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.
I am certainly for Bernie Sanders and was so excited when I heard that he was running, but wish I had heard him say it himself. Maybe I can find it online. We need social democratic policies in America.
the last thing America needs is a far leftist
its already bad enough with the lefty liberals like the Clinton's and Obama's
Agree completely! I am pro union but do not want politicians influenced by donations from them.
FDR was a great man. He realized as a civilized nation we must band together and fight as one vs everyone for themselves. A collective society can accomplish much TOGETHER vs 1 individual hoarding power,money etc for themselves.
USA (the country) was founded on INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM
sorry I could give two toes for what you 'think' is right or wrong as a society
FDR along with the many other fascist liberals destroyed this country
I am certainly for Bernie Sanders and was so excited when I heard that he was running, but wish I had heard him say it himself. Maybe I can find it online. We need social democratic policies in America.
USA (the country) was founded on INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM
sorry I could give two toes for what you 'think' is right or wrong as a society
FDR along with the many other fascist liberals destroyed this country
Well fortunately we have left behind YOUR idea of how this country was founded. Funny you claim it was founded on individual freedom yet it was a collective effort to insure we even had a nation....So I agree I could care less what you "think" is right or wrong as a society and as evidence that we are moving towards a more collective society just look around! Its happening whether anyone likes it or not. Now I would be MORE than happy to allow a state or a few states to secede and try it their way...
I'm a notorious left winger, and I think that this is idiotic.
They've elected the NDP at a time when it is most likely to fail, and paved the way for the fascists (the Wild Rose party). If there isn't a recovery in oil soon, they're just going to blame the left. And the markets are already getting nervous about a government that has promised to raise taxes.
Where were all the left wingers when business was booming and the people could have used the money the most? Oh right, they were begging for tax breaks so they could keep all the money for themselves. These people aren't leftists, they're opportunists who don't understand economics and thought that the boom would last forever. They used to MAKE FUN of leftists.
Albertans have always had this smug sense of superiority and I have heard on many an occasion about how they're 'carrying the rest of Canada' and don't want any of their oil wealth going eastward. They helped elect the ******* PM that has been feeding them everything they've ever wanted, suppressing data on climate change, giving huge breaks to oil tycoons and promising to turn Canada into a right wing conservative nation complete with more prisons, lower taxes, etc... and now that they've been hit with a bust period (with oil as the basis of their entire economy, who would have seen that one coming???) and their expensive, nasty, dirty, filthy sludge is too expensive to produce at a profit.
They've lost their jobs and didn't save a dime like they should have. All of the sane people have gone back home to Eastern Canada, so nobody is there to keep their economy going except poor people and the rednecks who actually live there full time. So now they want the government to save them.
This isn't a political victory for the left, it's a selfish, hypocritical cry for help. It's a sign of desperation... and it's not going to work.
I'm a notorious left winger, and I think that this is idiotic.
They've elected the NDP at a time when it is most likely to fail, and paved the way for the fascists (the Wild Rose party). If there isn't a recovery in oil soon, they're just going to blame the left. And the markets are already getting nervous about a government that has promised to raise taxes.
Where were all the left wing supporters when business was booming and the people could have used the money the most? Oh right, they were begging for tax breaks so they could keep all the money for themselves.
Albertans have always had this smug sense of superiority and I have heard on many an occasion about how they're 'carrying the rest of Canada' and don't want any of their oil wealth going eastward. They helped elect the ******* PM that has been feeding them everything they've ever wanted, suppressing data on climate change, giving huge breaks to oil tycoons and promising to turn Canada into a right wing conservative nation complete with more prisons, lower taxes, etc... and now that they've been hit with a bust period (with oil as the basis of their entire economy, who would have seen that one coming???) and their expensive, nasty, dirty, filthy sludge is too expensive to produce at a profit.
But now they've lost their jobs and didn't save a dime of it, and all of the sane people have gone back home to Eastern Canada... and the idiots who actually live there full time want the government to save them.
This isn't a move that has been carefully considered and rationally chosen, it's one of desperation... and it's not going to work.
I think you underestimate them. The conversations I hear from them involve HOW oil incomes went to the large companies, and very little ended up going to the people of Canada who actually owned the resources.
Status:
"everybody getting reported now.."
(set 24 days ago)
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,560 posts, read 16,548,014 times
Reputation: 6042
Quote:
Originally Posted by workingclasshero
social democracy is a self-proclaimed international revolutionary socialist party, aiming to abolish capitalism by any means necessary -- including the ballot box.
Socialism from Below?
Thus electioneering results in the fight being carried out by means of leaders, in which the masses can play but a minor role. In practice it means a handful of individuals, the representatives, carry on the struggle on behalf of the masses. It can only lead to the illusion that others can do the fighting for us - regardless of the wishes of the leaders in question. Once radicals are elected the whole focal point of struggle changes. Rather than direct struggle against the state and the boss, this is no longer needed as the elected representatives will act or people will think they will act and so not act themselves. They have elected someone to fight for them and so do not need to fight themselves. If radicals are elected to fight for people, can we be surprised if people do not act themselves? The notion that reforms (indeed, the revolution) would be the work of leaders acting on behalf of the masses soon followed, with the masses reduced to voters and followers, not active participants in the struggle.
Moreover, socialist support for electioneering is somewhat at odds with their claims of being in favour of collective, mass action. There is nothing more isolated, atomised and individualistic than voting. It is the total opposite of collective struggle. The individual is alone before, during and after the act of voting. Unlike direct action, which, by its very nature, throws up new forms of organisation in order to manage and co-ordinate the struggle, voting creates no alternative organs of working class self-management. Nor can it. It is not based on, nor does it create, collective action or organisation. Given that socialists often slander anarchists as "individualists" the irony is delicious!
you do realize that socialism, social democracy, communism, nazisism, and fascism are all part of the same family.
look at the kinship between communism, fascism, and liberalism. All derive from the same tradition that goes back to the Jacobins of the French Revolution. His revised political spectrum would focus on the role of the state and go from libertarianism to conservatism to fascism in its many guises – American, Italian, German, Russian, Chinese, Cuban, and so on.
As this listing suggests, fascism is flexible; different iterations differ in specifics but they share "emotional or instinctual impulses." Mussolini tweaked the socialist agenda to emphasize the state; Lenin made workers the vanguard party; Hitler added race. If the German version was militaristic, the American one which could be called liberal fascism is nearly pacifist.
The Social Democrats, USA is the same Socialist Party of America as is has been since August 1, 1901, an is LEFT WING. Social Democratic Party was originally founded June 11, 1898 as a direct political offshoot of the communalist Social Democracy of America (Labor Day Message of 1897 by Eugene Victor Debs). After a merger with the Socialist Party of America (1901) the party remained essentially the same although the named varied a few times. From 1900 (before its formal union) to 1912, the Socialist Party ran Eugene Debs for President at each election. The best showing ever for a Socialist ticket was in 1912, when Debs gained 901,551 total votes, or 6% of the popular vote. we are the party of Eugene Debs, Mother Jones, Helen Keller, Carl Sandburg, Norman Thomas, A. Philip Randolph, Bayard Rustin.
----------------------------
senator bernie sanders of vermont (d/l/s) (democrat/ liberal/ SOCIALIST)
===============
FDR was a fascist
socialism, democratic socialism, fascism, nasism, liberalism...all BIG POWERFUL GOVERNMENT, all ANTI-INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM
googled all those quotes, the only place they exist are right wing blogs.
I think you underestimate them. The conversations I hear from them involve HOW oil incomes went to the large companies, and very little ended up going to the people of Canada who actually owned the resources.
I guess it's possible, but Alberta has been right wing for decades... free market BS is a religion out there. It's probably a huge reason why their right wing party is so corrupt. But I don't know why they seriously thought that they were all going to get rich with the lowest taxes in Canada. Too many jobs were going to foreign workers and Canadians were mostly doing overpaid grunt work. That's what happens when educations are expensive... the rich people from other countries come in and do the jobs you can't afford to train for.
If Albertans really are disillusioned with capitalism then that is a good sign, but I'm not holding my breath. I definitely didn't hear anyone complaining when business was booming... it wasn't until everything crashed and burned that they started to realize they weren't as rich as they thought.
But if it means the PM is going to lose the election, that is definitely a very very good thing. Then maybe other Canadians WILL start seeing more of the oil wealth in health care, education and such. To be honest, I think they should just give it to Eastern Canada as reparations for selling their fishing rights to Japan.
The thing which doomed the PC in 2015 Alberta Provincial election was the split-up of the PC into a PC rump party and the Wild Rose Party which was Canada's answer to the Tea Party.
In historical terms this was like the 1912 Presidential election which put Democrat Wilson in the White House because the GOP vote was split between Taft (traditional GOP) and Teddy Roosevelt (Progressive GOP Bull Moose Party). Party splits like this are often the kiss of death at the polls!
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.
