The next four years of my life are bound to be filled with nonsensical Cold War rhetoric. A socialist? Really? Were you cognizant enough during the Cold War to still be harboring bitter feelings toward the Red Menace? I know that I wasn't. And to be honest, I feel that many of my contemporaries weren't either. Just a hunch. And now, with the election of Obama, the term socialist is being thrown around about as loosely as Lindsey Lohan's pink. One step closer to an egalitarian society? I suppose. One step closer to narrowing the undisputedly (too) wide wealth gap? Absolutely. Everyone so butt-hurt about Obama needs to realise that there is a world beyond their white picket fence and perfectly manicured lawn (but that isn't your responsibility amirite?). A minor redistribution of wealth is not socialism. Barack Obama is not a socialist. So please, take your McCain propaganda and file it next to your bible in the fiction section of your home library.
But hey, at least you aren't calling him a terrorist. Yet.
19 comments:
why would one have to be cognizant during the cold war to use, or understand the implications, of the term socialist? who, other than you, has related obama to the red menace? since when was the term socialist allowed to only be used in reference to the cold war?
the first sentence of the description of socialism in the brittanica encyclopedia is: System of social organization in which private property and the distribution of income are subject to social control; also, the political movements aimed at putting that system into practice.
and as you said in your own writing, 'a minor redistribution of wealth,' which looks like it falls directly into this description of socialism.
and it's also easy for you to say that we need to look beyond our white picket fences, and insist upon a mccain supporters selfishness in not wanting to redistribute their personal wealth to those with less, when you yourself don't even fit into the bracket that WILL be redistributing their wealth. If you feel so strongly, why don't you donate some of your money to those less fortunate?
A majority of the distaste for socialism in our country comes from The Cold War and our dealings with Russia. Much of the irrational fear of Obama's policies directly correlate to that time period. It was a blatant smear tactic used by the McCain camp to play off of a sensitive subject in our nation (much like the terrorist angle). To say that a large amount of the baby boomer generation is not still bitter about the Cold War would be incredibly ignorant, and much of those feelings have been filtered down to our generation. Not to say that we shouldn't harbor any ill feelings, but they certainly shouldn't make us write off any policy that could be slightly related to socialism off as unamerican.
I use the Cold War as a prime example of socialism because it is the most relevant, modern example.
I'm not sure what edition of the Encyclopedia Brittanica you're using, but the first sentence of the definition of socialism that I see is
"A social and economic doctrine that calls for public rather than private ownership or control of property and natural resources."
To say that "a minor redistribution of wealth" is an example of socialism is an absolute bastardization of the definition. In socialist societies ALL wealth was filtered through governing bodies before reaching citizens, and was filtered in a way that would make each citizen "equal". All that Obama is attempting to do is to close the unarguably too large wealth gap that is plaguing America.
I understand that you should be free to make as much as you want in a capitalist society, but Obama is not attempting to impede this. He is merely attempting to help those in need.
It's a harsh reality that there are people in our country that are in need of assistance. When I say "look past your white picket fence," I am saying that you need to understand that there are people in our own backyard that cannot realistically escape poverty. Yes, people take advantage of welfare. But not everyone on welfare is doing so. We can't punish those who are truly in need because there are others leeching off of the system.
Any why tax the higher income brackets more? Because it is one of the most reasonable ways to get the funding needed for such change. When the real estate bubble burst, it took the middle class with it. Higher taxes on people in lower/mid tax brackets would only worsen the problem that Obama is trying to fix. It would drive the middle/lower class even further into poverty. At a certain point it is the governments duty to step in and fix things that certainly aren't going to fix themselves.
"A minor distribution of wealth" certainly mirrors a socialist way of thinking. But to say that Barack Obama is a socialist is laughable. Socialism would have never existed if there weren't realistic and rational benefits to it. Many of the greatest thinkers of of the past 200 years have agreed that socialism at it's core is a noble way of thinking. It's been proven that, in action, taken to the level that it was taken, it will fail. That doesn't mean that to a lesser extent it isn't a positive thing. Quite the contrary. But now, we as Americans, will write off any idea with a socialistic lean as outright socialism. An idea leaning toward socialism is automatically a bad idea. This should not be the case. Barack's ideas may be inspired by socialism, but that's because socialism has a solid base.
Socialist thought can happily coexist with capitalism.
Socialist thought can happily coexist with democracy.
Socialist thought does not make you a socialist.
just a side note i assumed the original post was written in reference to me (and possibly Brandon) personally, due to conversations we had the previous day, and the implications that whomever you were talking about was not old enough to remember the cold war. so if this isn't true i suppose it changes a few of the arguments.
im not denying that certain people have negative feelings towards socialism due to past experiences, but this has nothing to do with my ability to discern the definition or implications of socialism. of course there are going to be people making decisions for ridiculous reasons, but that itself shouldn't nullify an argument.
it would appear that the most current britannica has a different first sentence, but the meaning is the same? property and wealth are one and the same, public control implies distribution.
to say that it is an absolute bastardization of the definition is just wrong. sure obama is not pitching pure socialism, but even by the definition you gave, obamas policies move us clearly further in this direction then we are now.
socialist thought already coexists with capitalism and democracy, the wealthiest 50% of americans already pay 96.54% of our income taxes, and the wealthiest 1% pay 34.27%
how can you deny that, by the definitions we have both given, this is in some sense socialism? surely calling obama a socialist is a hyperbole, but he wants to move us further in this direction then we already are, which to me is too far.
Just Brandon.
Moving closer to socialism does not imply socialism. Because a policy reflects socialism, does not make it a socialist policy.
Obama is not a socialist.
Whether or not America should or shouldn't adopt a slightly more socialist policy on taxation is another subject completely.
If you disagree with the policy in and of itself, fine. But the socialist angle was just a poorly executed, taseteless campaign tactic.
I can respect an opinion that is different than mine. But calling Obama a socialist is unfair and inaccurate. But I'm sure you understand that. Others, not so much.
i already published this but it looks like it didn't work for some reason:
sorry for the harsh arguments prior, i thought your post was aimed at me, i was being defensive. my fault i should have asked.
let's summarize this whole thing with:
"Whether or not America should or shouldn't adopt a slightly more socialist policy on taxation is another subject completely."
our disagreement is not on the use of the word socialism, but rather the policy itself.
It is very gallant (brave) of you to slander (insult) my person and/or way of thinking in this fashion. Continue to twist my words and make groping (blind) assumptions about my political views as well as my aptitude (intelligence). I look forward to more wikipedia-assisted insults full of prodigious (large) vocabulary aimed to get under my skin, since I'm sure you are full of them (amirite?).
Are you aware of what sort of information you would find on Wikipedia? Certainly not opinions, as my posts have been full of.
Ironic that you would use such a diversionary tactic while abusing a thesaurus to boast your own "extraordinary vocabulary," while at the same time offering no personal insight or opinion on the actual subject at hand (except maybe the fact that you were just a little butt-hurt by my jest).
PS. I suppose you weren't around for prior internet shenanigans. Here's how it works. I (or even you!) state an opinion that would be taken as controversial to some of your peers. It leads to a discussion or argument on the topic. Being friends or acquaintances, we do not take it as a personal attack and make unwitting retorts in the heat of the internet-based moment. Better luck in future blogging endeavors. Godspeed.
PPS. You may respond to the original post or any of the comments if you choose; not just my bait to lure you into the discussion (which appears to have gotten under your skin, unfortunately, not to the end that I had hoped).
PPPS. Internet is srs bzns. etc etc etc.
c-c-controversiallll~
OMG!!!!! WHAT THE FUCK HAS GONE WRONG WITH THE FRIGGIN BLOGS. MATT, TAKE YOUR DEMOCRAT BULLCRAP AND STICK IT. NEXT TIME I SEE YOU, YOU ARE GOING DOWN SON. ALSO, WHY DONT YOU REDISTRIBUTE SOME OF YOUR WEALTH MY WAY!!!
SEAN HANNITY FOR PRESIDENT IN 2012!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
lolbamownd
what?
neverminddddd i think i see what you're doinggggg
matt what the frig does loba mowned mean. better spell it out for me or Im a gonna cry.....
unatices!!!
hmmmm... do you mean obama won and some other words I cant figure out????
shkboai2012
these dogs
lol i am so lost...
oops i just read some more of this long one. Matt, Brandon and Kirby, cant we all just get along...... these blogs have turned so tragic :-(
it's one of the great tragedies of our time.
sigh..... tears in my eyes.
Post a Comment