Socialism is No Longer a Dirty Word

Discussion in 'Politics' started by BlackAsCoal, Dec 11, 2008.

  1. BlackAsCoal
    Offline

    BlackAsCoal Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2008
    Messages:
    5,203
    Thanks Received:
    528
    Trophy Points:
    155
    Ratings:
    +1,884
    John McCain's desperate attempts to smear Obama as a socialist during the last weeks of the campaign because of his defense of progressive income taxes are well behind us. Now that Obama's economic team has been named, primarily from the center-right, the question is more likely to be whether he is still a left-wing Democrat. But the attacks were a sign of how far right the Republicans had gone in questioning a policy long accepted by most Americans. We have forgotten that under that notorious left-winger Dwight D. Eisenhower, the tax on the highest bracket was 90 percent. In recent years tax cuts have been used, very effectively, to redistribute income upward. But "socialist" seemed to work as an epithet, replacing "communist," no longer useful now that Russia and China have become capitalist, and "liberal," now overused.

    While Socialist parties still play an important role in Western Europe and, increasingly, in Latin America, they have long disappeared from the American scene. Since the death of Michael Harrington, there has been no acknowledged spokesman. Though Bernie Sanders was elected as a socialist, he has not chosen to forward any socialist alternatives. There is no one around to explain what socialist approaches to the present economic crisis might be, what a platform different from Obama's very careful centrist arguments would be like.

    In 1942 a quarter of the population thought that socialism, of the kind that would be elected in nearly all of Western Europe, would be a "good thing." Socialist ideas were so popular that Harry Truman, old-style Democratic machine politician that he was, ran on a platform well to the left of Obama's--or of any of his Democratic successors. He faced important competitors to his left, not only the Socialist Party's Norman Thomas but also the more popular Progressive Party candidate, Henry Wallace. Truman thus argued for a socialized national health insurance plan, for more TVAs as well as more public housing, hospitals and the like. Full employment, not tax cuts, was then the American priority.

    To be sure, socialists, like the Democrats, have long argued for greater equality, economic as well as social. One can still see the effects of their policies in the Scandinavian countries and in France, where, despite having elected the conservative Nicolas Sarkozy, the top fifth of the population earns around four times what the bottom fifth does (as opposed to the United States, where the top 1 percent notoriously gets 20 percent of the national income). The French, along with the pre-Blair British and others, use their tax dollars in part to guarantee every citizen full medical care as well as an effective and free educational system through the university level. These extensive social payments, which all Socialist parties have implemented throughout Western Europe, give their citizens a far higher overall standard of living than we can hope to have.

    But socialists have traditionally argued for more than the welfare state. In order to guarantee equitable distribution, they have urged public ownership of crucial parts of the economy. Natural resources have been a major argument here, with oil and gas being obvious candidates for public ownership, since no individual capitalist has been responsible for their creation. Ironically, this is the case in Alaska, where those resources are publicly owned, as Governor Sarah Palin has boasted, allowing her to send substantial annual checks to each of her constituents. The checks would be larger if the oil companies were also publicly owned, as they are in many countries.

    Public ownership is not an all-inclusive dogma but one that has been applied pragmatically. In postwar Britain, the coal mines, the steel mills and the railways were nationalized, in part to provide the necessary funding to keep them running (as, in effect, happened here with Amtrak). When Margaret Thatcher's government began to privatize some of these industries, the results were shocking even to conservatives. Rail prices skyrocketed and accidents became so common that the British have begun to rue their decisions. When water was privatized, prices rose to incredible heights while the heads of the new companies paid themselves millions, showing how easily the private sector can redistribute wealth from the many to the lucky few.

    France nationalized its banks after the war and again under the Socialist Fran├žois Mitterrand, to allow it to direct loans into socially useful areas. We have seen, in recent weeks, the international success of Gordon Brown's approach to a true nationalization of British banks. Remembering his socialist background, Brown opted for true control, rather than giving the bigger banks vast amounts with which to buy their competitors and continue to pay dividends, as has happened with Henry Paulson's "socialization" of the banks. Reversing those decisions should be on Obama's agenda. Using Brown's approach, the $20 billion just paid to Citigroup would have sufficed to buy the whole company, at the price the stock had fallen to, instead of settling for a symbolic 7.8 percent share of the equity. It might have been interesting to see what could be done with a bank that was committed to lending rather than gambling.

    ---

    Socialists have long realized that if government is unable to control big business, businesses will control the government and its regulators, as has happened so flagrantly in recent years. In difficult times, it is all the more important, as we have seen in the banking crisis, that those controlling the financial industry not use the government simply to bail themselves out but to help the overall economy. Those arguing for unregulated private ownership, with ever increasing profits as their only goal, have come close to ruining the very economy they had so long controlled. The Friedmanite myth of the perfect market lies in ruins. It is clear that more and more people, here and abroad, are looking for new alternatives. As the global crisis continues, more of us, not just Obama, may want to begin to consider some of these socialist solutions. Everyone now remembers that Franklin Roosevelt initially ran on a very cautious, even conservative, platform. As he discovered, changing events may demand ideas that, until recently, seemed unthinkable.

    more at link --
    Socialism Is No Longer a Dirty Word

    Since socilaism already exists for the rich in this country, and we're teetering on the brink of disaster while wondering what to do with the auto industry, perhaps it's time to think of nationalized industries .. again.

    I recognize that I'm the only socialist here .. but the beauty of socialism is that you don't have to convince anyone .. society will come to it.
     
  2. Tech_Esq
    Offline

    Tech_Esq Sic Semper Tyrannis!

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2008
    Messages:
    4,408
    Thanks Received:
    558
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Northern Virginia
    Ratings:
    +558
    I'm afraid that once set upon the path, you are correct. In order to reverse the trend we would have to overturn United States v. Darby Lumber. It seems ever more likely that will never happen. It would cause such a revolution in US law it would feel like we had come unhinged.

    I don't see any entitlements going away and apparently they will only grow regardless of the fact that we have no possible way of paying for them. Under current law, we have over 50 Trillion dollars of unfunded entitlements in 2040. If we add a single payer health insurance or something else that encumbers the government, then that number will sky-rocket.

    I gotta think the piper will need paying at some point. When that happens, we'll get to reset to 0. Socialism will be dead in that instance and we'll see what else we can come up with.
     
  3. bigdaddygtr
    Offline

    bigdaddygtr Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2008
    Messages:
    1,139
    Thanks Received:
    72
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +72
    You're not the only Socialist on this board, I'm right there with you. But in the right's eyes we're "dirty" people.

    Or maybe thats because we're black socialists
     
  4. Bern80
    Offline

    Bern80 Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Messages:
    8,094
    Thanks Received:
    720
    Trophy Points:
    138
    Ratings:
    +726
    Naw, not dirty. A little naive about human nature and why socialism always fails because of it, but I wouldn't say dirty.
     
  5. Diuretic
    Offline

    Diuretic Permanently confused

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2006
    Messages:
    12,653
    Thanks Received:
    1,397
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    South Australia est 1836
    Ratings:
    +1,397
    I reckon it must have been about the second paragraph that I was thinking that. No, I'm not prescient but it tells me the writer constructed a piece that implanted that idea in my mind early and then reinforced it throughout the presentation of the argument. Yes, society will come to it, I think in some countries that aren't socialist (in the Euro sense) are seeing it working elsewhere and are gradually dismantling the old objections. As natural resources dwindle and an unregulated market system fails as the mechanism to manage those dwindling resources then the planned economy, learning from the excesses and failures of the past, will replace the free market economy.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  6. rayboyusmc
    Offline

    rayboyusmc Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2008
    Messages:
    4,015
    Thanks Received:
    338
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Florida
    Ratings:
    +338
    After what the "free market" has wrought with the banking crisis, the rule of the rich, the destruction of the middle class and now the even more fervent attack on unions,

    Maybe we never had anything repsenting a democracy under this group of narcisistic inbred oligarchy.

    You can't take greed out of any equation that the human psyche gets involved in.
     
  7. WillowTree
    Offline

    WillowTree Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    68,136
    Thanks Received:
    10,163
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Ratings:
    +14,683
    I'm not entirely sure how socialism works!
     
  8. Bern80
    Offline

    Bern80 Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Messages:
    8,094
    Thanks Received:
    720
    Trophy Points:
    138
    Ratings:
    +726
    For you to be able to blame the free market we would need to have actually had one in the first place.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  9. pete
    Offline

    pete The food stamp president

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2008
    Messages:
    1,581
    Thanks Received:
    232
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Ratings:
    +232
    :eusa_whistle:

    This might help
     
  10. WillowTree
    Offline

    WillowTree Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    68,136
    Thanks Received:
    10,163
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Ratings:
    +14,683

Share This Page