sponsors including the AFL-CIO, AFSCME, George Sorosí Media Matters, the Apollo Alliance and the Sierra Club -- the National Park Service has confirmed that the Saturday rallyís permit was requested by and issued to the International Socialist Organization, a group committed to building a "future socialist society."

 

How many unionized American workers consider the "American dream" to be a "future socialist society?"

 

According to their own website, the ISO admits its branches across the country are "helping to build a number of struggles," including "standing up for workersí rights":

      

The misery that millions of people around the world face is rooted in the society we live inĖcapitalism, where the few who rule profit from the labor of the vast majority of the population.

In the U.S., a tiny proportion of the population enjoys fantastic wealth, while millions of people live in desperate poverty, and many more live paycheck to paycheck.  Yet we have the resources to feed, clothe and educate everyone on the planet.

A world free of exploitation -- socialism -- is not only possible but worth fighting for.  The ISO stands in the tradition of revolutionary socialists Karl Marx, V.I. Lenin and Leon Trotsky in the belief that workers themselves -- the vast majority of the population -- are the only force that can lead the fight to win a socialist society.  Socialism canít be brought about from above, but has to be won by workers themselves. Ö
    
We see our task as building an independent socialist organization with members organizing in our workplaces, our schools and our neighborhoods to bring socialist ideas to the struggles we are involved in today, and the vision of a socialist world in the future.

       

In addition to working with liberal activists and national labor unions behind the scenes, the ISO is just one of many socialist/Marxist/communist groups organizing their members to support Van Jones' new "American dream" initiative.

      

The Daily Caller noted Friday that a number of radical groups -- including the Maoist Revolutionary Communist Party, the Communist Party USA, Trotskyist Socialist Workers Party and the Democratic Socialists of America -- are taking up the labor unions' talking points and encouraging Egypt-like unrest in the United States.

      

The Socialist Workers Party has labeled Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker "an enemy of the people."

      

"Egypt, whose revolution has been a constant source of inspiration here, reflected in signs and chants -- and Walkerís new nickname, Gov. Mubarak," an ISO article reads.  In addition, the article labels the current budget debates in Wisconsin as "class war" and as an affront to "the standard of living of working people."

      

"Using the deficit as a scare tactic, the right-wing corporate Republicans are on a fast track to defeat every initiative of the Obama administration, to destroy unions and public services at the federal, state and municipal level, and at the same time protect tax breaks for the richest few," writes Joelle Fishman, chair of the Communist Party USAís Political Action Commission.  A "broad alliance of forces for social change (labor, racially oppressed, women, youth)" need to step forward to re-frame the nationís political debate for the 2012 elections, she insists.

      

While many skeptics claim these radical leftist groups may agree with the unions on a number of issues, the fact that these groups are actually working in conjunction with unions to orchestrate the ongoing protests says a lot about American unionsí modern-day political orientation -- far to the left and antithetical to the real American dream.

      

The communist, socialists, and the rest of the Marxist Left are out of the closet.  They see this as their moment to seize the American political system and turn this country into Cuba.

      

Obama has made this possible.

Comments . . .
***  
 

©  Copyright  Beckwith  2010

All right reserved