Survivalist Forum banner

Socialism in America

4K views 31 replies 15 participants last post by  Dwind  
#1 ·
Please forgive me if this hurts anyone in particulars feelings.

"A nation of well informed men who have been taught to know and prize the rights which God has given them cannot be enslaved. It is in the region of ignorance that tyranny begins." ~ Benjamin Franklin

They call themselves liberals and progressives but they are socialists in the truest sense of the word. George Bernard Shaw, a leading member of the Fabian Society, a socialist organization began in London in the 1880’s said: “The Society made it possible for respectable citizens to support socialism without suspicion of lawless desire to overturn the existing order. The Fabian artifice of feigning respectability, while subverting society for revolutionary purposes, gave socialists easy entry into government, banks, stock exchanges, universities, and other respected centers of power and influence.”

This group realized that it would be easier to subvert sons, daughters and wives of prominent and well-to-do men than it is to change the minds of the labor class. The labor class would be you and I, the blue collar workers. The fundamental principal of the Fabians is that a select brain trust, those elitists trained to believe they are the chosen ones, should plan for, and direct all of society. It was and is to this day, a policy of ‘hiding behind skirts’. Fabians, like other socialists, claim to represent a progressive society, but, like communists, they are devoted to dictatorship. Today, in the U.S. House of Representatives, at least 57 members, all Democrats, are members of the Progressive Caucus and in partnership with the Democratic Socialists of America. Get the picture? A major problem after all these years is that most liberals do not even realize they are towing the socialist line. They have come to believe that they are truly the answer to America’s problems, even though most of America’s problems didn’t start till the socialists began their assault.

George Bernard Shaw put it rather bluntly when he said: "I also made it quite clear that Socialism means equality of income or nothing, and that under Socialism you would not be allowed to be poor. You would be forcibly fed, clothed, lodged, taught and employed whether you liked it or not. If it were discovered that you had not character and industry enough to be worth all this trouble, you might possibly be executed in a kindly manner; but whilst you were permitted to live, you would have to live well."

Socialism is not a joke. It is not a passive organization that the silent majority can continue to ignore. It invades every aspect of our lives. Hiding under non-threatening terms like ‘progressive’, and ‘liberal’ they smile at you from a platform and make you believe they want nothing more than to protect you. They make ‘universal healthcare’ and ‘more government oversight’ seem like a wonderful thing.

Groups that are a part of our society that were created by socialists are numerous. Groups like, the ‘ACLU’, The ‘NAACP’, ‘The Council on Foreign Relations’, and ‘Americans for Democratic Action’. That’s right, all began by, advanced by and to this day follow the socialist views and goals. These organizations have been eating away at our moral base since they were created. So long have they been at it that many of you silent majority have no clue as to their true intent. A little research for yourselves will verify just who these organizations are and how they began. I recommend you do not go to their web pages because you will just be fed their party line. I have no doubt that the socialist will not be open minded enough to even entertain the idea that they are wrong so they will insist they don’t need to ‘research’ because they already know the ‘truth’. These individuals are probably beyond the hope of seeing the errors in their ways.

Roger Baldwin, a prominent socialist and an original founder of the ACLU wrote to a Socialist agitator: “Do steer away from making it look like a Socialist enterprise....We want also to look like patriots in everything we do. We want to get a good lot of flags,
talk a good deal about the Constitution and what our forefathers wanted to
make of this country, and to show that we are really the folks that really stand
for the spirit of our institutions."

In Communist-Socialist Tactics Part 2 by Dan Smoot, he states it this way: “Since the end of WWI, communists and other socialists have worked harmoniously together for their common cause - by setting up fronts with names and stated purposes which appeal to the reformist, uplifting urge of do-gooders. The deception enabled socialists to draw Americans with respected names into socialist fronts. It also created a tremendous lobby for unconstitutional federal programs. Socialists and communists support federal programs which require taxing and spending by the federal government, in defiance of constitutional limitations, because this gives them appeal as advocates of welfare for the downtrodden.”

”But, it does something far more important than that for the cause of socialism. It concentrates economic and political power in the central government, to the detriment of state governments. As our federal system thus crumbles, the Washington bureaucracy becomes so big and complicated that the elected legislative branch of government loses control. Unable to operate efficiently in its constitutional role as formulator of national policy, Congress surrenders its responsibilities to gigantic bureaus and corporations, managed by an elite of appointed experts who make and enforce "administrative law" in defiance of the Constitution. Thus, the federal government is gradually transformed into a totalitarian bureaucracy.”

Does any of this sound familiar? Can you see the out of control government that is controlling your life? This has been going on for many, many years and yet it deceives us into complacency.

Speeches that convince you of more government control, oversight and laws are the very heart of this socialist movement. And they have you cheering and applauding these speeches as if it were a good thing. They continuously erode the family structure, religion and basic moral value and you see no problem with that. You great silent majority, you sleeping giant had better awake soon or you will be too late to save this country from becoming the USSA (United Socialist States of America). Think that can’t happen? Just look around you at those that are leading this country and at what they are saying. Their agenda is in their everyday speeches and comments as well as their actions. Pay attention and see if you too can spot the socialist next time the news is on.

Of course you could just stay asleep for a little while longer and when you wake, all you’ll have to worry about is how to be good little comrade citizens…..

“Whenever the people are well informed, they can be trusted with their own government; that whenever things get so far wrong as to attract their notice, they may be relied on to set them to rights.” ~ Thomas Jefferson
 
#2 ·
I don’t really have a problem with socialism as I understand it.

First of all, I understand it to be an economic system. It is possible to have a democratic socialist society. You don’t have to be a communist or a dictator or give up your right to a representational government to be a socialist.

Capitalism works great for the little guy when the population is low and resources are high. But as the population grows larger and larger companies form monopolies until a single individual can no longer produce a good or service that is competitively priced with a major corporation.

I recently read that China can produce all of the goods needed by every person on the planet. So what are the rest of us suppose to be doing?

As we become more and more efficient through technology there will be fewer people needed to produce the goods and services required to support humanity. I believe we will eventually need a new system of allocating or reallocating resources. I don’t think people are open to this right now because they feel they stand to lose something. When the economy deteriorates to the point that people feel they can only gain by embracing a completely new view of money, property, & work, then we can explore various options for economic systems.

I don’t think that fear mongering about liberal socialists is particularly helpful but I’m not that worried about it either. I’ve been astonished at how quickly public sentiment has changed this past year about oil drilling. Now that it’s hitting them in the pocketbook, all the good people are more then willing to have an oil rig parked in their back yard. I think the time will come when socialism is the new green.
VW
 
#8 · (Edited)
I don’t really have a problem with socialism as I understand it.
Then I would argue that you don't really understand it.

First of all, I understand it to be an economic system. It is possible to have a democratic socialist society. You don’t have to be a communist or a dictator or give up your right to a representational government to be a socialist.
Socialism is far more than an economic system, it's a system that oppresses individual rights for the "benefit" of the collective. This is by definition, the polar opposite of freedom. Not to mention, the collective can have no rights when the individual has no rights, as the collective group is comprised of individuals.

Capitalism works great for the little guy when the population is low and resources are high. But as the population grows larger and larger companies form monopolies until a single individual can no longer produce a good or service that is competitively priced with a major corporation.
Capitalism functions perfectly when the government makes no attempt to control it. Monopolies are a valid part of capitalism. If a businessman can corner a market through intelligent business decisions, he should be able to do so. The only real problem associated with monopolies is "price fixing". However, "price fixing" is a direct result of free market enterprise and supply and demand economics. In a truly free market system, someone would come along and start a company which competes with this monopoly, most likely offering a lower price to take market share away from the big guy.

I recently read that China can produce all of the goods needed by every person on the planet. So what are the rest of us suppose to be doing?
So? China may be "capable" of producing for the world but until it is economically feasable, it will not happen. BTW, this is one reason the government maintains the power to levy tariffs. But tariffs aside, things will always come to an equilibrium. Let's say that China took every job in the world and produced every good human kind required. Eventually, the "Buy American" line would stop being a bumper sticker and actually go into common practice.

As we become more and more efficient through technology there will be fewer people needed to produce the goods and services required to support humanity. I believe we will eventually need a new system of allocating or reallocating resources. I don’t think people are open to this right now because they feel they stand to lose something. When the economy deteriorates to the point that people feel they can only gain by embracing a completely new view of money, property, & work, then we can explore various options for economic systems.
Well, when the phone companies stopped using human operators to connect calls, lots of people lost their jobs. Within a few years these people had adapted and learned a new skill set. This exactly what will continue to happen. Think about all these "technology" jobs that didn't even exist 20 years ago. As technology advances, these industries will require man power to develope, maintain, manage, sell, and service their products. The human population is growing and with that growth comes additional need for ancillary services that each of these people require.

I don’t think that fear mongering about liberal socialists is particularly helpful but I’m not that worried about it either. I’ve been astonished at how quickly public sentiment has changed this past year about oil drilling. Now that it’s hitting them in the pocketbook, all the good people are more then willing to have an oil rig parked in their back yard. I think the time will come when socialism is the new green.
VW
Of all the things that "could" happen, a move away from individual rights and towards collectivism is already occurring. This isn't a what if scenario, this is a "Holy Crap" scenario! So, I wouldn't call it fear mongering. Besides, a free nation is supposed to remain vigilant in their defense of individual rights. If that requires the occassional false alert, so be it.

With regard to the oil drilling, the resources that reside below our national soil belong to every man, woman and child in this country. If those resources sit below private property, then they belong to the owner of the property. In any case, the government has absolutely no right to say where oil rigs should be set up and where they should not. The government is not in the oil business (At least they're not supposed to be). I'm all for protecting the environment within reasonable limits, if it will make the air unbreathable ... that's a problem, if it will make our water undrinkable ... that's a problem. But telling people they can't drill for oil because of what "might" happen is wrong and does not fit well inside the ideals of a free nation.
 
#3 ·
Hey Wall,

I have a serious question and I hope you can answer it without getting offended as that is not my intention. While I agree the general Democrat/Liberal mindset is more inclined to lend itself to the ideas of collective rights (Isn't that what we're really talking about when we discuss Communism/Socialism?), I think that the general Republican/Conservative mindset is slowly following suit.

The "Right" seems to be all for concentrating power in the executive branch, they tend to support the Patriot Act and they are against gay marriage. In my mind, these are not the positions of a group of people who value individual freedom.

I guess my question is ... Do you recognize that this isn't just a problem with Democrat/Liberals. Do you see that Rebuplican/Conservatives are allowing individual rights to be stepped on as well?
 
#6 · (Edited)
Socialism is primarily a system by which wealth is re-distributed evenly. It's an interesting, and sometimes appealling, theory when it's on paper. In practice, it has (arguably) failed miserably everywhere it's been attempted. I believe that one of the reasons why it doesn't work is that it fails to take into account human nature; it reduces everything to the lowest common denominator, and destroys the motivations that humans seem to need to be productive.

Having said that, I think a lot of us here would probably agree to greater or lesser degrees that capitalism hasn't been working so well for us recently. I would argue, however, that this is mostly because of interference in the operation of the free markets. Even though the free market system isn't perfect, it's the best thing we've come up with so far.

I don't see this as a liberal/conservative matter, strictly speaking....
 
#9 ·
Monopolies and cartels can only exist long term with direct support of the govt. Both are inherently unstable. Intellectual property laws allow companies to block competitors, supporting monopolies. Cartels will always fall apart from internal pressures as seperate companies compete for a larger part of the pie.

I'm not arguing that we remove all IP laws, though I believe we should. But allowing the patenting of genes, and "processes"? Come on, that was never what the founding fathers intended.

All the problems with capitalism, except one, are caused by the political intervention. The only problem with capitalism that isn't political, is that it punishes bad judgment. And I consider that a feature.
 
#10 ·
Well, what motivated the socialist a century ago made them different socialist than today-- child labor, seven day work weeks, women essentially slaves et cetera. Socialism was a good movement until it was hijacked by communism (first mentioned in the Bible, and directly borrowed by Marks, each according to his needs.)

Today's socialists (pretending to be environmentalists) are anti-capitalists. In that sense the Democratic party is also riddled with socialism of that type. That is why I don't vote for that party or anyone in that party.
 
#11 ·
Are people like us, who want clean air and water, and should BE considered "environmentalists", Socialists?

I have no problem with capitalism, I do however have a problem with the govt (ANY govt) stepping in and allowing hookups to corporations who pollute those items and then cut the penalties for them DOING so...

IE The gutting of the WORKING Clean Air Act, with the Orwellian "Clear Skies Initiative".

I think there's a difference here. :D But I kind of see how you may be relating "environmentalists" with a "profit scheme". Is that correct?
 
#15 ·
Yea, that darn T. Boone Pickens is a raving environmentalist, communist, no good, son of a.........:D:D:D:D

When you see that guy waving the alternative energy flag on national tv, you know we're already in trouble. He is the face of the new capitalist environmentalist. People who recognize the need to have a new plan for our energy future.

Seriously, environmentalism is not socialism or communism. Being a good steward of our resources only ensures those resources will be there for future business. Trashing the planet is bad for future business and it's bad for our national security.

What scares me is so many people are afraid to support alternative energy or environmentalism because they associate those issue with the "liberal agenda" and don't want to be tagged as such.

I don't support the dems. I don't support the Repubs. Neither represents me. But I do support weaning our dependence on foreign oil, developing alternative energy, cleaning up our environment. Just seems like common sense to me.
 
#16 ·
Socialism is theft.
Government is facilitated by theft being there is no voluntary aspect to taxation by force.
Ya dig?
Capitalism itself is the best system devised.
It is a system that is unfair to those who don't or won't take full advantage of it.
But is that really unfair?
Is it unfair that someone who won't do what needs doing to achieve doesn't achieve?
No.
Is it fair that some people can't do what's necessary to achieve, yes but that's where charity comes in.
Socialism is unfair to the masses in the name of fairness to the masses.
It is predicated by by violence in the name of fairness.
How then is it a fair and equitable system?
It's not.
Saying it is excusable because of the proliferation of people is ridiculous on it's face.
Because some people choose to have too many kids the rest of us need to give up the proceeds of our labor or holdings?
Nonsense.
There is ad nauseum talk of rights.
Right self defense.
Right to speak.
Right to worship or not at liberty.
Those are reasonable expectations.
What is not reasonable is the perception that you have a right to have have as many kids as you want regardless of your ability to feed, clothe and house them.
What is also an unreasonable expectation is the idea that one should be shielded from the consequences of their own actions.
Why should I have to finance the personal mitigation of someone elses bad choices....most of which are made as a series?

As was stated before, as jobs evaporate those displaced need to seek employment elsewhere in other arenas.
The Socialist would say give them an income and health care as well as job training.
I say this is a crutch funded by theft and is a self propagating cancer bound to enslave rather than liberate.
History shows my assertions to be correct.
Take away incentive and you are left with lethargy.
 
#17 ·
Hmmmm are you talking about socialism or current America? That kind of sound the same to me. RALLY THE TROOPS! because socialism is evil! Never mind its what you are already living in.You are already taxed for others health care, you are already taxed to provide training to the unemployed. Your rights are already reduced daily for the "good of the whole".

As for the whole theft thing, you can have your money taken by big business, or big government ones ok but the other is not?
 
#18 ·
I would favor an economic system where no one could make more then 4 times what anyone else makes. So the lowest salary might be 50K per year and the highest might be $200K. And the highest paying jobs are the least desirable and the lowest paying jobs are the most desirable. So actors, athletes, race car drivers, musicians, artists, and corporate executives earn the lowest pay scale and sanitation workers, day care workers, nurse’s aids, & bus drivers earn the highest possible salary. Since no one will be able to afford the big mansions on the hills, I would be open to giving them out as rewards to people who work tirelessly for the common good.
VW
 
#22 ·
I think I could be happy in a world with no private property. Where the planet is regarded kind of like a big national park. I think in the near future most of the work on the planet will be done by computers and robotics so that will leave lots of time for us to sit around thinking of ways to peacefully share our planet’s resources.

As a side note, I’ve been watching a series on robocars on the science channel this week. Fascinating. It’s a competition to design a robocar for the military & I believe they said the goal was to have 20% of military transport vehicles run robotically in 10 years. This is different then the remote control air planes where you’ve got someone sitting with a view screen and a joy stick. The goal with these vehicles is to program a destination and then they drive from point a to point b with no human assistance. From what I understand, previous year’s trials have been conducted in the desert and now they’ve graduated to tests in virtual cities with pedestrians and normal traffic. Catch an episode if you can. Soon drunk driving won’t be an issue. Just tell your car to take you home and to wake you up when you get there. I’m serious about the soon part. Very soon.
VW
 
#28 ·
Know all about that buck,when i first became a ironworker,back in the late 80s,there was a group of them that started a anti tax club,me being young and dumb,became one of those guys,claiming exempt on my w-4,and not doing taxes every year,well long story short ,it didnt work out the way we all thought,interest compounded daily,leins etc..still paying for it to this day.
 
#29 ·
Survive Earth

A new weekly series on the interplanetary cable network.

The series opens with the human species less then one generation into the electronics age. The rate of change is overwhelming and we follow individuals from various locations on the remote blue planet to watch how they cling to religious, cultural, and nationalistic histories to ease their fear of the unknown future.

Chills, spills, and funny man Dave Leno. Each week is filled with exciting new possibilities. Will the humans design a utopia or will they destroy themselves with new weapons. Will they reverse the environmental damage caused by the industrial revolution? Will their experiments in DNA resequencing accidentally create an unstoppable deadly virus that will kill them all? Tune in and find out Tuesday nights at 9.
VW
 
#31 ·
First we have all of our factories leaving the US, which put hundreds of thousands of people out of work, then we have the "illegal" immigrants coming over for the massive free cheese giveaways from Uncle Sugar, and now we have skilled people such as nurses, doctors, pharmacists, lab techs, and others that WORK for LESS pay than their US counterparts, and THUS put MORE people out of jobs. WTF is wrong here? In MANY countries it is VERY illegal to work there, esp as a skilled worker. I am SOOOOO dammed sick of this $hitty commode that has became OUR country.