Socialism in America

Balanced view. The sad thing is that this road started in the US in 1932, kind of leveled off for a while, but has been picking up speed a spiraling out of control since 1989.

Is 22 years of unchecked socialism too much to recover from? It seems like it may be too far gone. Even if a non-socialist president were elected he/she would still have to deal with a socialist Republicrat Congress.

George Wallace nailed it in 1968 when he said there was not a dime's worth of difference between the two major parties. Today there is not a cent's worth. Both are given over to the big government socialist mindset.

 

You're forgetting the corporates....

 

And there in that lies the rub.

Do the corporations control government or does the government control the corporations? Or, do they form an evil alliance for their own mutual good?

 

The paranoid conspiracist in me thinks the latter, but it's probably more a case of the corporations controlling the government. Certainly true in the UK.

 

I think about the Fianna Fail - land developer union here. Everyone lined their pockets and Fianna Fail stayed in power for decades. Finally the people had enough in the last election, but only after the crash and the developers jumped ship.

I just wonder if the US war suppliers and the Congress don't have the same kind of relationship and the rest of this is just a distraction.

 

Socialism nor Capitalism equals The Kingdom. They are both inventions of this world.

 

That's why both are terribly flawed. They are made up of sinners.

 

You need to add the enviro-scammers in with the war suppliers.

Obama has emptied the national treasury giving money hand over fist to these guys so that he can get his campaign contributions and other personal enrichment in return.

 

Yes, but socialism is anti-Christian, Capitalism is neutral.

 

Both are neutral/ equally amoral.

 

Huh? How is Socialism anti-Christian?

 

Exactly - it is how they are exercised.

 

LOL.....how do you figure neutral Professor? you then need to get out more.:smilewinkgrin:

 

I can only assume then that you believe parts of the New Testament are anti-Christian. Remember how the very early Christians in Jerusalem were to hold all things in common? Now that is a very Socialistic idea.

 

This is flawed - the president alone has no power over the public purse. That is up to the House, and they do legislate for re-election. Exactly how has the president emptied the national treasury to get campaign contributions and personal enrichment?

The problem is much deeper than this particular president. It is in a corrupt self-perpetuating Congress which doles out money for votes. Until people wake up to this the trouble is going to continue.

I don't think Americans will ever succumb to socialism in name. However, there are semi-state corporations of all ilks financing election for their puppets in Congress. They are not 'official' semi-state corporations, but any company whose primary customer is the federal government is no longer a truly private corporation. They have a become an agent of the state who conducts business to make their customer happy, and their customer has the power to continue to feed them money from public funds.

I don't know what it is going to take to break out of this cycle.

 

I only have to point to the Communist Manifesto by Karl Marx. If you have never read this book, I think it behooves everyone to take an afternoon and read the entire book.

The book demonstrates that socialism and communism's main goal is not merely economic, rather it is not economic at all except that it fulfills their larger goal. Marx relates that in order for their larger goals to work you need to reconstruct society economically and socially, otherwise it will all fail (and I think this is true and hard to argue against in the fact that if you think socialism is economic, you must eventually get to the other areas or face failure.).

The goals of socialism and communism are the same, to relieve oppression of the working class. Every entity, they say, is there to serve the working class and any social entity that could be viewed as oppressed should be freed from this oppression. This includes taking kids from their parents, not just abused kids, all kids.

Many modern communists/socialists agree, so they advocate putting social institutions under the control of government for the sole benefit of the working class in a massive social engineering plan for workers, but they also attack the family system. Marx relays that the family is an invention for the propagation of non-working class (middle and upper classes). He believes this is an oppressive regime and should be done away with. This is not an "out there" proposal, I researched and found several advocates of his beliefs today as they believe that when socialism and communism takes over more and more, the family become useless and outdated, that it will and should die. Only when this dies, can true liberation of the working class be advanced. As Marx noted, the family will no longer be needed for the socialization of kids. These kids will be wards of the state brought up to serve the working class.

He does not stop there. They believe the biggest enemy to socialism/communism is religion itself as we will fight the radical social engineering that takes place. He sees religion as a prop to the middle/upper class. The middle and upper classes, though, he believes are evil and should now serve the working class. If you are a stay-at-home mother, you are doing nothing to serve the working class and thus you should be forced to do such. Your kids, should be socialized by the state to think like the state, educated for the state, and should not have the benefits of a family who could harm you through thoughts not centered on advancing the working class.

They believed their view would never work unless they controlled the social engineering, and this is still the thought today. I have pulled up many philosophers who are pro socialism and communism, who almost all agree this is not an economic issue, but an entire social engineering that manifests itself economically. Marx noted that socialism is the first logical step and helps to controlling people to eventually complete social engineering. Ultimately until you grab all the social entities it will fail. He did not believe you can separate the two.

I wrote a short article on this here. BTW, I am not the only Christian who has said as much, there are many theologians I have read who agree that after reading Marx and then reading others in the communist/socialist movement that this is an anti-Christian movement. Christians who advocate for economic socialism, do not understand that it will never work in a non-socialist culture where social engineering has occured (Marx was atleast logically consistent and understanding that it would fail otherwise). Marx and others are consistent in seeing the problems and actual struggles that will occur, so they take over every social entity.

If you advocate socialism as neutral, first read the Communist Manifesto then read other of Marx's works. I stand with other theologians in calling it evil, even Satanic.

 

That was not socialism nor communism. Read my notes on communism and socialism. If you think Acts was socialism, you neither understand Acts nor Socialism.

 

1. Communism and Socialism are not the same thing.

According to Marx Socialism is the next step in Capitalism as it progresses to Communism ... and that I disagree with. Marx was wrong.

Of course, no country has really tried Communism. A country's culture gets in the way. Russia simply replaced the Czar with a new Czar, i.e. the Communist Party.

China simply replaced the emperior, Chang ... who was really simply a dictator and replaced it with a new emperior, the Party. But Communism in China looks quite different from Russia as China still was very Confucian at its cultural core and Russia was never Confucian in any way culturally.

2. The New Testament certainly does support Socialism.

 

Solyndra is a recent example.