• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Are We Now a Socialist Country?

Are We Now a Socialist Country?

  • Yes, we are a socialist country

    Votes: 5 9.8%

  • No, we are a capitalist country

    Votes: 12 23.5%

  • We have been partly socialist and capitalist for decades

    Votes: 32 62.7%

  • Other

    Votes: 2 3.9%
  • Total voters
    51
Kal'Stang said:
It's all in how you look at things. Think about this. Say a person works at a car factory. They help build the cars but they cannot take that car home because it is not theirs. It is the owner of the company's car. That person is just a tool to the car company owner. Remember no one is really irreplaceable to a company. The car company owner sells that car generating revenue which is then taxed by the government. And the person that builds the car is also taxed on their check. Everyone that pays taxes is in effect a tool for the government to make money to do what they need (want (<---also depends on how you look at things)) to do.
Click to expand...
Well, like I said if you're willing to radically redefine things you can come up with w/e sort of thing you like.
Generally, humans are considered something other than equipment.

But, yes, if you're willing to start using alternative definitions, then you can have w/e point you would like.
 
Combination of both and have been for some time. It remains to be seen if we will end up socialistic in the future. I have my concerns.
 
not even close and to boot Obama isn't a socialist either. nor is he a communist.
 
We've had a mixture for awhile. Government ran programs mixed with laissez faire.
 
Why are we a socialist nation again? Do you believe that since .2% of industry or so is nationalized that we qualify as socialist? Do you honestly think that the working class is running the show? That labor has it too good? I pose a new question: Is the United States now an ostrich egg? And I assure you that the United States has more in common with an ostrich egg than it does with a socialist state.
Again, Obama is a capitalist-nationalist. The fact that he pays the most basic consideration to the middle class does not make him a socialist, it's just such a shock to those sheltered all their lives in the right-wing bubble.
 
I thought the U.S. learned its lesson about socialist hysteria in the McCarthy era?
 
Orius said:
I thought the U.S. learned its lesson about socialist hysteria in the McCarthy era?
Click to expand...

Apparently not, that's why at the slightest hint of government involvement, Americans will light torches and make poorly spelled protest signs.
 
Orius said:
I thought the U.S. learned its lesson about socialist hysteria in the McCarthy era?
Click to expand...

It seems that some conservatives did learn a lesson there, just not the ideal one. They learned how effective labeling some one as socialist or communist can be.
 
Redress said:
It seems that some conservatives did learn a lesson there, just not the ideal one. They learned how effective labeling some one as socialist or communist can be.
Click to expand...

Yea, because nobody on the left would ever dream of using inflammatory epithets to stigmatize their opposition. See

wa-bush-hitler.png


fascism.jpg


bush_hitler.jpg


etc. ad nauseum.
 
RightinNYC said:
Yea, because nobody on the left would ever dream of using inflammatory epithets to stigmatize their opposition. See

etc. ad nauseum.
Click to expand...

Yes, but this thread is about socialism.
 
Redress said:
It seems that some conservatives did learn a lesson there, just not the ideal one. They learned how effective labeling some one as socialist or communist can be.
Click to expand...
Is this any better or any worse than liberals labeling people as Nazis?
 
Redress said:
Neither, it is the same.
Click to expand...

I agree. I thought the people doing it from 00-08 were idiots, just like the people doing it now.

Now if only tv shows would interview people like you and me instead of Cindy Sheehan and Orly Taitz, maybe we'd be getting somewhere as a society...
 
RightinNYC said:
I agree. I thought the people doing it from 00-08 were idiots, just like the people doing it now.

Now if only tv shows would interview people like you and me instead of Cindy Sheehan and Orly Taitz, maybe we'd be getting somewhere as a society...
Click to expand...

We are boring in comparison though.
 
Cilogy said:
Say what you honestly think.
Click to expand...

No, we are not a de facto socialist country but I would contend that some of the underlying theories and methods which define socialism are being implemented more so now than ever in American history, which, in my opinion, undermines the core beliefs upon which this country was founded.
 
I would also like to add that I'm sick and tired of the shrill cries coming from the left anytime someone mentions the words "socialist" or "socialism" in reference to Obama. Whether or not he is a de facto socialist is irrelevant, his policies and rhetoric are socialistic enough to warrant harsh criticism.

Saying the Bush-bashing Nazi-labelers are equivalent to people who call Obama a socialist is just retarded. It's not even remotely similar.

Nazism was based upon tyrannical racism and genocide, socialism is generalized economic philosophy that enjoys implementation across the modern world. Do not make the silly and ignorant mistake of conflating these two concepts.
 
Redress said:
We are a capitalist country with a few socialist styled programs. The whole socialism thing being talked about endlessly now is just a case of namecalling by those on the right.
Click to expand...

Hmmmmm..... how about a list of Congress critters that belong to the Democratic Socialists of America?

Co-Chairs
Hon. Raúl M. Grijalva (AZ-07)
Hon. Lynn Woolsey (CA-06)

Vice Chairs
Hon. Diane Watson (CA-33)
Hon. Sheila Jackson-Lee (TX-18)
Hon. Mazie Hirono (HI-02)
Hon. Dennis Kucinich (OH-10)

Senate Members
Hon. Bernie Sanders (VT)

House Members
Hon. Neil Abercrombie (HI-01)
Hon. Tammy Baldwin (WI-02)
Hon. Xavier Becerra (CA-31)
Hon. Madeleine Bordallo (GU-AL)
Hon. Robert Brady (PA-01)
Hon. Corrine Brown (FL-03)
Hon. Michael Capuano (MA-08)
Hon. André Carson (IN-07)
Hon. Donna Christensen (VI-AL)
Hon. Yvette Clarke (NY-11)
Hon. William “Lacy” Clay (MO-01)
Hon. Emanuel Cleaver (MO-05)
Hon. Steve Cohen (TN-09)
Hon. John Conyers (MI-14)
Hon. Elijah Cummings (MD-07)
Hon. Danny Davis (IL-07)
Hon. Peter DeFazio (OR-04)
Hon. Rosa DeLauro (CT-03)
Rep. Donna F. Edwards (MD-04)
Hon. Keith Ellison (MN-05)
Hon. Sam Farr (CA-17)
Hon. Chaka Fattah (PA-02)
Hon. Bob Filner (CA-51)
Hon. Barney Frank (MA-04)
Hon. Marcia L. Fudge (OH-11)
Hon. Alan Grayson (FL-08)
Hon. Luis Gutierrez (IL-04)
Hon. John Hall (NY-19)
Hon. Phil Hare (IL-17)
Hon. Maurice Hinchey (NY-22)
Hon. Michael Honda (CA-15)
Hon. Jesse Jackson, Jr. (IL-02)
Hon. Eddie Bernice Johnson (TX-30)
Hon. Hank Johnson (GA-04)
Hon. Marcy Kaptur (OH-09)
Hon. Carolyn Kilpatrick (MI-13)
Hon. Barbara Lee (CA-09)
Hon. John Lewis (GA-05)
Hon. David Loebsack (IA-02)
Hon. Ben R. Lujan (NM-3)
Hon. Carolyn Maloney (NY-14)
Hon. Ed Markey (MA-07)
Hon. Jim McDermott (WA-07)
Hon. James McGovern (MA-03)
Hon. George Miller (CA-07)
Hon. Gwen Moore (WI-04)
Hon. Jerrold Nadler (NY-08)
Hon. Eleanor Holmes-Norton (DC-AL)
Hon. John Olver (MA-01)
Hon. Ed Pastor (AZ-04)
Hon. Donald Payne (NJ-10)
Hon. Chellie Pingree (ME-01)
Hon. Charles Rangel (NY-15)
Hon. Laura Richardson (CA-37)
Hon. Lucille Roybal-Allard (CA-34)
Hon. Bobby Rush (IL-01)
Hon. Linda Sánchez (CA-47)
Hon. Jan Schakowsky (IL-09)
Hon. José Serrano (NY-16)
Hon. Louise Slaughter (NY-28)
Hon. Pete Stark (CA-13)
Hon. Bennie Thompson (MS-02)
Hon. John Tierney (MA-06)
Hon. Nydia Velazquez (NY-12)
Hon. Maxine Waters (CA-35)
Hon. Mel Watt (NC-12)
Hon. Henry Waxman (CA-30)
Hon. Peter Welch (VT-AL)
Hon. Robert Wexler (FL-19)
Click to expand...

DSA Members of Congress

[ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Socialists_of_America]Democratic Socialists of America - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]
 
Orius said:
I thought the U.S. learned its lesson about socialist hysteria in the McCarthy era?
Click to expand...

We did... turns out McCarthy was 90% correct. :mrgreen:
 
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
Can you post your copy of the list then?
Click to expand...

Sure:


.
Click to expand...

Are you seriously arguing that these 70 people are members of this group? What the **** are you basing this on - some retard conspiracy theorist's website?

Holy ****, you people are embarrassing our entire party.
 
RightinNYC said:
Sure:




Are you seriously arguing that these 70 people are members of this group? What the **** are you basing this on - some retard conspiracy theorist's website?

Holy ****, you people are embarrassing our entire party.
Click to expand...

He is an independent though....
 
Despite the some may say, all functioning countries require some level of socialism for stability.

Look at the country that didn't have any vestige of it, Somalia during the 1990s, did that go well?

And China is teaching the world some useful lessons, particularly how having no safety net is a serious drag on the domestic consumption portion of a country's economy.

I'd love to see a rational reason how offering a government insurance plan for the uninsured "nationalizes" the entire medical field.
 
I understand the intent behind the "combination" theory, but it's still inaccurate, and is presumably based upon some application of the textbook economic spectrum, which ranges from the "pure" laissez-faire economy to the "pure" command economy. However, legitimate socialism requires collective ownership of the means of production. The establishment of state-operated programs and public good provisions as elements of a mixed economy do not constitute "socialism," since they play an important role in the ultimate sustainment of the private ownership of the means of production. Welfare programs, for example, promote macroeconomic stabilization and maintain the physical efficiency of the working class, thus sustaining capitalism.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom