4
4
0
Please read this before responding.
How Did America Forget What ‘Socialist’ Means?
Posted from politico.com
United States
Socialism
Capitalism
Politics
Hillary Clinton
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 16
12
12
0
Okay, I read it and the author failed to make mention of one very salient fact. America has forgotten the meaning of "Socialist" because the socialists have hidden themselves in a new word: "Progressive". Unlike Great Britain and Europe where socialism has been embraced, the United States has a knee-jerk reaction to it. We don't like it. We tried it. The Pilgrims landed at Plymouth with Utopian dreams and almost died practicing socialism. Other English colonies weren't so lucky. They died. As the author mentions, "Socialist" is a four-letter word in America, the equivalent of a Blood Libel when applied to FDR. So, the socialists adopted a new word, verbal camouflage, and called themselves Progressives. Has a nice ring to it, doesn't it. And they aren't attacking directly. They're chipping away at the edges of the Free Market that grew America's economy beyond anything the world had ever seen. They now sit perched on the precipice of their greatest victory: The nationalization of health care in America. Obamacare will soon implode and we can't go back to the way things were because Obamacare's singular accomplishment has been to destroy the existing health insurance industry. Whomever wins the elections this year will be forced to lead us into a single-payer program, just what the Progressives wanted all along. America will then have stepped over the edge and onto the slippery slope...
(12)
(0)
PO3 Donald Murphy
CPT Jack Durish - I'm interested in where you could/would point me as far as books go, to grab a hold of that area of time. Pre-WW2 is not really my strong point (I have maybe ten books in the whole house that are pre-1937). I have been led to believe (both in America and by British family/friends) that the settlers were largely "bank employees" hired by the government/crown to settle the area then England would reap the benefit of the crops, treasure, etc. Basically, they came over and were doing what they had already done elsewhere in the empire. They weren't newbies.
So did this group that settled first in Virginia and later elsewhere, did they lose their leaders early on due to sickness/whatever and then find themselves leaderless? The reason I ask is that without waiting for an answer, the crown dispatched a ship full of supplies and troops to Jamaica when the expedition failed to "write home" that they had landed successfully. The crown assumed the ship/troops/supplies got sunk/lost and sent another. So I'm wondering why letters of hardship from North America didn't get the same answer from the crown?
I live 2 hours from St. Augustine and that city has great displays and tours where they show how the initial Spanish settlers died off from disease, heat exhaustion, etc. They then go on to show how the following British mission adopted less clothing, no armor, etc. So I'm wondering how the "pilgrims" strayed from the program, so to speak. Any book advice greatly appreciated.
So did this group that settled first in Virginia and later elsewhere, did they lose their leaders early on due to sickness/whatever and then find themselves leaderless? The reason I ask is that without waiting for an answer, the crown dispatched a ship full of supplies and troops to Jamaica when the expedition failed to "write home" that they had landed successfully. The crown assumed the ship/troops/supplies got sunk/lost and sent another. So I'm wondering why letters of hardship from North America didn't get the same answer from the crown?
I live 2 hours from St. Augustine and that city has great displays and tours where they show how the initial Spanish settlers died off from disease, heat exhaustion, etc. They then go on to show how the following British mission adopted less clothing, no armor, etc. So I'm wondering how the "pilgrims" strayed from the program, so to speak. Any book advice greatly appreciated.
(0)
(0)
CPT Jack Durish
PO3 Donald Murphy - For the first half of the 20th Century, there is no better resource than the biography of Winston Churchill. He was both an active/central participant and a keen observer. Hillsdale College made the complete set available on Kindle, free-of-charge last year to commemorate his birthday (Nov 30). I took advantage. Maybe you'll get lucky and they'll do it again. See the "Store" at the Churchill Project. They also have free on line classes (video lectures) that are extremely interesting. https://winstonchurchill.hillsdale.edu/ For the story of the Pilgrims, you may want to read The Pilgrim Chronicles by Rod Gragg https://www.amazon.com/Pilgrim-Chronicles-Eyewitness-Pilgrims-Founding-ebook/dp/B00NS40T0G/ref=sr_1_7?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid= [login to see] &sr=1-7&keywords=plymouth+colony I never depend on any one source. I study from multiple sources and compare. I also prefer source documents or books like the Churchill biographies or The Pilgrim Chronicles that rely on and quote source documents
The Churchill Project - Hillsdale College
The study of statesmanship is central to the teaching mission of Hillsdale College, and the classics teach that the art can be best understood by studying those who have a reputation for it.
(1)
(0)
(0)
(0)
6
6
0
I think the Millennials know full well what "socialism" means. They weren't subjected to the propaganda, that's all. Capitalism is what has led to the oligarchy we are under right now. Corporations run our government, not the needs of the people. I think they see the failure, especially in the last 35 years, of the laissez-faire "free-market" system, and they want to try something different. Like many other things, socialism has changed in the last 100+ years since Marx wrote his book. Despite their claims that they are not "socialist" countries, the economies of the European countries have more in common with socialism than they do with American style capitalism. The interesting this is, they have managed to institute socialist program while maintaining private ownership of the means of production. This is what the Millennials, and Sen. Sanders, are looking for.
Despite what you hear from the right wing propaganda machines, socialism does not require a totalitarian government to operate. Communism and Socialism are not the same thing. Communism is a political system that use Socialism as its economic system. Socialism has become an economic system that can live under just about any political system, including representative republics, like the US.
Is socialism, as practiced by numerous countries, and as advocated for by Sen. Sanders, the same as the socialism first proposed by Karl Marx? No. And that is the beauty of human ingenuity. We can take the ideas of Marx and turn them into something that actually works.
Anyone who thinks capitalism, as it is currently practiced in this country, is fair and equitable, that it works for everyone, is an outright liar. We are told that all we need is hard work and we will be successful. That is an outright lie. Millions lost everything in the crash of '08. It wasn't the Democrat's fault and it wasn't the Republican's fault. It was everyone's fault. And it showed that, even if you work hard, shit can happen and everything you work for can be taken away by a heartless capitalist with more money. Socialism, as advocated for by the Progressive movement, seeks to equal the playing field a little. It seeks to create that safety net so unexpected events don't make one homeless and destitute. It gives them the bare basics so they can earn back what they lost.
No, what we are seeing today is not the same socialism as what Marx proposed, and it shouldn't be. But it does deserve a chance, regardless of you knee-jerk, propagandist reaction to the word.
Despite what you hear from the right wing propaganda machines, socialism does not require a totalitarian government to operate. Communism and Socialism are not the same thing. Communism is a political system that use Socialism as its economic system. Socialism has become an economic system that can live under just about any political system, including representative republics, like the US.
Is socialism, as practiced by numerous countries, and as advocated for by Sen. Sanders, the same as the socialism first proposed by Karl Marx? No. And that is the beauty of human ingenuity. We can take the ideas of Marx and turn them into something that actually works.
Anyone who thinks capitalism, as it is currently practiced in this country, is fair and equitable, that it works for everyone, is an outright liar. We are told that all we need is hard work and we will be successful. That is an outright lie. Millions lost everything in the crash of '08. It wasn't the Democrat's fault and it wasn't the Republican's fault. It was everyone's fault. And it showed that, even if you work hard, shit can happen and everything you work for can be taken away by a heartless capitalist with more money. Socialism, as advocated for by the Progressive movement, seeks to equal the playing field a little. It seeks to create that safety net so unexpected events don't make one homeless and destitute. It gives them the bare basics so they can earn back what they lost.
No, what we are seeing today is not the same socialism as what Marx proposed, and it shouldn't be. But it does deserve a chance, regardless of you knee-jerk, propagandist reaction to the word.
(6)
(0)
SGT Edward Wilcox
Maj John Bell - The Community Reinvestment Act was passed to stop Redlining and other discriminatory acts by banks. It did not "force" them to approve people who could not afford to borrow. That is a gross mis-characterization of the act, if not an outright lie, propagated by those who want you to blame the poor people for the criminal acts of the banks. You should watch "The Big Short". An eye opening movie that puts the blame right where it belongs.
(0)
(0)
Maj John Bell
SGT Edward Wilcox - Redlining may be called discriminatory but it is based on one more factor of risk, geography, not race (yes I understand that there is a correlation), but whites who lived in red lined districts had the same factor used in determining the risk of loaning them money. Redlining has certainly not been legislated against in other industries. I do not pay the same rate for auto insurance as someone with a similar driving record, that lives in Detroit or Los Angeles. Geographic location is considered in healthcare rates.
It did "force" them. To enforce the statute, federal regulatory agencies examine banking institutions for CRA compliance, and take this information into consideration when approving applications for new bank branches or for mergers or acquisitions.
I do not put any stock in sworn testimony by Hollywood celebrities testifying before Congress (Elmo, Stephen Colbert, Ben Affleck etc.) Why would I give gravitas to a Hollywood Movie? Are the writers, directors, actors, and camera men recognized subject matter experts? Are they "sworn in" prior to filming? Do they face any criminal or civil penalties if they take "poetic license" to increase the entertainment value of "based on a true" story. Is their professional reputation damaged if the play fast and loose with the truth?
For a long read try: Democratizing Capital: The History, Law And Reform of the Community Reinvestment Act by Marsico
For a short read, with counter arguments try this post:
http://www.businessinsider.com/the-cra-debate-a-users-guide-2009-6
It did "force" them. To enforce the statute, federal regulatory agencies examine banking institutions for CRA compliance, and take this information into consideration when approving applications for new bank branches or for mergers or acquisitions.
I do not put any stock in sworn testimony by Hollywood celebrities testifying before Congress (Elmo, Stephen Colbert, Ben Affleck etc.) Why would I give gravitas to a Hollywood Movie? Are the writers, directors, actors, and camera men recognized subject matter experts? Are they "sworn in" prior to filming? Do they face any criminal or civil penalties if they take "poetic license" to increase the entertainment value of "based on a true" story. Is their professional reputation damaged if the play fast and loose with the truth?
For a long read try: Democratizing Capital: The History, Law And Reform of the Community Reinvestment Act by Marsico
For a short read, with counter arguments try this post:
http://www.businessinsider.com/the-cra-debate-a-users-guide-2009-6
Here's How The Community Reinvestment Act Led To The Housing Bubble's Lax Lending
A handy user's guide for those who want to jump into the debate.
(0)
(0)
SGT Edward Wilcox
Redlining was all about race. As one who tried to buy a house in 2006, I can attest that the CRA did nothing for me. You want answers to your questions, see the movie.
(0)
(0)
SSgt (Join to see)
We do not practice capitalism in this country and we do not have a " laissez-faire 'free-market' system." Government has imposed too many rules and regulations for it to be a truly capitalist society. We are really more of a corporatist economy now. Corporations that have money have been allowed to keep competition from entering the market place by paying off government to make more regulations that make it difficult to enter the market. Take professional licensing as an example. Sure there are some careers that probably do need licensing to ensure accountability but not to the level that we have in the U.S. Look at how many major cities are making rules to keep Lyft and Uber out of their jurisdictions because of taxi unions.
(0)
(0)
6
6
0
The "historical illiteracy that treats socialism as a benign economic system that is more equitable and fair than capitalism" is the result of our anti-capitalist liberals taking over the educational system and spreading their ideology onto the young minds in their care.
This historical illiteracy is only one of many failures of our current educational system to prepare our children for the real world.
This historical illiteracy is only one of many failures of our current educational system to prepare our children for the real world.
(6)
(0)
Capt Michael Greene
Capt Seid Waddell How in the world did you get there? Liberals are anti-capitalist? Come happy hour, I've have whatever you're drinkin'.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google