Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Socialism? We Wish, Says Local Group
Dan La Botz knows with certainty that President Barack Obama is no socialist.
He's sure because he's one himself, and finds little in common with the politics of the 44th president of the United States.
"I don't support Obama. If I did, I would be a Democrat," La Botz said. "I find it astonishing that people would think he's a socialist. He's given trillions of dollars to bankers, billions to General Motors, created a health care system that supports the health insurance companies ... his foreign policy is consistent with Bush's foreign policy."
La Botz, of Clifton, is running for a seat in the U.S. Senate this year on the Socialist ticket.
Since President Obama was elected, "socialism" is a word on the lips of many conservative politicians, tea party supporters and political pundits. A CBS News/New York Times poll in April showed 92 percent of tea party supporters believe Obama is moving the country toward socialism - while 52 percent of all Americans held the same belief.
Socialists shake their heads - but they don't really mind the attention.
"If folks like Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin and Rush Limbaugh make their careers off of using the word socialism as a slur, how bad could it be?" asks 35-year-old Shane Johnson of Corryville, a union electrician who helped revive Cincinnati's International Socialist Organization chapter this year, which has about a dozen members.
"We should be fighting for full employment. End wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan," La Botz said. "We should immediately take over BP. What they own is too valuable and too powerful to be in private hands."
Socialism 101
The core concept of this political and economic theory is that people should control the means of production and allocation of resources in society.
Socialists believe in equality for all - hence their devotion to civil rights - and a fair distribution of wealth. They see capitalism as a system that exploits workers in its aspiration for greater profit, therefore broadening the gap between rich and poor.
There are two basic socialist ideas, says Billy Wharton, co-chair of the Socialist Party USA, headquartered in New York City.
"We believe in a society that values human needs over the needs of corporations," Wharton said. "We think that the economy can be run in a democratic way, (allowing) people more decision-making power in the things that affect their everyday lives."He believes businesses, even big ones, could be run more like the Alvarado Street Bakery in California. Opened in 1979, the business is run and owned by its 119 employees.
"The people who work in the bakery make decisions on how much wages are, how hard they work, what they produce, larger economic decisions about how much they want to expand," Wharton said.
Miami University economics professor James Brock isn't sure socialism would produce the results its supporters want.
"I don't know whether - if you turn it over to the workers - it would make any big difference in the scheme of things," said Brock, who has taught economics for 31 years. "The great challenge is how do you create the maximum amount of creativity and opportunity and not be smothered by bureaucracy and excess. I think labor unions can be as bureaucratic as corporations."
Back from hiatus
At a recent Cincinnati ISO meeting, held at the University of Cincinnati on Wednesday evenings, eight participants discuss Marxist theory. The conversation hinges for about 10 minutes on how profits might be spent by large corporations, if the U.S. economy was based on socialism instead of capitalism.
Maybe medical research or advances in technology, a younger member opines.
"People from this generation are going to be the first to have a lower standard of living than their parents," Johnson says later. "They're going to work longer, for less pay, and their wages will get them less. They may not be able to retire and may file bankruptcy - or already have - due to illness without health care."The ISO chapter had been on a one-year hiatus when it again began meeting weekly in April.
Since then the group has organized and championed several local events,including the March for Immigration Reform attended by hundreds of people Downtown on June 5, demonstrating ISO's strong believe in equal rights.
A handful of the group's members are at the Socialism 2010 conference in Chicago this past weekend.
Third party politics
For the first time in his life, Johnson had the option to choose a Socialist ballot in May's primary election. Recent court rulings and an order by Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner gave third parties easier access to the ballot.The result: Johnson ended up one of 46 people in Hamilton County who voted for La Botz, compared to roughly 50,000 votes for Republican candidate Rob Portman.
La Botz pulled in 369 statewide votes, far behind Portman, Democrats Jennifer Brunner and Lee Fisher, and also trailing Eric W. Deaton of the Constitution Party, who got 1,737 votes.
La Botz, who teaches Spanish at a local private school, remains optimistic.
"I expect to win many more votes in the general election," La Botz said. "I also think the votes are only one measure of success of the campaign. You want to use the campaign trail as an opportunity to organize people or inspire people to do what they ought to do; to fight for jobs for everyone, to defend women's right to choose, to defend gay and lesbian rights and immigrant rights."
Xavier University political science professor Mack Mariani believes Americans are frustrated with government leaders and skeptical of big business, but he's not convinced socialist thought is spreading.
"I haven't seen anything that would seem the Socialist Party is having a resurgence," Mariani said. "Even though I think capitalism as a concept has taken a hit in terms of public approval ... it wouldn't translate into support for the Socialist Party."
Still, local socialists march on.
"I think we are at a very critical moment in our history," La Botz said. "People are looking for new ideas and the answers to the problems of American society. Our goal is to offer a different point of view."
70 Comments so far
Show AllSocialism could probably save this country from total collapse but it would not be the same ideology that rules now and not many people will endorse the concept. To bad.
You need to demand a ton if you hope to end up with an ounce.
This is a simple concept that right wingers understand very well while the rest of us keep starting the negotiation from a centrist position and ending up with nothing.
If you don't vote for an extreme left candidate or policy you will end up with a right of center candidate or policy.
Nothing can save the US from total collapse. The US grows, mines, and manufactures very little that is useful. Its banks are running on fumes.
What's there to "save" anyway?
- A "health care" system that kills 40,000 people a year?
- A "defense" department that has killed at least 600,000 Iraqis?
- A domestic security apparatus that spies on us 24/7?
- A "justice" department that approves of kidnapping and murder without trial?
- A banking system that is nothing more than legalized theft?
- A "lifestyle" where both parents work overtime and pay strangers to raise their children?
- An energy "plan" that includes the destruction of the Gulf of Mexico?
The list goes on.
How about less talk of "saving" the dumb ol' USA and more talk of what to do after it's gone.
Capitalism is the same system that not only rewards greed but produces selfish and cruel morons across the political spectrum. Just a few days ago, I had an argument with an idiot who defended the BP CEO, Obama, and the banksters by trying to shift the blame on the little guy. In a socialist system, you would not come across people who smug and arrogant in their attitudes. Obama's PR foot soldiers will always try to divert discussion when their leader is in hot water by copying the conservatives with their "What are you doing about it?" or "I got mine, to hell with you, you're nothing" bullshit talk. They know that they are wrong and that they were given special privileges and treatment that most of us wouldn't dream of having. The Ted Retailers and Joe Plumbers will either rail against socialism or pretend that they like it but show their arrogance by making themselves look like they did it all by themselves without government. Ahh, but here's the catch. What they don't want to tell you is that they are infected with the disease called capitalism which causes erratic behavior such as defending perpetrators at the top and blaming the little guy for their sins. Once they are infected with the disease, it becomes very difficult to cure them from their selfish and arrogant attitudes they show against others.
I hate to tell you this but from some of the comments I am reading even on this site, I find that even some on the left are infected with that disease. If I call for improvements to metro for example and point out the dirty secrets of raising fares just to paint a few trash cans, I'm called "self-centered" despite my calls to improve the routing schedules and expand those tracks for all the fare gouging. If I call out a bankster for cheating customers or BP mishandling an oil rig, I'm somehow to be blamed and not the CEO or the banksters. If politicians create policies which force more people to sign up when fewer jobs are available locally, then somehow it's the people's fault and not the politicians.
This morning I met a young girl 20 years old and studying economics at William and Mary. She arrogantly believes that socialism is for Satans. Little does she know that capitalism spoiled her thinking with this "degree" in Economics designed to brainwash and mislead these young students. Perhaps she is aware that in a socialist system, getting a degree in Economics wouldn't be as big because a socialist system is far less complicated than a capitalist system that has different rules for different classes.
I may not be poor or unemployed because I have what it takes to get a new job quickly but I acknowledge that most people do not share this fortune and I might be able to help or get them on the right track. But I also know that a change in the system must take place to reduce the burden on all. I learned enough lessons from being the victim of capitalism and losing many of friends in this system. I am supposed to be an obedient servant and be thankful for capitalism but I refuse to be because I know that even though I am doing fine, to be surrounded by others suffering is something I have no tolerance for. I refuse to cooperate with the authoritarian system and don't mind getting into trouble for repeatedly putting fools out of their misery even at the cost of demolishing the status quo repeatedly. There are two choices.
1. You can choose to be a part of the capitalist system that keeps the selfish and arrogant all beamed up saying "I'm doing great. What are you doing about it?" or similar shit.
2. You can choose to join the fight to remove the taboo on socialism and be spiritually vindicated for demolishing the status quo.
from the article:
"People from this generation are going to be the first to have a lower standard of living than their parents," Johnson says later. "They're going to work longer, for less pay, and their wages will get them less. They may not be able to retire and may file bankruptcy - or already have - due to illness without health care."
this is inevitable...the preceeding generations have raised their standard of living far beyond reason...
everything man has made, every salt shaker, every ballpoint pen, every toothbrush, every THING, has been ripped from the living planet...
the preceeding generations may have killed the planet already...
rather than emulate them, we should be stopping their practices, and cleaning up their mess...
socialism, as described here, is worthless...
the ownership of land is the core issue...
the ownership of land is the ownership of people...
free the land, free the people...
industrialization, turning the living world into product, must cease, that the planet, and people, may live...
In two generations we have seen room-sized computers drop to pad size and do 1000 new things. Now robots can build all sorts of things. It's going to be extremely difficult to have a lifestyle worse than our parents, but if anyone in the history of the planet can flub this up, we can!
Technology will only improve quality of life if managed to do so.
During the 60s we complained about the built-in obsolescence model advanced by the automotive industry. The technology industry has perfected built-in obsolescence to a level that the auto industry could only dream of.
Since when do electronic gadgets translate to a better "lifestyle"? Can I eat them? Are they tasty and healthful, locally-produced and enjoyable when shared around the table with friends? Do they create kinship, friendship, and harmony between humans? Did people not have parties, fairs, and festivals, romantic walks in parks, or fall in love before they existed? Do they assure all humans have security in obtaining shelter and food? Do they produce art and beauty? Will they prevent future global climate catastrophes? Do they satisfy the human need for high adventure, either personal or vicarously. Men flew to the moon with a computer a tiny fraction of the power of a PDA. Sir. Hillary and Norgay didn't even take a 2 way radio with them up Everest.
And, my own pet peeve, will these electronic gadgets get all of those illegal "quads" (something else peoples parents didn't have) off the West Virignia wilderness areas so that those of us who walk there can enjoy a place without man-made noise, smell and erosion?
Aside from maybe medical imaging technology, I quite seriously can't think of how computer and communication gadgets have improved human quality of life in the least. It seems to me, with their pace-of-live compression efect, that they have caused considerable degradation in the quality of human life.
Socialism is usually associated with government control, but many socialist priciples can be (and are being) applied in local communities (e.g., sustainability movements) and in creating glocal (people not corporate supported) networks.
The most important actions are poeple creating rganizations, businesses, etc. that are driven by social and environmental values (not by consumption and monetary profits) and supporting each other, locally and globally.
We would have never gotten FDR's New Deal if the Socialist and Communist Parties didn't have the number of US member they did during the 30s. FDR and many Congressmen convinced Congress and voters that the New Deal would take the wind out of the socialists' sails.
After more than a half century of propaganda and persecution a much smaller percentage of US voters will vote socialist, or for other parties that are to the left of Democrats. With rare exceptions, Democrats and Republicans consistently get 97-98% of the vote in each election, thereby assuring continued corporate control.
Until more Americans start voting for parties that are to the left of the Democrats, the Democrats will continue moving further to the right to please their corporate paymasters.
Capitalists know how to short-circuit both three-party and multiparty elections, as witness the recent UK election, where Clegg and the LibDems were faced with the choice of governing with the Tories or leaving the Tories to try to go it alone. Dissatisfaction with the anti-socialist anti-worker "New Labour" had led to the rise of the LibDems, so they couldn't collaborate with them; but forming a coalition government with the Conservatives deprived them of even more credit.
In France, as Jospin continued the sellout of the Socialist Party, the multiplicity of left-wing parties left the PS in third place so that LePen actually wound up in the national election which led to Chirac's second term, and the PS have not been able to unify the left despite Sarkozy's further attacks on the public sector.
Elections in the US are now nakedly in complete control of corporations since the corporations have asserted complete control of the Supreme Court, which had been compromised at least from the 1950s until the 1980s.
Living in a Socialist Democratic country like Sweden, Finland, Norway, Austria, etc...would be dreamlike compared to the absolute hell that the US is becoming.
They pay taxes yes, but they actually get something for their taxes like universal health care, education all the way through the university system based on merit, clean streets, low crime, no citizens going homeless, no excessive military spending.
Private enterprise exists just fine in these countries as well, but they don't run the show, and raid the treasury that is supposed to be shared by, and promote the citizenry.
Yes, and anybody who votes for a Democrat or Republican when a socialist is on the ballot is contributing to the problem and against any possible solution.
I was griping to a friend about how much money I owe after outpatient surgery in spite of having health insurance; the friend, who's in the military, suggested that this was proof I needed to find a job (I was recently laid off). I reminded my friend that when I underwent surgery, I was insured through my job, and asked what good the insurance was if I ended up still owing money. He then claimed maybe it was time for me to move. I answered, "Yes, maybe to Canada or Europe," and he answered, "I don't think you would be happy with their health care." This is they myth that too many Americans believe: that health care in other countries is substandard, that citizens have lengthy waiting periods and have to pay far too much in taxes, that we would never be happy if we had their coverage.
Yet I know people who live or have lived in Canada and parts of Europe who are/were very happy with their coverage. And still, Americans fear "socialism" and insist that we have more "freedom" than anyone else in the world. How can one be free without having their most basic needs met?
You would be surprised to find the number of even the liberals and progressives in this country falling for the anti-socialism talk hook, line, and sinker. Obama's PR foot soldiers do a hell of a job covering up for him. Raise the issue of Obamacare and they ask "What are you doing to get your state or town to provide single payer?". I hate to tell it to you but don't take this as an offense. Like many, your friend is the victim of capitalism infecting his way of thinking. He thinks that he has it all and is on top of it all but he isn't. The word freedom is completely open to misinterpretation in this country.
Military indoctrination brainwashes pro-corporate values into its victims and those victims' opinions will always reflect corporate values.
If Americans wake up and realize that we are being duped with Obamacare, insurance industry execs. know that they will no longer be pulling down 7 figure salaries or flying around the world in corporate jets. They spend millions of your insurance premium dollars bribing politicians to keep those salaries and jets.
Most so-called liberals and progressives who I know do not know any of the details of Obamacare...their knowledge is limited to Obama talking points. Demolition Man's Obama PR foot soldier acquaintances are obviously not aware that Obamacare prohibits state and local governments from starting their own single-payer insurance.
"Demolition Man's Obama PR foot soldier acquaintances are obviously not aware that Obamacare prohibits state and local governments from starting their own single-payer insurance."
There was one exception I met. I quoted a part of the bill where the prohibition lies and he thought that I was misinterpreting and accused me of defending naysayers. He still thinks that single payer on state and local governments will prevail even if state and local lawmakers do their own prohibition.
Some of these PR soldiers are aware of execs flying around and lobbying with our money and yet they'll still blame us for not being personally responsible enough. Capitalism sure has a way of making some people feel too good about blaming the small guys for everything while exonerating the top crooks.
Socialism is what actually empowers small businesses while capitalism actually kills them. Before we can see more small businesses for more people, we need to start out with a 10 year moratorium on capitalism and replace it with socialism. We will then see just how many Americans will then hate it vs love it.
Irrespective of their party affiliation, the values of most Americans who I know are much more fascist than socialist, They don't really like small businesses...they prefer the convenience, homogeniety and hype that the Wal-Mart, too big to fail banks, McDonalds and their ilk provide.
Maitreya, the World Teacher, has said: a cart needs two wheels to run properly.
In other words, freedom (free enterprise, capitalism) + justice (community, social responsibility, looking out for people's basic needs to live)
You cannot have freedom without justice, or justice without freedom. We've seen how all these systems, including the one we're living in right now, have utterly failed. People argue over which one - capitalism or socialism? But that's not the right question. Any more than which is right - spiritual viewpoint or scientific viewpoint. Life is not black or white. There is an art to finding balance in living, seeing, thinking, acting. The Buddha long ago taught the Noble Middle Way. Well, you might say there's relevance here.
A new economic framework is coming very soon - centered around sharing, justice, freedom....
www.WakeUpMankind.org
Theodoric, the Night Soil Man, has said: my wheelbarrow of crap works with one wheel.
You cannot have freedom without justice, except when the unjust enjoy total freedom by depriving others of theirs, which is usually the case, so I guess you can.
You cannot have justice without freedom, except when the application of justice entails depriving someone of theirs, which is usually the case, so I guess you can.
You can, however, make up tautologies that sound nice and people will agree with them for that reason, even if they are demonstrably false.
You need to define "freedom". You say "'free' enterprise" without defining "free" or "freedom".
I don't think freedom is defined as free enterprise or capitalism. If something can be especially excluded from the definition of freedom, it is unregulated capitalism that preys on consumers and taxpayers.
I know what you mean. In fact, Maitreya addresses this point very much, over and over -- "market forces" are blind, and will harm and destroy anything in their way if left unregulated, for the sake of making more and more profit. Blind men being led by blind forces puts us on a path of destruction.
The other point, to address everyone's comments in one fell swoop, is that it's true - "freedom" must be defined. I realize the manifestation of capitalism we see is terribly corrupt and causing massive death and misery for untold millions around the world. But religions are corrupt manifestations, too, of basic spiritual principles that never intended to be commercialized and set up in exclusive like camps, telling people how to live, etc.... Humans take high level ideas and turn them into our own ideals. Idea -> Ideal -> Idol. This is a very important concept if you're interested in the more esoteric aspect of the evolution of human consciousness over the ages. Right now we are entering a brand new era, which involves the Aquarian ways of bringing ideals down to the physical plane and living out the things we have dreamt of for a long time but never really put into practice - peace, justice, brotherhood. These are not impossible, in fact they are essential for survival. Capitalism, like socialism, like any "ism" is an ideology and no ideology will ultimately save us. Love, recognizing the inherent connection between all peoples and nations -- this is what will save us. But at some point we have to have a framework to implement these qualities, and that's what we must re-structure.
Who the hell is Maitreya? If he is the Buddha to come, why are you quoting him?
Yes, the one awaited by all the major religions (Christ to Christians, Messiah to Jews, Kalki Avatar or Krishna for Hindus, 5th Buddha for Buddhists....)
He's not a religious enforcer, though. The World Teacher is a teacher, here to inspire all humanity to transform our system of death and greed into a saner, more compassionate world based on justice, sharing, and right relationship among nations and peoples.
Maitreya (his personal name) has already released fragments of his teachings. Between 1988 - 1993 Share International sent press releases out to the world with many predictions, teachings, insights on major happenings of the time - like sudden end of Cold War, release of Mandella, fall of Margaret Thatcher and many other things. He gave insights on everything from personal spiritual growth to political/economic crises, wars, and the environmental revolution which was on the way. The gradual awakening of the people today is due to the ongoing stimulus and guidince ("behind the scenes" up until now) of Maitreya and his group of perfected men - the Masters of Wisdeom. They are emerging right now into the open everyday world to teach us and be with us in a new, more direct way.
Our country was founded as a socialist nation. "Mob rule!", the European nobility sniffed. Our forefathers invented free public education, a socialist idea if ever there was one. We forced national health care at the point of a gun upon a conquered Germany and Japan.
In California, the only socialist party with ballot status in this November 2010 election is The Peace and Freedom Party.
California residents, opposed to both corporate controlled Democratic and Republican Parties, wanting jobs - not war, want to end global warming, wanting to stop the destruction of public education and public health, economic justice for all, should check out and voter register with PEACE AND FREEDOM PARTY,
http://www.peaceandfreedom.org/home
Also check out the daily articles by clicking on the BLOG tab on the home page.
Also check out the daily World Socialist Web Site at
http://www.wsws.org
DO IT TODAY! PROPOSITION 14 PASSED IN CALIFORNIA WHICH WILL EFFECTIVELY PREVENT ANY THIRD PARTIES FROM RUNNING IN THE GENERAL ELECTIONS. ONLY MILLIONAIRES AND BILLIONAIRES WILL BE ABLE TO RUN FOR OFFICE IN CALIFORNIA STARTING IN 2011!!!!
THE CORPORATE-CAPITALIST TAKE-OVER OF THE ENTIRE POLITICAL PROCESS IS ALMOST COMPLETE.
Resistance is on the agenda, just because the people in this country are not interested anymore in ensuring an economy which creates a diversely educated workforce. This by itself guarantees a lack of stability, which in time, is going to lead to upheaval. Whether we get socialism out of it or not is another question.
I have no idea why or how three different Tea Party identified spammers got my email on their lists, but they did, and it provides me with a steady stream of both amusement and Tea Party talking points. Here's one that came in a few minutes ago. It ends with a question from "Minuteman Steve" (a real person atop a real organization) that I could not figure out how to even begin answering. Maybe someone here can help.
Minuteman Steve Needs To Know! Hey Patriot, how do you explain this?
Gun grabbing, Government Motors, Wall Street Firms Seized, B.P. Crushed, Destruction Of U.S. Borders, Cap & Trade, TARP, Stimulus, Bail-Outs, Billions To Palestine, Obama-Care, No Birth Certificate, Crushing Arizona Citizens, Gays in the Military, Refusal To Salute Our Flag, Bribes, Communist Czars, Internet Assimilation, Condemning Israel and the list goes on. Is this a Communist takeover or am I badly mistaken?
It sounds more like National Socialism (e.g. Hitler's Fascism) than Communism to me.
Communist czars? We have commie czars? Like Joe Arpaiovich?
We are experiencing-- are we not?-- the conditions of barbarism across our globe in warfare, starvation and ecological collapse. Now given the ecological imperative maybe it is time to color socialism with some green (and I do NOT mean the green backs).
I am an American.
I am a Patriot.
I am a Socialist.
I am a man...
I am a husband...
I am a dad...
for now...
You would probably be a better man, husband, and dad if you subscribed to politics which aim to share the wealth.
Good point. We really need to frame it this way.
There was a brief period in the 1930's, thanks to the various federal art and theater projects, when the working class was depicted heroic terms (some of it still seen on buildings here in Pittsburgh); through visual and decorative art, the songs of Gutherie, Seeger and other folk singers; Copelands "Fanfare for the Common Man."
For a brief spell, in those days, labor-solidarity and socialism was "cool".
I want there to be far more democratic [one person/one vote] control of both civil government and the economy, and so do, I think, most Americans. But I avoid the term 'socialism,' since it is just manipulated as a scare word, against change, by the ruling class.
In most western nations today, there are no longer any coherent definitions of the terms 'socialism' and 'capitalism,' and this fact causes more confusion than clarity in public debate about how to change the abominable US System.
The initial terms used by Marx/Engel/Lenin to define socialism (i.e., wholescale public ownership and public control of the means of production under a single political party), and by Adam Smith to define capitalism (mostly but not entirely private ownership/control of same under multi-parties), no longer apply to the political economies of any major nation - if they ever did.
For example, the current US political economy [the merged political & economic system) is in most respects Fascism (i.e., the functional blending of effectively single-party civil government and big business), not capitalism.
Recall, too, that even the Fascist parties of the last mid century called themselves 'National Socialists'...
Aside from lingering Cuba, the last 2 remaining nations that attempted to implement scientific 'socialism' - ala Marx -- were the USSR and the PR China -- both of which gave it up because, in a word, as a System, textbook Socialism fails to produce and reasonably mass-distribute wealth, economically, or to freely increase democratic people control, politically. The fact that the US system is called capitalist, and that we vaguely associate the word 'socialism' with being against capitalism, doesn't make the use of the term 'socialism' either accurate or, more importantly, smart.
So what do we US leftists really mean when (some of us) sloppily call for 'socialism'-?
I think that most of us mean a moving toward the 'mixed' political economies we see operating in the Scandinavian countries and increasingly in some South American countries, like [perhaps] Venezuela and (fitfully) Brazil.
We mean, basically: moving toward decisive and full democratic governance - and end to privileged/elitist control - of all aspects of political and economic society.
Using the historically discredited but still negatively-loaded word 'socialism' to describe these democratic changes, only hands the Fascist US ruling class endless forensic ammo to bamboozle and scare the general populace into maintaining the outrageous status quo.
An economic and political Communitarianism will likely be the result of a functionally democratized US society, and we should by all means fight for just that level of democracy.
But let's stop giving the indefensible enemies of that vision, the Right, a ready made terminological weapon that easily makes US, instead of THEM, look scandalous and historically ignorant.
Talking about a 'ruling class' will get you called a socialist whether you want to use the term or not. Socialist analyses, whether the scientific socialist or the sentimental socialist variety, are recognizable by the ruling class & their propagandists in the public relations & advertising business, i.e., the 'think tanks' and the consulting & lobbying firms.
We can't fight for the thing without also fighting for the word. Liberals gave up calling themselves liberals and began to refer to themselves as progressives, on the grounds that Americans were afraid of the word. We see how well that failed. Liberals/progressives want to reconstruct the artificially-created middle class that FDR & Truman succeeded in building, though that middle class was dependent on military industry & the expansion of US imperial power.
We have to fight not only for the thing & the word, but for the real history that propagandists have obscured to the eyes of the US citizenry for decades. Now as American citizens begin to experience the realities that they were cushioned from by the destitution & destruction of other countries, they can begin to open their ears & their minds. Of course it takes an effort to teach, and an argument will not win the day so much as lived experience.
To see such an article in the rather right-wing Cincinatti Enquirer is itself a positive development.
And they even chose the local chapter of the Trotskyist ISO as the focus of their sympathetic article! One would have at least thought they would have chosen more moderate socialists like the DSA or the Socialist Party USA to interview. I suspect that in a land wher the Democratic Party is considered "socialist", very few in the corporate media could even distinguish a Vanguardist from an Anarcho-Syndicalist nowadays.
No, but a dishwasher might.
eugene debs got millions of votes when he ran for president from prison. we could do it again.
Palin stands up and says Obama is a socialist, but forgets Alaska was as close to socialism as America could get when she was Governor, and so was Reagan's administration. The Tea party is the same as the American Liberty League in 1934, when they, along with Prescott Bush, the duPonts, and other weathy republicans tried to overthrow the government , oust FDR. and implement facist hitlerian policies. A facist state is what the GOP seem to want. Bush Jr. almost fullfilled what his grandfather tried.
I hope he wins. In reality Our Government and Democracy is based on Socialist ideas. What blows me away is how many people say they are patriots and that they support Democracy yet they think Socialism is wrong. Doesnt the Constitution say we are all created eqaul? Well folks that is socialism in a nut shell. I agree with the commentor who said we need to use a new term since idiots like Glenn Beck and Foxnews love to make it a dirty word. But we need a stronger party who Supports "Socialism. i really do hope this new Movement gains the momentim it needs
Also check out this related article titled, Obama: Obviously NOT "a Communist":
http://fosterhall.blogspot.com/2009/10/obama-obviously-not-communist.html
I posted the excerpt from my recent Tea Party spam (below) simply to give people a clearer picture of what we're up against. They just throw out a bunch of nonsensical, vaguely inflammatory things, and many tens of millions of people -- most of them heavily armed, and I hope that most of us here remember after Obama's election it took the munitions industry months to catch up to the backlog in bullet orders -- go "hell, yeah, I'm not letting them take my country away!" and make sure all their clips are full and safeties off.
This is a bad time. We have to work, and we have to find both gentle and firm ways to show people in incontrovertible ways that unfettered capitalism simply does not magically solve problems, and causes many of them, and that the Reagan-Clinton reversal of government from its Constitutional definition as a general welfare state to a corporate welfare state, coupled with the McCarthyite and neoconservative redefinition of our military from a defensive force to a global constabulary force severely exacerbates those tendencies. In so doing, we can uncouple the Democrat-Republican paradigm that constrains the discourse. Turn Reagan, Clinton, Cheney, and Obama on their heads -- corporations don't solve problems, corporations ARE the problem.
But at some point, the rednecks are going to start shooting. You can count on that.
You're right of course, but those rednecks are never going to comprehend a word of "the Reagan-Clinton reversal of government from its Constitutional definition as a general welfare state to a corporate welfare state, coupled with the McCarthyite and neoconservative redefinition of our military from a defensive force to a global constabulary force severely exacerbates those tendencies." They won't listen past the third word, and won't understand those three.
The tea partiers are motivated strictly by emotion and startling images, the kind Limbaugh, Palin and their ilk churn out daily. They're impervious to reason, history, logic or sanity. What they can't understand is that they've been driven insane by a society they now will do absolutely anything to defend, because that's one of the inevitable results of capitalism. Brainwashing is very real. The far right's refusal to READ for umpteen many years, and pay attention only to shocking imagery manfactured by hysterical fascists like Beck, has totally programmed them to keep their guns locked and loaded, with us in their sights.
We've let this thing called capitalism continue far too long, like about 50 years too long. The damage it's done to the earth and human consciousness is literally incalculable. Here we are with a basically destroyed Gulf of Mexico, most of the Mideast in perpetual flames because of our religious devotion to profit-making and the expansion of empire, the whole world loathing us and wanting us dead ASAP, and the most visible political movement anywhere in this demented land is that of the ignoramus tea partiers, or tea baggers or whatever they're called.
Where is the movement to not only "make BP pay" but to link what happened there to what Bush did to Iraq (for OIL), what Obama is doing to Afghanistan, and what our miserable sychophantic Congress does every fucking day to advance the aims of these exact same corporations? La Botz gets 46 votes while every other candidate pulls in thousands, and his Republican challenger gets 50,000. That illustrates how much Americans "trust" any serious challenge to their state religion, capitalism. 46 for socialism, 50,000 for unfettered rapacious capitalism. That system has wrecked the world in every conceivable way, and still the staggering majority of Americans will risk their ignorant lives to save it!
No, it's too late. The redneck mentality has prevailed, all the way up to Obama, who is really the quintessential redneck because he cannot divorce himself from that destructive, insane mindset. He merely puts a fresh coat of American paint on it. Underneath it all, Barack Obama isn't that different from Glenn Beck. They're both on paths to destroy the world, religiously believing they're saving it.
"I think labor unions can be as bureaucratic as corporations"
The USan econ professor exhibits the usual mix of hubris and denial that is characteristic of USans. He denies the will of the people and in doing so from a position of awareness and influence exhibits the utmost hubris.
Everyone knows the people's agenda is universal equity/justice. Everyone knows the people haven't had a chance to pursue it. The econ professor won't mention the heavy hand of the establishment bearing down on the people in their pursuit of universal equity/justice.
He might have said something like: "the election of the lesser evil in 2008 reinforces the corruption in leftist institutions, such as labor unions, therefore the people still have no way to purge the corruption and turn the ineffective into the effective."
He didn't say it because he wanted to keep his job. The people should question the econ professors and all the rest.
Discover their true agendas and challenge them in public.
Those of us who know, wish we had Socialism. Those of us who don't know, wish we knew.
FREE AMERICA
REVOLUTIONARY (DIRECT) DEMOCRACY
Capital will always be with us.
Capitalism merely says 'It is mine.'
Bloody chancers! It is clearly the world's.
Only a bloody fool will be against capital and the capitalist convinces many who call themselves Socialists and Communists and social justice campaigners that capital is evil, just so he can take it for himself. And he attracts the lowest of human idiots into his pen, each a delusionary, little, precious Prince or Princess who faithfully snorts in agreement.
To be pro-capital it is necessary to be anti-capitalist.
We must take the bloody pigs and their minions down!
We must throw them into the streets. It is where humanity is, and where we can be happy, and it is a great leveller.
As this article points out, the pigs will true to form then talk up a storm, but if you listen to them you deserve them. The evidence is that USA deserves them; that the USA is a dead culture, an absurdity lead by gangsters who are supported by their victims.
Ladies and gentlemen!
Allow me to present,
Under the Big Top tonight,
S&M!!
You'll see----blah blah ----just how stupid you are!
With China as a mentor, the world is not listening. It is telling the capitalists to take the bloody pig-shit out of their areas.