Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
We do not need Communism or Socialism in this country. I think Communists and Socialists find a country to their liking. Leave this country the eff alone.
We do not need Communism or Socialism in this country. I think Communists and Socialists find a country to their liking. Leave this country the eff alone.
Socialist already run the USA, it’s socialism for the rich, capitalism for the poor.
Democratic socialism like Medicare, SSI, SSD and Unemployment?
Which I would bet any number of our right wing posters are collecting right now.
Of these four only Social Security really meets the definition of socialism: gov't ownership of the means of production.
What does it matter whether a right (or left) wing poster collects from these programs? We are forced to pay into them, so wouldn't it be foolish not to collect if eligible? It's neither here nor there as to whether the programs are good. Liberals may not like the Trump tax cuts, but history shows that they will take advantage of them if they are in a position to do so.
I did not read all the hot air here and I don't intend to, but I can tell you that if the Democrats run with this socialist message, they will fail at the polls nationally in November. Yes, that message can work locally, since as Tip O'Neill said, all politics is local. If they run with that in the Midwest, which, as a Republican, I hope they do, they will be in for a big surprise.
It is the Nordic model which is becoming popular, not Venezuela type system. Even Bernie Sanders, who uses words "Democratic Socialist" refers to the Nordic model, not Venezuela type. The biggest difference between the two is the fact that Nordic countries have free market economies, and Venezuela does not.
But the Nordic model is not socialism. We know that from the Danish Prime Minister.
Bernie Sanders is either wrong, or more likely in my opinion, being disingenuous, and trying to mislead his millennial followers on the nature of socialism. Even if he doesn't know what socialism is, it seems likely that a staffer would have corrected him by now. He's part of the movement to surreptitiously rehab 'socialism.'
But the Nordic model is not socialism. We know that from the Danish Prime Minister.
Bernie Sanders is either wrong, or more likely in my opinion, being disingenuous, and trying to mislead his millennial followers on the nature of socialism. Even if he doesn't know what socialism is, it seems likely that a staffer would have corrected him by now. He's part of the movement to surreptitiously rehab 'socialism.'
I guess it's a matter of semantics, but there is no place in Europe today that is socialist. All the Nordic countries, for example are purely capitalist, having lending, banking, commerce, housing, etc all in for profit, private hands. That is not socialist. Now, all of these industries are heavily regulated, fine, but that is regulation within the capitalist, liberal democracy system.
Some more on the electoral history of Hugo Chavez, showing that he truly did meet the "democratic" half of the term "democratic socialism."
He first won election in 1998 as president of Venezuela by 56%. While his advisors were bubbling with ideas, he said that his first priority was a new constitution. A referendum on this was held in April 1999, which Chavez won by 71%. The new constitution was approved, again by 71%, in Dec. 1999. Rory Sparrow writes that the new constitution " fluttered with progressive, enlightened language while offering a hammer to the palace [i.e. to Chavez]."
The new constitution required a new presidential election in 2000. He won again in 2000 with 59.7%.
In 2000, the duly elected National Assembly passed an 'enabling act,' that Chavez supported. It gave him the power to rule by decree for one year in case of emergency. He used the act to impose 49 laws, including expropriation of land from 'latifundos' (large land owners).
Chavez always faced plenty of push-back from those who had been thriving prior to his arrival. After all, Venezuela had been the most prosperous country in South America. The new constitution had a recall provision, and in 2003 opponents collected 3 million signatures to get a recall election. Chavez was able to delay the election until 2004. In the meantime, he launched relief missions including food, medical etc. programs, many manned by Cubans sent by Fidel Castro. When the election was held in Aug, 2004, his popularity had recovered and he won by 58%.
Chavez faced re-election again in 2006. This time he won by 63%, the biggest margin in Venezuelan history. In 2007 Chavez promoted and ran a referendum to eliminate presidential term limits (then limited to 2 terms). This was his first loss, by a 51-49 margin. It inspired his first public display of profanity, but significantly, he accepted the result and moved on.
In 2008, opponents of Chavez won numerous state and local elections, including the mayor of Caracas. While again he accepted the results, he did use the machinery of the gov't to harass and neutralize them (sound familiar?). Manuel Rosales, mayor of Maracaibo, was charged with corruption and fled to Peru.
In 2008 an attempt to again abolish presidential term limits was launched. This time Chavez took the campaign more seriously, taking the best managers from the state-run oil company PDVSA to run it. In Feb. 2009 the referendum was held, and this time Chavez won by 55%.
"Chavez's expropriation (socializing of) the jewelry stores."
So who's the blame here? Chavez, jewelry stores, or the governing system??
Somehow you don't blame Chavez.
Calling you out on it is not deflection. It's the very opposite.
And if you really want to have an honest discussion about socialism, why wouldn't you include China???? That's like a discussion about democracy but excludes the US. Dumb move.
.
But the expropriation was possible due to the socialist laws. Yes this was done by Chavez, but fully in accordance with the socialist laws that he had enacted (this particular expropriation occurred in 2010, after he had been in power 11 years). Remember the Caracas Mayor drew up the expropriation papers and handed them to Chavez live on TV.
Yes I blame Chavez, but more importantly the socialist system that he had constructed. Without that, he would not have been able to do what he did.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
