• Advertisement
To advertise, place classifieds free ads by category in a forum as a new topic, or in the classified display ads section, or start a classifieds free blog.

Trump rejects socialism at SOTU as expressionless Dems sit unmoved

Trump rejects socialism at SOTU as expressionless Dems sit unmoved

Postby smix » Wed Feb 06, 2019 2:57 pm

Trump rejects socialism at SOTU as expressionless Dems sit unmoved
Fox News

URL: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump- ... it-unmoved
Category: Politics
Published: February 6, 2019

Description: President Trump drew a clear line Tuesday night between his party's policies and the creeping socialism some see on the left, declaring at the State of the Union "America will never be a Socialist country" as many nonplussed Democrats appeared to shift uncomfortably in their seats. The vow from Trump, whose speech was delayed a week amid a partial government shutdown, came as Democrats have proposed an evolving agenda of "Medicare-for-all," free college tuition, minimum wage increases and even guaranteed basic income. Trump cited the ongoing disaster in Venezuela, where socialist policies have wrought "abject poverty and despair," and pledged to maintain free-market economics in the U.S. “America was founded on liberty and independence and not government coercion, domination and control," he said to Republican applause. "We are born free and we will stay free.” “Tonight, we renew our resolve that America will never be a Socialist country,” Trump added as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi sat stone-faced behind him. Viewers at home were treated to a tight shot of a frowning Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, an avowed Socialist and modern-day godfather of a movement that has produced a host of far-left young Democrats, including Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D- N.Y., who also was shown expressionless. Other Democrats, including Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, however, applauded the line.

bernie-sanders-SOTU-TV.jpg

Sanders would tweet following the speech: “Trump said tonight, ‘We are born free, and we will stay free.’ I say to Trump: People are not truly free when they can’t afford health care, prescription drugs, or a place to live. People are not free when they cannot retire with dignity or feed their families.” The socialism storyline was just one of several dividing lines Trump highlighted in a speech that simultaneously called for bipartisanship and unity. Trump pledged to pursue his signature project, the wall on the Mexican border, saying: "I will build it." "I am asking you to defend our very dangerous southern border out of love and devotion to our fellow citizens and to our country," Trump said, in a speech that variously referred to both "walls" and "barriers" at the border. “Simply put, walls work and walls save lives," Trump added. "So let’s work together, compromise and reach a deal that will truly make America safe. ... This is a smart, strategic, see-through steel barrier -- not just a simple concrete wall." Trump framed border security as a matter of preventing human trafficking, stopping the flow of illegal drugs from Mexico and maintaining federal resources for legal citizens. Democrats, including Ocasio-Cortez, sat on their hands as Trump praised an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agent, Elvin Hernandez, for breaking up a notorious human trafficking ring. But perhaps more than any other issue, the socialism schism brought into sharp relief the differences between the two parties as 2020 looms. Trump began the portion of his 82-minute speech by citing the economic decline and civil disorder in Venezuela as a cautionary tale, after his administration last week imposed sweeping sanctions against the regime of Nicolas Maduro. The country's government in recent years limited citizens' access to foreign currency, implemented substantial subsidies and price controls on food and other items, and fell victim to sweeping corruption -- before effectively collapsing last month. "Two weeks ago, the United States officially recognized the legitimate government of Venezuela, and its new interim president, Juan Guaido," Trump said. "We stand with the Venezuelan people in their noble quest for freedom -- and we condemn the brutality of the Maduro regime, whose Socialist policies have turned that nation from being the wealthiest in South America into a state of abject poverty and despair. "Here, in the United States, we are alarmed by new calls to adopt socialism in our country," Trump continued, prompting boos from Republicans in the chamber. "America was founded on liberty and independence -- not government coercion, domination and control. We are born free, and we will stay free." Then, after a prolonged chant of "USA" broke out, Trump concluded, "Tonight, we renew our resolve that America will never be a Socialist country." Democrats largely remained seated as Republicans resumed the "USA" chant and applauded for several seconds. Still, Democrats did find enough common ground to applaud many of Trump's remarks. “We stood up and cheered dozens of times. I stood up and cheered more often than last time I was at a Dodgers game," Rep. Brad Sherman, D-Calif., told Fox News Channel's Laura Ingraham Tuesday night. "We stood up and cheered dozens of times. Not as often as the Republicans did, we cheered more than when Obama was cheered for by Republicans, we cheered plenty, but you can’t stand up after every half a sentence and give a standing ovation.”



Trump declares 'socialism is dying' amid Venezuela 'catastrophe,' promises 'this will never happen to us'
Fox News

URL: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump- ... ppen-to-us
Category: Politics
Published: February 18, 2019

Description: President Donald Trump, speaking in a major foreign policy address in Miami to members of the Venezuelan community, declared Monday that "a new day is coming in Latin America" and issued a stark assessment that "socialism is dying" across the world. In a wide-ranging rebuke of socialism that seemed targeted as much at Venezuela, Cuba, and Nicaragua as it was at congressional Democrats, Trump remarked: "We know that socialism is not about justice, it's not about equality, it's not about lifting up the poor -- it's about one thing only: power for the ruling class. And, the more power they get, the more they crave. They want to run health care, run transportation and finance, run energy, education, run everything. They want the power to decide who wins and who loses, who's up and who's down, what's true and what's false, and even who lives and who dies." Before a supportive and raucous crowd at Florida International University in Miami Trump announced, flanked by large American and Venezuelan flags, "This will never happen to us. ... America will never be a socialist country." The president's vow came as Democrats have proposed an evolving agenda of "Medicare-for-all," free college tuition, minimum wage increases and even guaranteed basic income. "When Venezuela is free, and Cuba is free, and Nicaragua is free, this will become the first free hemisphere in all of human history," Trump said. The address was the second time Trump publicly and forcefully has condemned what he has called "the horrors of socialism and communism" and "massive wealth confiscation" in recent weeks, following his similar vow during the State of the Union address that "America will never be a socialist country." That remark, which left Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., stone-faced, came as part of a larger condemnation of disputed President Nicolas Maduro for "turning that nation from being the wealthiest in South America into a state of abject poverty and despair" through a mixture of "brutality" and "socialist policies." On Monday, Trump hammered that theme repeatedly and called on Venezuela's military to rise up and take on Maduro, who has blocked U.S. humanitarian aid shipments. "We know the truth about socialism in Venzuela, in Cuba, in Nicaragua, and all around the world. Socialism promises prosperity, but it delivers poverty," Trump said. "Socialism promises unity, but it delivers hatred and it delivers division. Socialism promises a better future, but it always returns to the darkest chapters of the past. That never fails. It always happens. Socialism is a sad and discredited ideology rooted in a total ignorance of history and human nature, which is why socialism, eventually, must always give rise to tyranny -- which it does. Socialists profess a love of diversity, but they always insist on absolute conformity." As the crowd chanted "USA," Trump, who was joined by first lady Melania Trump, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, and National Security Adviser John Bolton, asserted, "The people of Venezuela stand at the threshold of history -- ready to reclaim their country and to reclaim their future. Not long ago, Venezuela was the wealthiest nation by far in South America. But, years of socialist rule have brought this once-thriving nation to the brink of ruin. "The results have been catastrophic," Trump continued. "Almost 90 percent of Venezuelans now live in poverty. In 2018, hyperinflation in Venezuela exceeded one million percent. Crippling shortages of food and medicine plague the country. Socialism has so completely ravaged this great country that even the world's largest reserves of oil are no longer enough to keep the lights on." As the monthslong political crisis in Venezuela continued, Trump took multiple generalized shots at socialism that pointedly were not limited to the country's borders. "The days of socialism and communism are numbered not only in Venezuela, but in Nicaragua and Cuba as well," Trump said, as the crowd roared. "Do we love Cuba? Do we love Nicaragua? Great countries. Great potential." Trump again declared that Guaido was the country's rightful president amid what he called an unprecedented "humanitarian disaster." He also made a public case to Venezuela's military, which has remained loyala to Maduro and could play a decisive role in the stalemate, to support Guaido's government. Trump issued a dire warning to Venezuela's military that if they continue to stand with Maduro, "you will find no safe harbor, no easy exit and no way out. You will lose everything." Trump added: "We seek a peaceful transition of power, but all options are open." Trump urged the Venezuelan military to accept Guaido's offer of amnesty and refrain from violence against those opposing Maduro's government. And he praised the Venezuelan opposition, saying of the people of Venezuela, "They are turning the page on dictatorship and there will be no going back." The Maduro-controlled military has blocked the U.S. from moving tons of humanitarian aid airlifted in recent days to the Colombian border with Venezuela. The aid shipments have been meant in part to emphasize the hyperinflation and shortages of food and medicine that are gripping Venezuela. "Unfortunately, Dictator Maduro has blocked this life-saving aid from entering the country. He would rather see his people starve than give them aid, than help them," Trump said. "Millions of Venezuelans are starving and suffering while a small handful at the top of the Maduro regime plunder the regime into poverty and death. We know who they are and we know where they keep the billions of dollars they have stolen." The aid is supposed to be moved into Venezuela on Feb. 23 by supporters of Guaido. But, Maduro has called the aid unnecessary and said it constituted an attempt to destabilize his government. Trump delivered the remarks to a supportive audience at Florida International University in Miami. South Florida is home to more than 100,000 Venezuelans and Venezuelan-Americans, the largest concentration in the country. Trump has largely been spending the holiday weekend at his private club in West Palm Beach. Critics said Maduro's re-election last year was fraudulent, making his second term illegal. On Sunday, Florida Republican Sen. Marco Rubio -- whom Trump invoked in his Monday address -- visited a border staging point for U.S. aid to Venezuela and warned soldiers loyal to Maduro that it would be a "crime against humanity" if they blocked entry of the goods being channeled through Maduro's rivals. An enthusiastic throng of Venezuelan migrants, some chanting "Rubio! Liberty," met the senator as he visited Cucuta and held a news conference in sight of a border bridge that has been flooded in recent months by people escaping the hardships of Venezuela's hyperinflation and severe shortages of food and medicine. While Russia, China, Turkey and a large number of Asian and African countries still back Maduro, Rubio dismissed them, saying in English: "The countries that support Maduro do not surprise us. All of them are corrupt and none of them is a democracy and many of them are owed billions of dollars that they want to get paid by the corrupt regime."



Steve Forbes: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, others think socialism is the future – they're dead wrong
Fox News

URL: https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/steve-f ... dead-wrong
Category: Politics
Published: February 27, 2019

Description: Is America experiencing a socialist moment? Given the current political environment, you’d be forgiven for thinking so. The Green New Deal – a comic book collection of absurdist ideas to combat global warming – would devastate the economy with unprecedented government controls. Yet it has been endorsed by numerous Democrat presidential candidates. So, has the idea of a total government takeover of health care; Democrats sugarcoat (oops, sugar is a no-no, so let’s use the word disguise) this form of socialism by dubbing it Medicare for All, even though this program currently offers a robust private insurance option. Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif., one of what is becoming a stadium full of presidential aspirants, made clear that the private health insurance industry would be rendered illegal. Another White House wannabe, Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., proposed a bill last year that would impose radical government oversight of corporate governance, part of a move to effectively take over businesses without the inconvenience of buying out shareholders. And hardly a day goes by without new schemes for higher taxes such as a 70 percent income tax rate and a wealth tax. This hostility to capitalism was on display in New York City where local politicians led by avowed socialist Rep. Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., gleefully led the charge to scuttle a deal with Amazon that would have brought in 25,000 new jobs where the average pay would have been an eye-popping $150,000. Ostensibly they objected to the tax credits for Amazon, even though this would have been money New York wasn’t going to get unless Amazon was there and would have been vastly exceeded by the taxes – income, sales, property and other exactions – generated by Amazon’s presence. But make no mistake: the real motivation for Ocasio-Cortez and other leftist activists was a loathing of free enterprise. Most ominous, and hardly given much attention, was how all these socialist programs would be paid for in addition to growth-killing new taxes: Ocasio-Cortez let the cat out of the bag when she casually tossed out the idea of simply printing more money. In a documentary I helped produce, "In Money We Trust?" now being shown on public television, we underscore the truth of Lenin’s observation that the best way to undermine the existing social order was to debauch the currency. As John Maynard Keynes said about the resulting inflation: “There is no subtler, no surer means of overturning the existing basis of society than to debauch the currency. The process engages all the hidden forces of economic law on the side of destruction and does it in a manner which not one man in a million can diagnose.” The disturbing trends seem to confirm the declaration of a Washington Post columnist: “It’s time to give socialism a try” as if we should ignore the ugly experiences of the Soviet Union, Maoist China, Cuba, North Korea and Venezuela. Fortunately, as these socialist nostrums are being put forth, Americans are waking up to their true nature: a horrific loss of liberty and the opportunity to get ahead and a precipitous decline in our standard of living. They are right to be concerned.
* Medicare for All. The way single-payer systems control medical costs is through rationing: agonizingly long waits for surgeries and for needed treatments of diseases like cancer. In Britain, for example, bureaucrats have formulas for deciding who gets life-saving remedies. If you need kidney dialysis and you are in your 60s, you will never get to the front of the line; you will be left to die. In addition, government control of health care severely curtails research for new pharmaceuticals and medical devices. Europe was once a font of new drugs. No longer.
* Higher taxes. Socialists confuse wealth with cash as if Bill Gates sits on a vast pile of money. The bulk of the wealth of “the rich” these socialists want to plunder are assets such as stocks, bonds, factories, software, etc. Tank the economy as the Ocasio-Cortezs of the world would do and the value of these assets would plummet, if not disappear. These taxes would also destroy the creation of savings and capital. Without the investment capital makes possible, we stagnate.
* The Green New Deal. Airplanes? Ground ‘em. The combustion engine? Consign it to the Smithsonian. Where would the juice come from for electric vehicles? Why windmills and solar energy, even though any projection based on reality shows that the world will be getting most of its energy from fossil fuels for decades to come. Get rid of cows, as if their flatulence is a greater danger than that which comes from so many of today’s politicians.
Americans are increasingly waking up to the threat. A new Fox News poll of about 1,000 registered voters found that 57 percent have a favorable view of capitalism compared to only 28 percent who have an unfavorable view. As for socialism, only 25 percent had a favorable view of it vs. 59 percent who held an unfavorable view. These numbers should be reassuring to anyone who recognizes the remarkable benefits of our free-market system, which is the greatest engine for innovation, opportunity and prosperity. Socialism does nothing to lift people out of poverty except for its rapacious rulers. In the past generation, by contrast, thanks to capitalism, one billion people around the world have escaped dire poverty. That’s 137,000 people a day. Socialism is all about the government controlling our lives. Free child care, for example, would ultimately mean government telling us how our children are to be raised. While most Americans are recognizing the truth about socialism, we cannot be complacent. We must vigorously fight socialism’s falsehoods. As President Trump said in his State of the Union address: “Here, in the United States, we are alarmed by new calls to adopt socialism in our country. We are born free, and we will stay free. Tonight, we renew our resolve that America will never be a socialist country.”



John Stossel: Democratic socialism is not the route to paradise – Just look at Venezuela
Fox News

URL: https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/john-st ... -venezuela
Category: Politics
Published: March 27, 2019

Description: Venezuela is a disaster. Yet 20 years ago, it was the wealthiest country in Latin America. It still has the world’s biggest oil reserves. It should be a happy and prosperous nation. But then Venezuela went socialist. Democratic socialist to be exact. They voted for it. Hugo Chavez promised the poor “social and economic reforms.” The majority of voters believed him. So did many American leftists. Model Naomi Campbell traveled to Venezuela to give Chavez a hug. She called him “a rebel angel.” Michael Moore said that Chavez used oil money to “eliminate 75 percent of extreme poverty.” But now that the socialists created much more extreme poverty, I would think that progressives would realize that democratic socialism is not the route to paradise. But no, nothing convinces a dedicated socialist -- or much of the media. A popular Vox video titled “The collapse of Venezuela, explained” never once mentions socialism. Instead, it says Venezuela collapsed because “oil prices plummeted in 2014 and Maduro failed to adjust.” “Blaming socialism for Venezuela’s riches to rags story is grossly misleading,” said Al Jazeera anchor Ryan Kohls. Venezuela didn’t collapse because of socialism, added comedian John Oliver. “It’s a story about epic mismanagement.” But mismanagement is what happens under socialist governments. It always happens. That’s because no group of central planners is wise enough to manage an entire economy. Even if they have good intentions, socialists eventually run out of other people’s money. In Venezuela, the solution was to print more money. That caused massive inflation. When businesses raised prices to try to keep up with inflation, Hugo Chavez and Nicolas Maduro called that “profiteering” and punished many by confiscating their businesses. The socialists claimed they would run those businesses better than greedy capitalists could because they weren’t obsessed with profits. Without the “excess” profits, prices would be lower and more money would go to the poor. But pursuit of profit is what makes an economy work! I’d think the collapse of nations such as Venezuela, China, Russia, Korea, Vietnam, Cambodia and Cuba would have taught the socialists that. But no.



In America, progressives claim that socialism is succeeding in much of Europe. John Oliver claims, “There are plenty of socialist countries that look nothing like Venezuela.” Presidential candidate Bernie Sanders agrees, saying: “When I talk about Democratic socialism, I am not looking at Venezuela. I’m not looking at Cuba. I’m looking at countries like Denmark, like Sweden.” But those countries are not socialist! Yes, they have big welfare programs, but their economies are more capitalist than America’s. They set no national minimum wage. They impose fewer regulations on businesses. Their leaders even go out of their way to point out that they are not socialist. Denmark’s prime minister went on TV to respond Sanders’ comments by saying: “Denmark is far from a socialist planned economy. Denmark is a market economy.” Not only are Scandinavian countries not socialist, lately they’ve reduced government control of their economies. Denmark privatized the national phone system and the railroads -- and sold the Copenhagen airport to a private company. Swedish economic historian Johan Norberg points out: “We did have a period in the 1970s and 1980s when we had something that resembled socialism, big government that taxed and spent heavily. (But) that’s the period in Swedish history when our economy was going south.” So Sweden reduced government’s role, too. They privatized businesses and even instituted school choice. The progressives are just wrong. Scandinavian countries that they call “socialist successes” are not socialist, and they’re moving toward more capitalism. It’s astounding that the progressives keep winning votes peddling economic nonsense. At least Venezuelans who escaped their country’s socialism understand now that socialism creates poverty. I asked Stossel TV’s Gloria Alvarez to go to Florida to interview recent Venezuelan immigrants about socialism. Most gave answers like “I wouldn’t recommend it to anyone” and “It’s never gonna work!” It never will. Never. As libertarian economist Ludwig von Mises wrote: “The champions of socialism call themselves progressives, but they recommend a system which is characterized by rigid observance of routine and by a resistance to every kind of improvement… They promise the blessings of the Garden of Eden, but they plan to transform the world into a gigantic post office, every man but one a subordinate clerk.” Until progressives learn that, tragedies like Venezuela will happen again and again.



Justin Haskins: Sanders, Ocasio-Cortez keep lying about socialism. Here’s the truth
Fox News

URL: https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/justin- ... -the-truth
Category: Politics
Published: March 31, 2019

Description: Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., have amassed a huge following among millennials by propagating the myth that the only way to solve society’s problems is to seize wealth and property away from law-abiding citizens so that the federal government has significantly more power over all of our lives. However, history has proven repeatedly that the collective ownership and management of property eventually leads to death, destruction, coercion, and tyranny. More than 167 million people have been killed, exiled, or imprisoned by socialist and communist regimes in the twentieth and twenty-first centuries. That’s comparable to more than 50,000 attacks as deadly as those that occurred on September 11, 2001. Whenever socialism is tried, it fails miserably – whether it’s in China, Nazi Germany, North Korea, Russia, Venezuela, or Zimbabwe. Yet, despite the mountains of evidence against collectively owning and managing property, Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez continue to allege that anyone who argues against socialism is nothing more than an untrustworthy right-wing propagandist and that all people like Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez really want is to tweak the current system to make things better for the poor. In a recent interview with NPR, Sanders said he needs to “do a better job maybe in explaining what we mean by socialism … Obviously, my right-wing colleagues here want to paint that as authoritarianism and communism and Venezuela, and that’s nonsense. What I mean by democratic socialism is that I want a vibrant democracy.” Sanders later added, “Second of all, what it means, Rachel, is that in the wealthiest country in the history of the world we can provide a decent standard of living for all about [sic] people. … Health care for all can be done, and we can save money in doing it. We can have a minimum wage which is a living wage, and I’m delighted to see that, you know, right now, five states already passed $15 an hour minimum wage.” According to Sanders, socialism is nothing more than advocating for higher minimum wage, single-payer health care, and a “vibrant democracy” – whatever that means. Interestingly, all these policies are also classified as “liberal” in U.S. politics, leaving many to wonder whether Sanders thinks liberalism, progressivism, and socialism are all synonymous terms. If so, why bother touting the benefits of “socialism” at all? Of course, this isn’t what “socialism” is, and Sanders knows it. Socialism is the widespread collective ownership and management of property. A socialist society might have single-payer health care, which is undoubtedly a socialist policy, but that’s not the only socialized industry in a socialist economy. In a truly socialist system, government controls most of the economy, in part to ensure that wealth is continuously redistributed. Socialists are deeply concerned about “wealth gaps” between different classes. They want to create a society in which wealth is equitably redistributed so that everyone has what they need, but not necessarily what they want. They don’t care about private property rights, individual liberty, free enterprise, or, in many cases, even religious freedom. Their primary concern is one thing, and one thing only: taking property and wealth away from the people who have earned it. They don’t support creating a truly free society, because they believe freedom leads to wealth gaps, and that can never be tolerated in socialism. They think the “rights” of the collective – which continuously shift and inevitably become whatever the majority of people in society wants – trumps all individual rights. Or, put more simply, socialists want to create a democratic tyranny of the majority. There are plenty of examples of how this plays out, but let’s briefly consider one of the most common. In a society in which the health care system is collectively owned and managed, who decides whether that health care system will pay for abortion, contraception, physician-assisted suicide, or a whole host of other controversial issues? Who decides what will happen if there is a limited supply of a vaccine or who will be first (or 50th) in line for a heart transplant? Who determines which communities deserve new hospitals and which do not? Or which parents are worthy of in vitro fertilization, which helps couples struggling to have children? In a free market, all of these decisions are made by individuals, who voluntarily choose to exchange money, goods, and services with each other, as well as to create or support charities that help those who need assistance. In socialism, the answer is the majority of people in society determine the answers to all of these questions, and those who disagree are forced to go along with those choices, even if it violates their deeply held beliefs. So, for example, in a single-payer nation, nuns are forced to pay for abortions and condoms, even though abortion and contraception are against their religious beliefs. In a socialized agricultural society, Hindus and members of PETA would be forced to pay for animals to get slaughtered, even though they think killing animals is immoral. In a society with socialized education, a majority of people might decide, for example, that women shouldn’t be educated, stifling the rights of girls. In socialism, whatever the majority wants, the majority gets – even if that means hurting others in the process or stealing their property simply because most voters think they would benefit from having it. This is exactly the sort of system Ocasio-Cortez and Sanders want. They might spend a lot of time talking about things like increasing the minimum wage, but what they’re really after is controlling our entire society. That’s why Ocasio-Cortez proposed the “Green New Deal,” which would destroy countless thousands of businesses, including all of the fossil-fuel industry; impose “upgrades” for every building in the country; effectively eliminate the private health insurance market and put government in charge of the health care system; create a free college tuition program; provide a federal job to anyone who wants one and a basic income to people who are “unwilling” to work; end air travel; and add thousands of new federal regulations, among numerous other radical policies. It also explains why Sanders recently hired David Sirota as a presidential campaign advisor. Sirota is a far-left pundit who once referred to Hugo Chavez’s “full-throated advocacy of socialism and redistributionism” in Venezuela as an “economic miracle” – just before Venezuela’s economy collapsed into total chaos. Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez are socialists, and socialism is, at best, well-intentioned tyranny. Don’t be a tyrant.
User avatar
smix
 
Posts: 1852661
Images: 1
Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2013 8:05 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Trump Knocks Socialism And Bernie Sanders Does Not Look Pleased

Postby smix » Wed Feb 06, 2019 3:20 pm

Trump Knocks Socialism And Bernie Sanders Does Not Look Pleased
Huffington Post

URL: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/tr ... 87b5562046
Category: Politics
Published: February 6, 2019

Description: Networks zoomed in on the Vermont senator after the president’s remarks during the State of the Union.
President Donald Trump lambasted socialism during his State of the Union address on Tuesday night, prompting cheers and chants of “USA, USA” from Republicans in the chamber. But at least one lawmaker didn’t seem too pleased by the diss: Bernie Sanders, the independent senator from Vermont. After criticizing embattled Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro’s “socialist policies” as being the cause of the South American country’s “abject poverty and despair,” Trump said he was “alarmed by the new calls to adopt socialism” in the United States — a statement that prompted some boos from his audience. The president continued: “America was founded on liberty and independence and not government coercion, domination and control. We are born free and we will stay free.” “Tonight, we renew our resolve that America will never be a socialist country,” he added after a pause. Cheers and applause erupted in the room as network cameras zoomed in on Sanders’ face. The 77-year-old senator, who has described himself as a democratic socialist, appeared to frown, his lips tightly pursed.

bernie-sotu-cbs.jpg

Sanders, who issued a rebuttal to Trump’s SOTU address, later pushed back against Trump’s remarks. “Trump said tonight, ‘We are born free, and we will stay free.’ I say to Trump: People are not truly free when they can’t afford health care, prescription drugs, or a place to live. People are not free when they cannot retire with dignity or feed their families,” he wrote on Twitter. The senator has described democratic socialism as a system of government that “works for all and not just the very wealthy.” “[Democratic socialism] builds on what Franklin Delano Roosevelt said when he fought for guaranteed economic rights for all Americans,” the senator said during a 2015 speech at Georgetown University. “And it builds on what Martin Luther King, Jr. said in 1968 when he stated that, ‘This country has socialism for the rich, and rugged individualism for the poor.’ It builds on the success of many other countries around the world that have done a far better job than we have in protecting the needs of their working families, the elderly, the children, the sick and the poor.”

52-weeks-of-vacation.jpg

“Democratic socialism means that we must reform a political system in America today which is not only grossly unfair but, in many respects, corrupt,” Sanders continued. An August Gallup poll found that 57 percent of Democrats view socialism favorably, compared to 47 percent who view capitalism positively. The same poll found that just 17 percent of Republicans have a positive view of socialism, compared to 71 percent who viewed capitalism in a favorable light.
User avatar
smix
 
Posts: 1852661
Images: 1
Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2013 8:05 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Chants of 'USA' after Trump says 'America will never be a socialist country'

Postby smix » Wed Feb 06, 2019 3:27 pm

Chants of 'USA' after Trump says 'America will never be a socialist country'
The Hill

URL: https://thehill.com/homenews/house/4286 ... st-country
Category: Politics
Published: February 5, 2019

Description: President Trump pledged during his State of the Union address Tuesday that "America will never be a socialist country," sparking chants of "USA" from GOP lawmakers. Trump, transitioning from talking about the escalating political crisis in Venezuela, said that he was "alarmed by new calls to adopt socialism in our country." "We are born free, and we will stay free. Tonight, we renew our resolve that America will never be a socialist country," Trump said. Trump's mention of socialism drew boos and chants of "USA, USA, USA" from Republican lawmakers. The remarks appeared to a veiled barb at some progressive lawmakers in the audience, including Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), who are both self-described democratic socialists. Ocasio-Cortez was spotted smiling during Trump's comments. Sanders, who was slated to deliver his own response to Trump's speech after the address, sat stone-faced.

Bernie-Sanders-2019-SOTU.jpg

Congressional Democrats are in the midst of fierce debate with a newly resurgent progressive caucus about the best way to take on Trump. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) remained seated but was spotted applauding when Trump said the United States would not be a "socialist country."



President’s State of the Union promises an America free from socialism
The Hill

URL: https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house ... -socialism
Category: Politics
Published: February 6, 2019

Description: President Donald J. Trump just previewed why he will be re-elected in 2020 with his 2019 State of the Union speech. The Democratic Party has been hijacked by Democratic socialists intent on revenge. While the president promised to keep America safe, strong and proud, the Democrats in attendance pouted and sneered at his vision of American greatness. Democrats have been self-defined as the party of gridlock, resistance and vengeance. The president declared to Congress that “we must reject the politics of revenge, resistance, and retribution — and embrace the boundless potential of cooperation, compromise, and the common good.” The fact is that Democrats are not the old party of John F. Kennedy, nor even Bill Clinton; they are a party dominated by the visions of socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) who want to bankrupt taxpayers with trillions in big-government spending. Socialists hate the idea that capitalism has worked in America, and they talk down the economic growth spurred by President Trump’s regulatory reform and tax cuts. The president bragged that “in just over 2 years since the election, we have launched an unprecedented economic boom — a boom that has rarely been seen before. We have created 5.3 million new jobs and, importantly, added 600,000 new manufacturing jobs — something which almost everyone said was impossible to do, but the fact is, we are just getting started.” Democrats are trying to use socialist ideas to stop this growth with class warfare and trillions in new spending. If you need a smoking gun that the Democrats have officially embraced socialism, you had some evidence in what one Democrat said in response to the State of the Union address. The idea of “cradle-to-grave” welfare spending is a socialist idea. The Democratic response to President Trump was given by the defeated 2018 Democratic candidate for governor in Georgia, Stacey Abrams, who declared that “children deserve an excellent education from cradle to career.” Interesting play on words and a dog whistle to socialists in America that Democrats are on your side. President Trump officially recognized Juan Guaido as the new interim president of socialist-controlled Venezuela. He explained that “we stand with the Venezuelan people in their noble quest for freedom — and we condemn the brutality of the Maduro regime, whose socialist policies have turned that nation from being the wealthiest in South America into a state of abject poverty and despair.” America can get prepared for similar poverty and despair if one of the many Democratic socialists running for president is successful; these candidates are pushing massive new expenditures on a government-run, taxpayer-funded health care system that will rely on rationing. Venezuelans followed the policies of free health care and “cradle-to-grave” welfare spending, and look where it got them. President Trump worries that Venezuelan socialism has come to America. He made the case at the State of the Union: “Here, in the United States, we are alarmed by new calls to adopt socialism in our country. America was founded on liberty and independence — not government coercion, domination, and control. We are born free, and we will stay free. Tonight, we renew our resolve that America will never be a socialist country.” America is a proud capitalist nation that is experiencing record growth, low unemployment and better trade deals. Socialism would put America on the Venezuelan track to go from a rich to a poor nation. The next time a socialist asks you what’s wrong with “Medicare for All,” a “Green New Deal,” free college tuition and taxes on the wealthy, ask them: “What’s the cost?” “Medicare for All” costs $32 trillion over ten years, according to George Mason University’s Mercatus Center. A “Green New Deal” costs between $2 trillion and $5.7 trillion over ten years, according to the American Enterprise Institute. Free college tuition and college loan forgiveness is about $2 trillion over ten years. Add up the tab for socialism, and it dwarfs the $22 trillion national debt we have accumulated over the history of the nation. In other words, Democratic socialist ideas would bankrupt our nation. Democratic socialists will lie and tell you that all these ideas can be paid for by taxing “the rich” (also known as job creators). A Washington Post analysis concluded that Rep. Ocasio-Cortez’s idea for a 70 percent tax on those earning more than $10 million a year only raises $720 billion over ten years. A wealth tax on those worth $10 million of 1 percent would raise $2 trillion over ten years. A tax on the so-called “one percent” would reach down to those making $600,000 per year and raise $3 trillion, if taxed at 73 percent. When you match up the class-warfare taxes versus the cost of Democratic socialism, you have a huge deficit. The Democratic Party of today is intent on growing government and soaking taxpayers in a way that will kill off American capitalism. The president gave a great State of the Union address, and his strongest point was to expose the Democratic Party for becoming extreme left-wing nuts. A successful businessman like Trump understands, better than any career politician, the evils of cradle-to-grave socialism. The American people understand that the Democrats of new don’t resemble the party of JFK; the new Democrats are morphing into the party of Sen. Sanders, and adhere to the policies promoted in communist Cuba and socialist Venezuela. The state of our Union will be great, as long as American socialism is defeated by President Trump.



Ocasio-Cortez, progressives accuse Trump of using socialism as scare tactic
The Hill

URL: https://thehill.com/homenews/house/4286 ... are-tactic
Category: Politics
Published: February 6, 2019

Description: Progressive Democrats accused President Trump of engaging in scare tactics for his warning in the State of the Union address about new calls for socialism in the United States. “I thought it was great. I think he's scared,” Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) told reporters when asked about Trump’s remarks. “He sees that everything is closing in on him and he knows that he's losing the battle of public opinion.” Ocasio-Cortez is a democratic socialist who has soared to political fame following her victory in a Democratic primary last summer. She has joined other liberals in the House in calling for a single-payer health care system and has also voiced support for higher marginal tax rates on the wealthiest households, as well as the “Green New Deal” that would fund programs to create clean energy jobs.

the-green-part.jpg

The New York lawmaker described Trump’s comments as “fabulous” and said he “has no substantive proposals to counter.” Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), a co-chair of the Progressive Caucus, argued the group’s proposals aren’t extreme, noting a number of them have been implemented in countries in the Western world. “I think he’s, you know, he's worried about the good ideas like Medicare for all and taxes on the wealthiest and a green new deal and he wants to paint it as socialism,” she told reporters. “And I think he's worried and he wants to paint it as socialism, but these are actually policies that every industrialized country in the world almost has instituted and built their societies on.” Trump in his speech said socialism had led to the economic and political disaster in Venezuela. “Here, in the United States, we are alarmed by new calls to adopt socialism in our country. America was founded on liberty and independence — not government coercion, domination and control,” he said. “We are born free, and we will stay free. Tonight, we renew our resolve that America will never be a socialist country.” Republicans gave Trump a standing ovation for this segment of his speech. Freshman Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), who has been a staunch critic of the president since taking office, accused Trump of not understanding what socialism is, adding she believes his rhetoric has further divided the country. “I mean look, for me I think a lot of people don't understand it [socialism]. I mean the library and the post office is socialism — so many of the things that we have in our country that we all value is very much based on those values of equality,” she said.



Democratic Socialism — philosophy of poverty
The Hill

URL: https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/42 ... of-poverty
Category: Politics
Published: February 1, 2019

Description: The road from imperfect capitalism to socialist idealism is soaked with the blood of those who failed to appreciate the fairness of economic equality. Yet the socialist believers will not relinquish ideas that have been disproved repeatedly by historical precedents, and no amount of reality can shake their convictions. For them, acceptance of reality equates to a denial of faith. It’s always the same — this time it is different; this time socialism is democratic. So, what is this mysterious democratic socialism? How is it different?

democratic-socialism.jpg

For the most of us who are not familiar with the terminology and Marxism, ponder this: Social democracy is a political ideology that has as its goal the establishment of socialism through the implementation of a policy regime that includes, but is not limited to, high taxation, government regulation of private enterprises, and the establishment of a universal welfare state. In 1903 Marxist Russian Social Democratic Labor Party (RSDLP) was having the Second Party Congress to adopt the Party platform of transition from capitalism to socialism. The leaders of the Party, Julius Martov and Pavel Axelrod, aimed at a peaceful regime change via democratic process. After gaining power, they would use the authority of government bureaucracy to destroy capitalism by overburdening it with taxation and regulations. A radical faction led by Vladimir Lenin rejected this approach and demanded a revolutionary tactic with the imposition of the dictatorship of the proletariat. Evidently, neither faction had illusions that this unnatural social organization could be implemented on a voluntary basis. In the end, the Party split into Bolsheviks and Mensheviks. The Bolsheviks ultimately won, became the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, and eventually liquidated their comrades in arms in accordance with Marxist comradeship ritual. Nowadays, the Mensheviks’ concept adopted by American socialists is being promulgated by Bernie Sanders and his disciples as an alternative to Marxism. This Marxist’s Trojan horse is intended to enact socialism by installing the Hugo Chavezes of this world through the democratic process. Democratic socialism is not a new version of socialism; it is just another method of establishing socialism. This slow-roll strategy designed to do to the United States incrementally what Russian Bolshevism did to Russia in 1917 abruptly. Notwithstanding its heavy Russian accent, democratic socialism is bringing under one roof all the true believers and intellectuals disheartened and disillusioned by the ugliness of Stalinism, Maoism, and other socialist “isms” but still yearning for equality, fairness and righteousness. It is also intended to ascertain ideological cohesion among pseudo-patriot advocates of strong governmental authority and left-wing lunatics, to whom capitalism is a common enemy. Regardless of how the socialists come to power and what variants between political flavors of Christian democratic socialism, Soviet-style revolutionary socialism, Democratic socialism or any other kind of socialism are, they are all based on the same blueprint — Karl Marx’s "scientific socialism" — and share the common mantra: “fair and equitable” distribution of wealth. Hence, the differences are superficial. The ultimate goal of socialism is economic equality. If the untutored graduates of Boston University and supporters of socialism absorb human history, they may realize that the only historical datum that points to economic equality goes back to the era of primitive communism. There were no property and no wealth, resulting in total economic equality — in poverty. Ironically, this is the only way economic equality can be achieved. There is no equality in wealth. Those who criticize socialism for its failure to create wealth are missing the point. Socialism is not about wealth creation; it is about wealth distribution. In this context, socialism works, it works as it supposed to. Venezuela, Cuba, North Korea, etc. are not socialism’s failures; they are actually a fulfillment. We have to be mindful that every ism — communism, socialism, fascism, etc. — has its supporters and benefactors. Those who imagine themselves on the receiving end, have every reason to think they will be better off with socialism. In 1846 French philosopher and socialist Pierre-Joseph Proudhon criticized Karl Marx’s theories in his book “System of Economical Contradictions: or, The Philosophy of Poverty.” Since then, the generations of true believers have been endlessly stepping on the same rake expecting different results. In this manner, they have been proving time after time that Proudhon was right then and he is right now — socialism, whether democratic or otherwise, is the philosophy of poverty.



America: The new Socialist frontier
The Hill

URL: https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/42 ... t-frontier
Category: Politics
Published: January 18, 2019

Description: It seems that socialism is like an infectious disease that everyone has to get ill of to develop immunity. As Alexander Solzhenitsyn pointed out, “For us in Russia, communism is a dead dog, while for many people in the West, it is still a living lion.” This dead dog, expelled from Russia, acquired a new life in the United States and regained vitality to become a living lion within the Democratic Party. The 2018 Democratic victory in the midterms brought new Marxist arrivals to the House of Representatives who are interpreting the elections as an endorsement of socialist policies. They dropped all the pretenses — no liberals, no progressives — they are proud Marxist-Leninists driven by the ideology and committed to converting this country into the United Socialist States of America. This militant crowd is comprised of uninformed and misinformed people looking at themselves as unfortunate, underpaid, underappreciated victims of capitalism, overwhelmed with jealousy that there are people who are everything they are not. They are the face of new Democratic Party – “We have been naught, we shall be all.” The Democratic Party explicitly casts itself as an inheritor of Marxism. The Democrats’ demands are almost total inversion of the Constitutional arrangements and traditional American values. The economic redistribution, open borders, repeal of the Second Amendment, the abolition of the Electoral College, the election of a president by popular vote, voting rights and free health care to illegal aliens are just part of the comprehensive strategy of putting the harness of socialism around the necks of the American people. The driving force of the Democratic Party is economic “inequality” — the argument socialists have never tired of invoking since the dawn of capitalism. The mantra brought into play by the French Revolution — “War to the palace, peace to the cottage” — is alive and well today in the Democratic Party. The seductive idea of wealth redistribution has proved to be irresistible to the masses discontented by the inequities. The philosophy of envy and siphoning from the rich appeals to a large segment of the population that does not realize that the definition of “rich” is a spiral of devolution that eventually will reach every business and every individual who works for a living. From the Democrats’ perspective, President Donald J. Trump is a disrupter of what had been a smooth transition to the bright socialist future. In a concerted effort to denigrate the President and paralyze executive authority, they are branding him a racist and blatantly subvert every program on his agenda. To render him ineffective, they actively support a collective mania for ever more sweeping investigations of dubious claims, rumors, unsubstantiated allegations and innuendos that has descended over the President, his family, his associates, and nominees. People who cannot even spell “impeachment” demand one without any substantiation. They act as if their fiat is turning the country into chaos, or as Lenin called it, “revolutionary environment.” Unfortunately, the contemporary political thinking of the American people is more backward than that of the Russians or Chinese, and too many of them are living in a flat-earth, know-nothing, Jesse Watters’ world. Neither education, nor upbringing, nor life experience prepares Americans for grasping the veracity of the socialist assault on the American way of life. Thanks to the fatuity of the American public, there has not been any effective comprehension of the totality of the assault nor its enervating effect upon national vigilance. We may surmise that the socialist dragon has come of age and socialism in America, be it democratic or otherwise, no longer looks like an exceedingly lofty ambition. The great historical irony is that unlike the Russian people who understood the perils of socialism and fought the Bolsheviks in a bloody three-year civil war that by some estimates took fifteen million lives, the freedom-loving Americans keep voting themselves into socialism. Indeed, Communist leaders from Lenin to Brezhnev are sardonically grinning from hell and watching in disbelief as what was impossible for the Soviet Union to accomplish with all its military might and nuclear arsenal is being endorsed by the duly elected American legislators. Fifty-five years ago, in 1964, Ronald Reagan gave a speech on behalf of presidential candidate Barry Goldwater that would become known as “A Time for Choosing.” His ardent warning of the advance of socialism in the United States resonates even more today:
"You and I have a rendezvous with destiny. We will preserve for our children this, the last best hope of man on earth, or we will sentence them to take the first step into a thousand years of darkness. If we fail, at least let our children and our children’s children say of us we justified our brief moment here. We did all that could be done."

Did we?



Socialism is neither a fair nor 'progressive' political philosophy
The Hill

URL: https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/44 ... philosophy
Category: Politics
Published: May 15, 2019

Description: While politicians, pundits and college professors heap praise upon the supposed benefits of socialism, the reality is unfortunately all too clear for Venezuelans. Years of economic mismanagement and political instability that led to mass shortages of food, medicine and other necessities has culminated in recent weeks to rioting in the streets and an ongoing, violent political tug-of-war over the nation’s leadership. And while socialism remains unpopular among most Americans (especially non-coastal elites), there can be no doubt that socialism seems to be enjoying a resurgence among many members of the millennial generation. How can we explain this, especially given recent events in Venezuela? What do college students even mean when they use the word “socialism”? Do they mean basic economic fairness or increased spending on social programs, or do they mean the system that runs counter to basic human nature (and basic economics) and has failed every single time it has ever been attempted? How does one go about refuting socialism when its proponents themselves appear unclear on what it is they actually are advocating? “Socialism” becomes whatever policy proposals progressives happen to prefer at any given moment. Maybe a better approach would be to start with what socialism is not:
* Socialism is not new: Despite the social media savvy or slick rhetoric of many of the new socialists, socialism in no way is a new or “progressive” political philosophy or approach to government. In fact, varieties of socialism were directly responsible for the deaths and misery of millions throughout the 20th century.
* Socialism is not working in Europe: This is one of the favorite tropes paraded by the new socialists: “Look at Sweden! They are socialist and thriving.” However, Sweden is not socialist. Instead, Sweden’s recent prosperity is the result of free-market deregulation. If you want to see how socialism works in actual practice, check out Venezuela.
* Socialism is not more fair or just: How much wealth is “too much”? How much independence should we have when making our own economic decisions? Why is that a matter for the government to decide? “Soaking the rich” by arbitrarily deciding who has too much wealth is not only not fair, it doesn’t make sense. Bill Gates and Jeff Bezos have done more to improve the lives of millions throughout the world through investment and the provision of valuable goods and services than any government bureau could ever dream of. We should want more millionaires and billionaires in America, not fewer.
* Socialism is not superior to capitalism: Capitalism is the best system thus far discovered by mankind to most effectively provide quality goods and services to society, at competitive prices, all the while lifting the maximum number of people out of poverty. And all through voluntary exchange without the need for coercion by the government or other entities.
* Socialism is not better for the individual: One indisputable fact we can take from the 20th century is that socialism does not lead to greater freedom or dignity for the individual. Socialism, by its very nature, requires force. Pursuant to the good of society you will be told how much of your money you can keep, what you can buy and what you can do. Or else. This is not freedom; it is tyranny. What matters is the actual proven results of public policies, not the supposedly good intentions of those who enact them.
In the end, the only reason the new “democratic” socialists (because voting for tyrants to take your rights is so much better than their just doing it directly) have the ability to decry the alleged injustices and inhumanity of capitalism is the wealth, development and material comfort capitalism has provided for them. When you are starving or struggling to survive, you don’t have a lot of time to complain. But sipping their lattes from corporate coffee shops, tweeting from their iPhones while wearing designer clothing from head to toe, the new socialists may appear either disingenuous or downright dumb. But most are likely just ignorant. The remedy to this affliction isn’t to call them names or question their motives. Instead, we should strive to help them understand the economic and political realities they seem to disregard so that we can work together towards a brighter, more prosperous future here in our own country.
User avatar
smix
 
Posts: 1852661
Images: 1
Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2013 8:05 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Ignore My Socialism, Please!

Postby smix » Wed Feb 06, 2019 5:16 pm

Ignore My Socialism, Please!
The Wall Street Journal

URL: https://www.wsj.com/articles/ignore-my- ... 1549410591
Category: Politics
Published: February 5, 2019

Description: The Democratic election calendar says it’s time to bash business and the rich.
Part of Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign you surely don’t recall is her plan for six different capital-gains tax rates, plus a passel of new regulations, to cure the alleged “short-term focus” of corporate America. She gave the speech in mid-2015, long before any voters were paying attention, then promptly dropped the subject. The topic doesn’t seem to have arisen in her Goldman Sachs speeches, which she tried to keep secret, though she did talk about how politicians need to say one thing in public and another in private. We’re at the same point in the 2020 race, with proposals for wealth taxes, Green New Deals and now a Chuck Schumer and Bernie Sanders op-ed calling for regulation of corporate share buybacks. For any sane person’s taste, our world is far too indulgent of politicians saying blatantly insincere things, but that’s a subject for another day. In a reliable indication of banality, Messrs. Schumer and Sanders begin their widely noted New York Times op-ed by invoking a lost golden age when corporations “shared a belief that they had a duty not only to their shareholders but to their workers, their communities and the country.” Into this garden came a snake in the form of an excessive preoccupation with the share price. The authors claim, without evidence or logic, that “corporate boardrooms have become obsessed with maximizing only shareholder earnings to the detriment of workers and the long-term strength of their companies.” You might wonder how mistreating workers and undermining a company’s “long-term strength” helps the share price. Good question.

bernie-and-chuck.jpg

But the senators hurry on to their chief grievance: “One way in which this pervasive corporate ethos manifests itself is the explosion of stock buybacks.” In fact, there is plenty of evidence for the opposite proposition: Companies that engage in big buybacks are the same companies that shower riches on their employees and invest heavily in their businesses. A hot area of research, led by Stanford’s Nicholas Bloom and others, actually sees these companies as key drivers of inequality because their pay and benefits are so superior to what most businesses can afford. Think Apple, Cisco and Google-parent Alphabet. These companies presumably would get a pass from Schumer-Sanders since their employees already are aristocrats. Other, less-favored companies, if they want to buy back shares, would have to prove they are doing “things like paying all workers at least $15 an hour, providing seven days of paid sick leave, and offering decent pensions and more reliable health benefits.” Take away the blather, and what they are promoting is another unfunded mandate — the disreputable practice of forcing private parties to pay off some constituency so politicians can take credit without having to vote for it. Let’s correct some misconceptions. In a buyback, a company exchanges one asset (cash) for another at the market price, so it should have no effect on the share price except to the extent that it signals a credible commitment by management not to waste shareholder resources on low-return assets such as needlessly large cash balances or other forms of empire building. When shareholders sell their shares, they don’t burn the money in the backyard. They spend it or invest it, in which case it becomes somebody else’s income or somebody else’s seed corn for a business. Because the bill promised by Sens. Sanders and Schumer aims at the wrong target, it would achieve nothing good. A new bureaucracy would be needed to enforce their open-ended insistence that a company “invests in workers and communities” before engaging in buybacks. CEOs would get a new incentive to invest in vanity projects and unproductive cash hoards. More realistically, the bill would encourage companies to quit the public markets altogether to avoid the new regulation. Already the number of publicly listed companies has dropped by half in 20 years. When Sens. Schumer and Sanders are done, the public will have no companies left to invest in. OK, it would be ridiculous of me to suggest that the two authors care about any of this, or care whether their proposal makes sense or would have good effects. Equally ridiculous are those academics who, in their desire to be noticed, rush out their own op-eds endorsing the latest business- and wealth-bashing plans of Democrats, even though these proposals are not meant to be enacted but only as silly-season signals to the Democratic base. Why do we put up with it? The things that politicians say are only episodically related to things they do. Their actions in office are highly constrained by interest-group pressures and election considerations, and usually default to the optimal (if not ideal) outcome of gridlock. The rest of the country, meanwhile, goes about its business the best it can.
User avatar
smix
 
Posts: 1852661
Images: 1
Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2013 8:05 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Bernie Sanders on sidelines as fellow Dems take socialist stance

Postby smix » Wed Feb 06, 2019 8:25 pm

Bernie Sanders on sidelines as fellow Dems take socialist stance
Boston Herald

URL: https://www.bostonherald.com/2019/02/06 ... st-stance/
Category: Politics
Published: February 6, 2019

Description: Poor Bernie. He’s been mugged. He started all this modern free-stuff socialism when he ran for president in 2016. Now his fellow Democrats-turned-socialists have ripped off all his issues, made them their own, and left poor Bernie in the dust. And Bernie Sanders, the U.S. senator from Vermont, who gave Hillary Clinton a run for her money in the 2016 Democratic presidential primaries, is struggling to remain relevant. It is a shame because Bernie is the founder of the big government, modern free-stuff movement that every Democrat running for president has locked onto and built upon. He knows how wise and great big government can be. After all, he has been on the government payroll all his adult life, first as mayor of Burlington and then as a member of Congress. “Socialism Is Us,” could have been his campaign slogan, and perhaps it will be when he announces his candidacy for president again. Or it could be “Socialists R Us,” now that the toy store has gone bust. Even newcomer U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the outspoken 29-year-old socialist U.S. representative from the Bronx, who campaigned for him in 2016, has outstripped him in media and in looney-left-wing popularity. She too would be joining the crowd of faux socialists running for president if she were old enough. And Bernie, 77, was a socialist before she was even born — or even before most everyone else was born, too, including Kamala Harris, 54, the left-coast, left-wing U.S. senator from California. How many candidates running for president can say they honeymooned in the Soviet Union before the Soviet Union, like Toys R Us, fell apart? That was back in 1988, when then Mayor Sanders and his wife honeymooned in Moscow and in Yaroslavl, a sister city. There is a video now making the rounds showing Sanders and wife sloshing Stoli and, like good Bolsheviks, singing “This Land is Our Land” with a group of drunken Russians.



That was when Sanders was a man of the working class. Now, after all these years in Congress, he has become wealthy, as socialists do when they reach positions of power. He now owns three homes and has a net worth of $2 million, which, although not in the range of Sen. Elizabeth Warren ($8 million), is not bad for an old Bolshy. Still, he is still financially unassuming considering most Democrats running for president are rich, or very well off, compared to the people they purport to represent. Michael Bloomberg, the former mayor of New York is a billionaire, as is Howard Schultz, the former Starbucks CEO who is contemplating running as an independent. These two, having already accumulated their massive wealth, have become critical of their fellow Democratic/socialist candidates who want to take their wealth away in the name of income inequality. The state would then in theory redistribute that wealth to the needy the way it is done in Cuba and Venezuela where everybody — except the politicians — is equally hungry and miserable. That’s socialism. Nevertheless Harris, who announced her candidacy for president last week, even went to the left of Bernie by proposing to abolish health-insurance companies, and provide free health care for all, debt-free college, guaranteed minimum income, free pre-K schooling and, of course, confiscatory taxes on the wealthy. The Democrats appear to be on a roll and have attracted the presidential interest of more than 30 potential candidates. In the dice-and-slice world of diverse Democratic politics, there are already a variety of candidates to choose from. There is Harris, who is of Jamaican and Indian descent, U.S. Rep. Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii, who is a Samoan-American and an Iraq War veteran; former Cherokee Elizabeth Warren; Robert Francis O’Rourke of Texas, an Irish-American with the Mexican nickname of Beto; former San Antonio Mayor Julian Castro, who is of Mexican descent; South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg, who is openly gay; Sen. Cory Booker of New Jersey; and a whole bunch of other people. I would support former Bay State Gov. Bill Weld if he could get Massachusetts-based Dunkin’ Donuts to back him. That way he could challenge California-based Schultz and Starbucks. It would be called the Coffee Bowl. My early favorite candidate, though, is former Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper, only because the name of his political action committee is “Giddy Up.” Bernie, we hardly knew ye.
User avatar
smix
 
Posts: 1852661
Images: 1
Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2013 8:05 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Stay Free

Postby smix » Wed Feb 06, 2019 9:14 pm

Stay Free
City Journal

URL: https://www.city-journal.org/trump-socialism
Category: Politics
Published: February 6, 2019

Description: President Trump took on socialism in the most effective way—not on the question of its costs, but of its principles.
The last few months have seen an ascendency of socialist ideas about wealth, property, and the role of the state. Suddenly, the rhetoric of Occupy Wall Street and Z Magazine has gone mainstream, with prominent Democrats demanding confiscatory federal taxes on wealth, the abolition of the private health-insurance industry, and centralization of planning and production. Opposition to these ideas from the right has been mostly derisive and ineffective. When freshman congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez proposed spending trillions of dollars on “greening” the American economy over the next ten years, conservative economists shook their heads and grinned, explaining how the math doesn’t add up. Skeptics on social media posted memes representing Ocasio-Cortez, Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, and their ilk dopily conjuring free health care, housing, and other goodies out of thin air. Even if they illustrate socialism’s illogic, though, they don’t address the fundamental wrongness of the socialist perspective. Socialism may be economically untenable but laughing at its innumeracy is the wrong way to proceed politically because its adherents are not persuaded by questions of cost, any more than proponents of the border wall are swayed by the argument that it would cost too much. Socialists openly acknowledge that they seek radical transformation of America, and they reject as false and rigged the arithmetic and vocabulary nonsocialists use to argue against them. Their standards are different, and their revolutionary appeal has wrongfooted critics. As President Trump demonstrated in his State of the Union address last night, the most effective way to attack the socialist tendency is not nitpicking at its particulars but attacking it at the normative level—by explaining how socialism runs contrary to basic American values. “We are alarmed,” said Trump, “by new calls to adopt socialism in our country. America was founded on liberty and independence—and not government coercion, domination and control.” Trump reframed the debate from a discussion about price to one of principle. “We are born free, and we will stay free.” Salesmen operate on the maxim that if you argue cost, you have already blown the sale. Ocasio-Cortez seems to understand that, and she’s right about one thing: on the deepest level, it really isn’t about how much socialism costs—at least in dollars. What really matters is what it would cost us as a people. On that matter, a substantial portion of Democrats now seems to have a view at odds with most Americans. Trump was wise last night to focus on the threat that this shift represents, and to raise again the timeless question of what kind of society we want to be—one in which liberty is primary, or one in which the state makes the important decisions about our lives. The matter may be up for grabs, but Trump at least has shifted the discussion in the right direction.
User avatar
smix
 
Posts: 1852661
Images: 1
Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2013 8:05 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Trump Rejects Socialism in Landmark Address

Postby smix » Wed Feb 06, 2019 11:35 pm

Trump Rejects Socialism in Landmark Address
The Epoch Times

URL https://www.theepochtimes.com/trump-rej ... 92636.html
Category: Politics
Published: February 6, 2019

Description: President Donald Trump stood up to a resurgent wave of socialism in America during the State of the Union address on Feb. 5, telling Congress and the nation, “America will never be a socialist country.” The president reviewed his administration’s successes, most of which have been antithetical to socialism. He charted a course toward American greatness and away from the failures of socialism. Since taking office in 2017, Trump has lambasted socialism and communism on the world stage. On Feb. 5, facing the members of the Democratic Party—many of whom are socialists—the president confronted, for the first time, the ideology’s encroachment on America. “Here, in the United States, we are alarmed by new calls to adopt socialism in our country,” Trump said. “America was founded on liberty and independence–not government coercion, domination, and control. We are born free, and we will stay free,” he added, drawing a standing ovation from the Republicans. “Tonight, we renew our resolve that America will never be a socialist country.” As Republicans chanted “USA, USA” in response to the president, Bernie Sanders, a self-proclaimed socialist, fidgeted in his seat, his lips tight and his hand propping up his chin. A small number of Democrats, including Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, stood up and applauded. Trump prefaced his remarks about socialism by pointing to Venezuela, a once-wealthy nation that has been crippled by socialist policies. Democrats in Congress have floated similar policies for years and have intensified the push beginning in the 2018 midterm election cycle. Prominent members of Congress, including presidential candidate Rep. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.), are backing socialist policies like Medicare for All and the Green New Deal that would open the floodgates to massive government expansion into the health care and energy sectors. While calls for socialist policies received a significant amount of media attention during and after the 2018 election, the proposals are not new to American politics. “Obamacare” nearly achieved the socialist dream of the total government takeover of the entire health insurance industry, paving the way toward the goals enshrined in Medicare for All. Under the guise of progressivism and other causes benevolently named, socialism–the preliminary stage of communism–has penetrated deeply into U.S. politics, higher education, the sciences, and culture. “It was great to see him throw down the gauntlet and name the problem because the biggest political problem is the danger of socialism and communism right now,” said Trevor Loudon, an author and contributor to The Epoch Times who has spent 30 years researching radical left, Marxist, and terrorist movements and their covert influence on mainstream politics. “A quarter of his audience were socialists, so he was throwing down the gauntlet to the left wing of the Democratic Party—which is now the main leading wing—and telling them that their agenda was not acceptable.” The Congressional Progressive Caucus was co-founded by Bernie Sanders, a self-proclaimed socialist. The caucus swelled by 26 seats after the 2018 election to a roster of 100 members. Many members have links to the Democrat Socialists of America and the Communist Party of USA, according to Loudon’s research. The bulk of what Trump has achieved during his first two years in office either rolled back socialist policies or prevented the ideology’s further encroachment on America. The president took steps to protect religious freedom, insulating again socialism’s promotion of atheism and attacks on religion. He also spearheaded the passage of a major tax-cut package and ordered an unprecedented purge of government regulations. The moves were a major blow to socialists’ moves to expand the government via new regulations, and to fund that growth by raising taxes. “[Trump] sees that America has been rushing toward the socialist brink for a long time, perhaps since the middle of the last century and very much accelerated during the Obama presidency, which was scary for anyone who believes as he does and certainly as I do that socialism is not going to go,” William Gairdner, an author and independent scholar, said. “That was strategic. He wanted to cut the Democrats off at the pass.” Trump’s choice of Venezuela stood out, considering that examples of socialism’s failures abound. The president has taken a tough stance on Maduro’s regime and intensified pressure on the socialist dictator to step down. In January, Venezuela’s National Assembly declared Maduro’s presidency illegitimate. Juan Guaidó, the assembly’s leader, stepped forward as an interim president. Maduro refused to give up control. Trump immediately recognized Guaidó, triggering a virtual global referendum on socialism. Free-world nations, like Germany and Australia, sided with Guaidó. Socialist and communist regimes, like those in China, North Korea, and Cuba, backed Maduro. Russia, which is not socialist on paper, has been propping up socialists and communists in South America for decades. The Kremlin backed Maduro.



Advocates of American Socialism Need to Learn Some Lessons
The Epoch Times

URL https://www.theepochtimes.com/advocates ... 87276.html
Category: Politics
Published: February 5, 2019

Description: Critics of the public school system must feel vindicated, in a sickening way, to see so many American politicians and younger citizens advocating socialism. After all, the critics have been warning us for years that the schools are not adequately teaching history, economics, or political affairs.

aoc-history-class.jpg

It would be hard to name a political ideology so thoroughly debunked as socialism. It would be difficult to find an idea whose implementation has proved so horrific. Socialism comes in two economic forms. In the first, the state owns all, or at least the most valuable, economic enterprises. Factories, medical clinics, schools, travel agencies, newspapers—the government owns them all. The prototype was the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR). Surviving examples are Cuba and North Korea. In the other economic form of socialism, the state does not own as much—but it controls almost everything. It controls by parceling out benefits to favored groups. It controls by central regulation, by state monopolies (where the government is the sole provider of a product or service), and by government monopsony (where government is the sole buyer). A prototype for this form was Adolph Hitler’s National Socialism. Communist China was originally in the first category and now is in the second. The second form is the one now promoted by American “progressives.” Central to their platform is massive redistribution, detailed regulation of private economic decisions, some government ownership, expansion of the role of government schools, and a health care monopsony (“single payer”). In addition to socialism’s two economic forms, it has two political forms: authoritarian and (purportedly) democratic. Both Soviet communism and German Nazism were authoritarian. So are Cuba and North Korea today. Britain and the Scandinavian countries traditionally have been considered examples of democratic socialism, although they have become far more capitalist in recent years. Actually, socialism can never be truly democratic. The state and its officials are too powerful. They control people’s choices, pensions, and jobs. Most major political decisions are either (1) pre-determined from above, or (2) confined to a narrow range of choices. For example, in a country with government health care, people can’t vote to privatize it. The option is practically impossible because citizens rely so heavily on the government for health care. Yet, “democratic” socialism has proved unstable over time. It tends to become either more autocratic or less socialistic. Venezuela is a good illustration of socialism starting democratically and veering toward autocracy. Britain, Canada, and the Scandinavian countries are examples of democratic socialist countries that have become much less socialist and more free. Repeated experiments in many countries over the past century prove one fact beyond doubt: As an economic system, socialism doesn’t work.
Scapegoats
While free markets convert even places with few resources into fountains of economic well-being (e.g., Hong Kong), socialism consigns countries with fabulous resource wealth to poverty (e.g., the USSR). Moreover, an injection of the socialist virus can transform a healthy economy into a wasteland within a very short time (Venezuela, Cuba). One reason socialism doesn’t work is that it distorts people’s incentives. People become dispirited and they are encouraged, or forced, to make bad decisions. Another reason socialism doesn’t work is that the central planners don’t have the information necessary to run an economy: Only individuals and private organizations have that. A third reason is that socialism gives too much power to government officials. Power corrupts. Those implementing or promoting socialist economics usually don’t want to admit failure. Hence, they seek scapegoats. The scapegoats may be economic groups (such as the “bourgeoisie” and “kulaks” in the USSR), or ethnic or religious groups (such as the Jews and Slavs in Nazi Germany), or political opponents. When socialists are able to, they ruin or kill the scapegoats. This is why socialist governments have been responsible for so many deaths: Communist China (40–80 million), Soviet Russia (30–40 million), Nazi Germany (perhaps 11 million non-combatants). The list goes on from there. Some claim that mass murder and other forms of oppression are the products only of the authoritarian brand of socialism. But they are wrong. Oppression is inherent even in “democratic” socialism, because the government restricts people’s right to live as they wish. During the 20th century when “democratic” socialism was at its height in Western Europe, several million people from Western Europe fled to America. Many no doubt thought in terms of better opportunity. But that is really to say that they were fleeing socialist constraint. Venezuelans are now doing the same. Like their avowedly authoritarian cousins, “democratic” socialists use scapegoats. Among American socialists the scapegoats are “the 1 percent,” “Wall Street,” the hydrocarbon industries, “corporations,” “the gun lobby,” “deplorables,” and “white males.” These economic, social, and ethnic categories closely resemble those used by authoritarian socialists.
Social Darwinism
I recently came across an essay by George Bernard Shaw, the famous playwright. Shaw was a leading founder of British socialism. In “The Perfect Wagnerite,” he expressed frustration with the failure of reforms his own allies had advocated. He proposed fiercer measures: “And this dilemma will persist until … our governors … see that their business is not the devising of laws and institutions to prop up the weaknesses of mobs and secure the survival of the unfittest, but the breeding of men whose wills and intelligences may be depended on to produce spontaneously the social well-being our clumsy laws now aim at and miss. The majority of men at present in Europe have no business to be alive; and no serious progress will be made until we address ourselves earnestly and scientifically to the task of producing trustworthy human material for society. In short, it is necessary to breed a race of men in whom the life-giving impulses predominate.” [emphasis added] Now, British socialism as promoted by Bernard Shaw and his fellow “Fabians” was perhaps the gentlest form of socialism on the planet. Yet, this passage reads as if it were composed by Hitler. Socialists often accuse capitalists of social Darwinism—of advocating a struggle of all against all, with death to the hindmost. This is a lie. Modern capitalist societies are the most philanthropic in history. Successful capitalists have given more to charitable causes than any group of people, other than religious societies. But scan again the words of British socialist Bernard Shaw: We must reject the “unfittest” for “[t]he majority of men at present in Europe have no business to be alive.” We must act “scientifically” to “breed a race of men.” This is social Darwinism with a vengeance. Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) is correct: Socialism is a fraud. But it is more than that, and worse: It is dysfunctional and evil. Americans knew that when the Soviet Union fell. It’s time for us to re-learn it.



Will ‘Democratic Socialism’ Lead to Communism?
The Epoch Times

URL https://www.theepochtimes.com/will-demo ... 77705.html
Category: Politics
Published: January 29, 2019

Description: So, what’s the difference between democratic socialism and communism? Usually, five to 10 years. Seriously, though, this question comes up a lot in the age of Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Many younger people seem to think democratic socialism means all the liberty and prosperity we enjoy today, plus a bunch of free stuff. Indoctrinated young people are led to believe that the only changes in their lives under socialism would be the addition of free college, free health care, lots of public housing, guaranteed pensions, and generous welfare programs. Sweden, Germany, and Norway are the oft-cited examples of the benefits of a welfare state. Small government advocates will retort that the amount of taxation and regulation required to maintain this kind of system will stifle innovation and entrepreneurialism, strangle growth and job creation, and drive most of us into poverty—Venezuela is the current fashionable example. The term “democratic socialism” is often used interchangeably with socialism. The purists, though, will condescendingly explain that the qualifier “democratic” distinguishes democratic socialism from the admittedly tyrannical Marxist–Leninist variety of socialism, popularly known as communism. Some on the left, especially those from America’s largest Marxist organization, the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), will tell you that this will never happen on their watch. We’ll stay “democratic”—they say—all major decisions will come to a vote. We’ll introduce widespread “workplace democracy.” They will point to the stability of Scandinavian countries for their evidence of a model welfare state. “We’ll never let the United States turn into Venezuela, or Cuba, or Bulgaria, or Hungary, or the Soviet Union, or the People’s Republic of China, or the Democratic Republic of Germany (East Germany), or the Democratic Republic of Korea (North Korea),” they assure us. As an often quoted saying goes, “Any country with ‘democratic’ in its name, isn’t.” Most young democratic socialists probably sincerely believe they are working toward a freer, prosperous, more equitable society with a mix of public, private, and co-operative ownership. They acknowledge the need for greater taxes (such as Ocasio-Cortez’s 70 percent on “billionaires”) and regulations. Despite the repeated lessons of history, the young socialists don’t believe that greater taxes and regulations will damage the economy and drive huge numbers of people into abject poverty. The more hardened (and honest) radicals will tell you, “Yes, we will need more taxes and regulations. Yes, that will put businesses out of business. That’s the point!” In an article from the Spring 2007 edition of the DSA publication “Democratic Left,” DSA National Political Committee member David Green of Detroit wrote very candidly about his organization’s goals: “What distinguishes socialists from other progressives is the theory of surplus value. According to Marx, the secret of surplus value is that workers are a source of more value than they receive in wages. The capitalist is able to capture surplus value through his ownership of the means of production, his right to purchase labor as a commodity, his control over the production process, and his ownership of the final product. Surplus value is the measure of capital’s exploitation of labor. … Our goal as socialists is to abolish private ownership of the means of production.” Notice Green doesn’t just want to abolish “big business.” There’s no qualifier there. He is explicitly advocating for the full public ownership of the “means of production”—communism. As Karl Marx famously said in the “Communist Manifesto“: “The theory of Communism may be summed up in one sentence: Abolish all private property.” Green was quoted by Reuters in February 2017 as a participant in the Michigan Democratic Party’s spring convention. The Michigan Democratic Party did not seem to mind that a high-ranking socialist was in their midst. “We need a party that’s open to progressive forces,” Green was quoted as saying. “And that’s why we have to elect progressive leadership within the party.” Now, according to DSAers and their comrades, abolition of private property will be done “democratically.” There will be a vote in Congress to take away your multi-national corporation, your timber mill, your dairy farm, your gas station, or your convenience store. There will be no rampaging proletarian mob to “expropriate” your business or farm. It will be done in a civilized manner. Incrementally at first. Gradually you will pay more taxes, you will have to deal with more and more regulations, and hiring and firing will get ever more difficult and onerous. If you’re a small business, you’ll probably eventually be forced to sell out to a bigger business that can afford to hire enough lawyers and accountants or bribe enough officials to keep the government at bay before you are forced to shut your doors. At some point, the slide to socialism and communism may arrive at a temporary equilibrium, where big business will co-exist alongside the “all-powerful state”—China in the last three decades is an example. Following the “revolution,” Marx argued, workers (the “proletariat”) would take control of the “means of production.” After a period of transition, the government would magically fade away, leading to a classless society based on common ownership of all wealth: “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.” Unfortunately, no socialist has ever convincingly explained why revolutionary leaders with control of all the wealth and power would then willingly turn that over to the “masses.” British historian and statesman Lord Acton understood human nature much better than Marx. His famous dictum, “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely” is the ultimate argument against Marx’s demonstrably unworkable theories of socialism and communism. Acton’s dictum holds equally true whether the wealth and power is seized “democratically” or by naked brute force. Naive young Marxists believe that democratic socialism will lead to socialism and eventually to a benevolent classless, leaderless utopia called communism. Importantly, more sophisticated and seasoned revolutionaries understand that “democratic socialism” and then “socialism” will lead to the centralization of wealth and power into a very few hands. Those revolutionaries intend to be those hands. This is where the communist dream must inevitably end. There are many roads to tyranny. “Democratic socialism” is but the subtlest and most benign sounding road to communism.



Our Revolution: Marxist Trojan Horse Inside the Democratic Party
The Epoch Times

URL https://www.theepochtimes.com/our-revol ... 49933.html
Category: Politics
Published: February 19, 2019

Description: In the 2018 election cycle, a Marxist-led organization claiming more than 100,000 members in 50 states helped elect one U.S. senator, 10 members of Congress, and around 70 state, county, and municipal officials, as well as contributing to the victory of more than 20 left-wing state and county ballot measures. Our Revolution, the vehicle organized in 2016 to carry on the Bernie Sanders movement, endorsed several hundred candidates and ballot measures. Most fell short of victory, but six new leftist members of Congress—including Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.)—and a slew of socialist state representatives, county commissioners, and school board members have encouraged a U.S. left that had long been disillusioned with electoral politics. Other beneficiaries of Our Revolution included incumbents Sen. Bernie Sanders and Reps. Tulsi Gabbard (D-Hawaii), Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), and Raul Grijalva (D-Ariz.). Our Revolution’s goal is no less than the revolutionary transformation of the United States. “Our Revolution will reclaim democracy for the working people of our country by harnessing the transformative energy of the ‘political revolution.’ Through supporting a new generation of progressive leaders, empowering millions to fight for progressive change, and elevating the political consciousness, Our Revolution will transform American politics to make our political and economic systems once again responsive to the needs of working families,” states the Our Revolution website. Our Revolution’s goal is socialism, and it has already made considerable progress in that direction.
A Front Group.
Our Revolution is a front for the United States’ three most influential Marxist organizations: the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), Communist Party USA (CPUSA), and Freedom Road Socialist Organization (FRSO). Most Our Revolution-endorsed candidates are affiliated with one or more of these organizations. Virginia DSA member and Our Revolution affiliate Emily Cone-Miller said plainly in a Facebook comment that “for the time being the strategy of DSA is to steal the ballot line from the Democratic establishment.” In other words, take over the Democratic Party until such time as an openly socialist party is viable. Our Revolution is the main vehicle for this strategy. At 55,000 members at the time of writing, America’s largest Marxist organization—the DSA—provides the bulk of Our Revolution leadership. David Duhalde is the political director at Our Revolution and a former deputy director of the DSA. In a November 2017 interview with news website Truthout, Duhalde explained: “I have been rather pleasantly surprised about how well the different post-Bernie formations have been doing and working together to keep this political revolution going. I want to give one great example, which is Our Revolution, [which] either locally or nationally endorsed all of our candidates that we endorsed nationally, as well. Not to mention tons of local races. “We have a very good working relationship with Our Revolution. We often share information and talk about candidates. We, also, have this affiliation program where DSA chapters can be the local Our Revolution chapter, as well. That is to avoid unnecessary conflicts, duplication of efforts. So, our Knoxville chapter which helped elect two DSA members is, also, the Our Revolution chapter. That is a really great example of keeping this collaboration going.” In Delaware, the Our Revolution affiliate is the Democratic Socialists of Delaware. In Lexington, Kentucky, the local DSA chapter is effectively the Our Revolution local chapter. A similar situation exists in New Orleans. Many of the Our Revolution chapters or affiliates are led by DSA members, who usually also work inside the Democratic Party. The following are a few examples:
* In Connecticut, DSA comrade Dan Durso is Our Revolution director.
* Paul Glaze is a Metro Atlanta DSA member while serving on the executive committee for Our Revolution, Georgia.
* In Kansas, DSA member Rhonda Cox served as congressional candidate James Thompson’s field director, and in the local Our Revolution leadership.
* In Nebraska, DSA leader Tom Tilden also leads Omaha Our Revolution while also serving as 2nd associate-chairman of the Nebraska Democratic Party.
* In Oregon Lane County, Our Revolution is led by Matthew Osborn-Grosso of the University of Oregon Young Democratic Socialists.
* Our Revolution Texas Statewide Coordinator Chris Kutalik Cauthern is also both a DSA member and a Bexar County (San Antonio) Democratic Party activist.
There would be no Our Revolution without the DSA. Our Revolution is also used as a tool to recruit more DSA members. In September 2016, Daniel Werst of the Trotsky-inspired revolutionary organization Socialist Worker wrote about a launch meeting for Our Revolution in New Orleans: “On August 24, staff, volunteers and supporters from Sanders’ campaign for the Democratic nomination organized local meetings across the U.S., inviting contacts and friends of friends from their mailing lists and activist networks to join this new political organization. Each meeting tuned in to watch a LiveStream broadcast of Bernie Sanders giving a speech to a small audience of supporters in Vermont about his goals for influencing politics after losing to and endorsing Hillary Clinton for president. “Before Sanders’ speech, we had time for a few introductions, and [DSA member and Our Revolution contact for New Orleans] Aaron [Baczkowski], who was leading the meeting, asked for an informal poll: ‘Who considers themselves a socialist?’ A majority of the room raised our hands, including the speaker, who explained that he was a member of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA)—and later that he was inviting people to join that organization as well as Our Revolution.” The much smaller CPUSA (approximately 5,000 members) also participates in Our Revolution. In a Jan. 24, 2018, article on the CPUSA website titled “Survey says, CPUSA members want to be heard,” Party Chairman John Bachtell wrote: “Most members are involved in their communities and in a range of labor, social justice, environmental and peace organizations. “Members were involved with Bernie Sanders campaign and are continuing their activism in Our Revolution, Swing Left, Indivisible, Working Families Party, statewide groups like the New Virginia Majority and local Democratic Party groups and 2018 electoral campaigns.” Additionally, the chairman of the Houston Communist Party, Bernard Sampson, also serves as a Democratic Party precinct chair and serves in the leadership of the Texas Gulf Coast branch of Our Revolution. In Arizona, Tempe School Board member and CPUSA supporter Patrick Morales is also active in the local Our Revolution and in the Democratic Party. The influential but highly secretive FRSO has an estimated 2,000 to 3,000 members. The FRSO controls the Memphis Tennessee Our Revolution affiliate Memphis for All. Working in conjunction with the Memphis branch of the DSA, Memphis for All ran several candidates on the Democratic ticket last election cycle. Their successes included Shelby County Mayor Lee Harris and Shelby County Commissioner Tami Sawyer. The FRSO also is close to Our Revolution’s Lancaster, Pennsylvania, affiliate Lancaster Stands Up, which narrowly missed electing leftist Jess King to Congress in 2018. Lancaster Stands Up also works closely with Philadelphia Our Revolution affiliate Reclaim Philadelphia, which appears to be a joint DSA/FRSO project. Founded in 2016, Reclaim Philadelphia has grown into an “organization with multiple issue based and electoral campaigns and task forces that are fueled by the engagement of over 300 dues paying members and hundreds of volunteers,” according to its website. Reclaim Philadelphia runs a “Democratic Party Transformation Taskforce.” They claim to have infiltrated hundreds of their people into the Democratic Party: “We recruited and supported over 200 committee people city wide to transform the broken political machine into an active system that engages voters and supports movement candidates.” The group also backed four state representatives in 2018 and elected or re-elected all of them—including DSA member Elizabeth Fiedler and FRSO affiliate Chris Rabb. Reclaim Philadelphia is also very close to Philadelphia City Councilor Helen Gym, a long-time FRSO affiliate. Gym helped return Philadelphia to “sanctuary city” status and recently engineered a $15 minimum wage ordinance for the city, both Marxist policies in line with the DSA/CPUSA/FRSO. Philadelphia’s ultra-radical District Attorney Larry Krasner also owes his position to Reclaim Philly. According to the DSA’s Jacobin magazine: “Krasner, a self-described ‘completely unelectable’ defense attorney with a history of suing the city’s police department and representing Black Lives Matter and Occupy activists pro bono, became the city’s top prosecutor. With a campaign spearheaded by former Bernie Sanders volunteers and pledges to end to [sic] cash bail, the death penalty, and mass incarceration, he won by a three-to-one ratio, thanks largely to the votes of the city’s communities of color. ‘This is what a movement looks like,’ he told a crowd of supporters.” That movement was spearheaded by the DSA, FRSO, and Reclaim Philadelphia. According to Krasner, Reclaim Philadelphia played a “key role” in his 2017 victory. Our Revolution’s name is no joke. The organization has penetrated the Democratic Party in all 50 states. It is taking over local and state Democratic Committees and running candidates at all levels, while purging “moderates” who stand in the way. Our Revolution’s tactics represent a classic example of revolution through infiltration. If current trends continue, Our Revolution will soon dominate the Democratic Party in some states and become a significant influence in most others. Our Revolution is a networking tool for the DSA/CPUSA/FRSO alliance. It is a vehicle to either transform the Democratic Party into a completely socialist organization, or to form the nucleus of a new Marxist third party.



If You Want to Make Sure ‘America Will Never Be a Socialist Country,’ Start Taking AOC More Seriously
The Epoch Times

URL https://m.theepochtimes.com/if-you-want ... 10501.html
Category: Politics
Published: February 21, 2019

Description: When President Trump vowed that “America will never be a socialist country,” he wasn’t just throwing the gauntlet at Democrats. He was also challenging Republicans to stand up for their principles and vigorously resist the creeping encroachment of socialist policies. It’s natural for conservatives to react to unapologetic socialists such as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, also known as “AOC,” with dismissive laughter, but that’s a mistake we can’t afford to make. If we refuse to treat terrible ideas such as the “Green New Deal” as serious threats to our economy and society, we will eventually have to deal with the destructive ramifications of their enactment. The reasons we tend to respond with derision instead of serious argument are simple. Decades of nationwide consensus about the evils of socialism have given us an unwarranted degree of confidence that voters will soundly repudiate socialist policies whenever they rear their ugly heads. Perhaps more importantly, it seems so obvious to many of us on the right that these ideas are impractical and counterproductive, that we think it unworthy of our time to debate them. To most conservatives, proposals such as “abolishing ICE,” imposing 70 percent tax rates, and eradicating air travel and meat consumption are non-starters. Similarly, claiming that the government has an obligation to support people who are “unwilling to work,” that every billionaire is a “policy failure,” and that every person of Latin descent has a right to ignore American law because our whole country is “native land” might strike most rational Americans as too absurd to merit a serious rebuttal. Alas, many of our countrymen—especially those who weren’t yet born when we defeated the Soviets’ international socialist evil empire—are ignorant of socialism’s oppressive and destructive nature. Fifty-five percent of American millennials have a positive view of socialism, according to one poll. Perhaps because they’re unaware that even confiscating the wealth of every billionaire in the country could never finance all the massive handouts Ocasio-Cortez is promising, a majority of Americans think a top marginal income tax rate of 70 percent is a good idea. Among the broader left, AOC’s ideas are taken even more seriously. Almost three-quarters of Democrat voters would consider her for President of the United States, if she were old enough to be eligible. Conservatives often accuse their adversaries across the aisle of “living in a bubble” or being “out of touch” with real Americans and their concerns. It may be painful to admit, but we sometimes live in a bubble of our own, unable to see that the bad ideas we thought we’d done away with have come creeping right back into the mainstream. To confront Ocasio-Cortez and the awful concepts she’s digging out of the ash heap of history, we have to recognize that the folly of her discredited ideology is no longer taken for granted by many Americans—especially in light of the fawning coverage of her by the mainstream media. Take, for example, the reporting about her now-infamous “Green New Deal” FAQ document, which was hurriedly taken down from her website after some of its more radical elements attracted widespread derision. AOC’s spokesperson initially tried to deny that the document ever existed, calling it a Republican parody, but was later forced to admit that it was genuine. Not only did The New York Times report the whole FAQ episode as a mere “flub,” but to them, that wasn’t even the real story. Instead, they literally included the now-clichéd “Republicans Pounce” in the headline. If conservatives want to understand how liberals, the young, and the uninformed view AOC, they must be mindful of the way her proposals are taken seriously by the liberal media. Only then can we effectively relegate her agenda to the left-wing fever swamp from whence it came, which is just where it belongs. There is good news on that front, though. Republicans are getting wise to Ocasio-Cortez quicker than Democrats are rallying behind her. Part of that is the grudging realization that we need to take her proposals seriously. For example, Bill Bennett, a fixture of the conservative movement back when global communism was the greatest threat America faced, has done a great job laying out just what’s at stake. That’s encouraging. So are nationwide polls showing that Americans who are familiar with AOC are more likely to have an unfavorable opinion of her than a favorable one. That’s not permission for us to become complacent, though. Conservatives must remain vigilant and proactively counter the siren song of socialism in order to ensure that Donald Trump will be the last President who ever has to remind the world that America will never be a socialist country.



Democratic Socialists of America Is a Communist Organization
The Epoch Times

URL https://www.theepochtimes.com/democrati ... 21954.html
Category: Politics
Published: August 16, 2018

Description: America’s largest socialist organization, the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), recruited tens of thousands of young people during the presidential campaign through the Bernie Sanders movement. Recently, their membership has been given another boost in the wake of DSA member Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s upset victory over New York Democratic Rep. Joe Crowley in June. Most of the new DSA comrades genuinely believe they are working for a better America. These indoctrinated souls have no idea that by joining DSA, they have become part of the international communist movement. DSA claims to be working for an America that looks more like Scandinavia—yet it harbors many members loyal to Cuba, China, and even the old Eastern Bloc. In fact, the rapidly growing Marxist organization has many serious communists in leadership positions—including convicted East German spy Kurt Stand, who was a long-time DSA national leader even before he was forced to serve a prison sentence for his role in passing U.S. secrets to East Germany’s Stasi secret police. (His ex-wife, Theresa Squillacote, who worked in the Pentagon, was also sent to prison). Stand was released in 2012 and has since assumed a leadership role in the Metro Washington DSA. East Germany was known officially as the German Democratic Republic. DSA is just as “Democratic” as was Stand’s beloved Stalinist East Germany.
A Bit of History
DSA was founded in 1982 from a merger of the 5,000-strong Democratic Socialist Organizing Committee (DSOC) and the 1,200 to 1,500 members of the New American Movement (NAM). The leader of DSOC was Michael Harrington, whose 1962 book “The Other America” is credited with being the inspiration behind President Lyndon B. Johnson’s “War on Poverty” initiative known as the Orwellian-sounding “Great Society.” While DSOC could claim a few genuinely anti-communist old-time socialists in its ranks, NAM was much more communist-oriented. Most younger members of NAM came out of the anti-Vietnam War protests of the 1970s and the Maoist-leaning Students for a Democratic Society. Most of the older members were former Communist Party USA militants. NAM tilted the Democratic Socialists to the left, and as more younger people joined, the party became increasingly pro-communist. DSA draws heavily from the ideas of the late Italian Communist Party theoretician Antonio Gramsci. Realizing that old-style violent revolution was not working in Europe, Gramsci came up with a new plan. Rather than using the standard Marxist-Leninist revolutionary model of inciting the workers to revolt against their bosses, Gramsci reasoned, why not infiltrate communists into all areas of society? The phrase “long march through the institutions,” coined by Gramsci student and German revolutionary Rudi Dutschke, reflects this vision. To achieve revolution, infiltrate the field of education, journalism, the churches, entertainment, labor unions, civic organizations, and mainstream political parties. The Orange County, California, branch of the DSA acknowledged its debt to Gramsci in its February 1984 newsletter: “Antonio Gramsci was a founder of the Italian Communist Party. He developed theories on ‘open ended Marxism’ and independent Euro-Communism. His writings have remained influential among European parties of the left for several decades. They have also formed a vital part of the ideas that brought about the formation of today’s DSA.” With Gramsci’s doctrine firmly in play, DSA was able to accomplish this infiltration on many fronts. Here is a sample:
* AFL-CIO president and DSA member John Sweeney fundamentally transformed the U.S. labor movement in 1994–95.
* DSA comrades like actor Ed Asner moved Hollywood even further left through their influence in the entertainment unions.
* Eliseo Medina, a DSA comrade and former executive vice president of the Service Employees International Union, almost single-handedly started the political movement to legalize illegal aliens. Medina became President Barack Obama’s unofficial immigration adviser.
* Ron Bloom, who served under Obama directly as “assistant to the president for manufacturing policy,” was a member of the DSA’s predecessor, the DSOC.
* The movement for single-payer (government-run health care) is and continues to be a DSA operation. It started with Chicago DSA comrade Dr. Quentin Young, another mentor to Obama.
* Academia has been overrun with Marxist professors, who are grooming the next generation of radicals. DSA is well-established through their youth organization, Young Democratic Socialists of America, with chapters on university campuses and even high schools all over the country.
* Thousands of “community organizers”—labor organizers and nonprofit officials—have been trained through the DSA-aligned Midwest Academy in Chicago.
* DSA member Michael Moore has influenced millions through his documentaries, and DSA member Linda Sarsour is a prominent pro-sharia activist and speaker, including her role at the Communist Party USA-sponsored Women’s March.
Additionally, hundreds of DSAers have taken on prominent roles in the churches, including Norm Faramelli, who served as an adjunct faculty member in Christian ethics at the Episcopal Divinity School; Michael Eric Dyson, who was a theology teacher at Georgetown University; Rosemary Ruether, formerly of the Garrett-Evangelical Theological Seminary; Cornel West, professor of philosophy and Christian practice at Union Theological Seminary; Eugene TeSelle, former professor of philosophy and Christian practice at Union Theological Seminary (and a mentor to presidential candidate Al Gore); Gary Dorrien, Reinhold Niebuhr professor of social ethics at Union Theological Seminary in the City of New York and professor of religion at Columbia University; and Steve Charleston, former president and dean of the Episcopal Divinity School in Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Infiltrating the Government
The Democratic Party has always been a major target for DSA. Most DSA comrades in the early days were also Democrats, and members held office all through the party. In the early 1990s, New York Mayor David Dinkins and St. Paul, Minnesota, Mayor Jim Scheibel were DSA comrades. DSA had many state legislators, county commissioners, and local officials in its ranks—almost all under Democratic Party cover. Several congressmembers were DSAers, including Rep. Major Owens (New York) and the pro-Cuba Rep. Ron Dellums of California, who shockingly served on the House Armed Services Committee. In 1991, Bernie Sanders and the DSA got together to set up the House Progressive Caucus, now known as the Congressional Progressive Caucus. At nearly 80 members strong, it is the largest and most influential caucus in the House. The Congressional Progressive Caucus will likely gain several new members this coming election, including card-carrying DSA members Ocasio-Cortez of Queens, New York, and Rashida Tlaib of Detroit, Michigan. Both have won their Democratic primaries and look certain to be elected in November. But Ocasio-Cortez and Tlaib are far from the only DSA members and allies who have won their primaries so far this election cycle alone.
What Is the Plan?
While touted in the media as a new movement, DSA is nothing but warmed-over communism. Reading their inner party documents soon provides a clearer view of the organization’s intentions. For example, Detroit DSA leader Dr. David Green visited Cuba to review the communist dictatorship’s health system. He wrote in Greater Detroit DSA’s May 2009 newsletter: “One of the most impressive features of Cuban society is its health care system. The Cuban system demonstrates what can be accomplished when health care is viewed as a human right rather than a commodity.” Green also wrote in DSA’s publication Democratic Left, in Spring 2007, “Our goal as socialists is to abolish private ownership of the means of production.” When DSA members boast that they want to end capitalism, they mean it. All private business is the Marxists’ enemy. Pressuring lawmakers to implement policies favorable to the revolution is the ongoing goal of many Marxist organizations, and DSA is dedicated to several policies that they believe would further that goal. During their annual convention, an estimated 700 to 800 delegates voted to abolish the police altogether and additionally to empty the prisons. The DSA has been clear about their desire to abolish the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency of the Department of Homeland Security. DSA wants to economically isolate “apartheid” Israel, strongly supporting the so-called BDS (Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions) movement. They are very active in pushing for so-called anti-gentrification policies and for rent control. One of DSA’s most coveted policy positions is the euphemistically named “Medicare for All,” or Single Payer. DSA is using massive resources to push these policies on a local and national level, from having their thousands of members engage in knocking on doors, to pressuring elected officials to make single payer a part of their platform.
DSA, ‘Totalitarianism,’ and ‘Direct Action’
Many DSA members tout “democracy” while supporting totalitarianism. Consider that many of their members are associated with—or are outright members of—the anarchist “anti-fascist” movement known as Antifa. One will rarely, if ever, find a DSA member denouncing the violence of Antifa. DSA members were active “counter-protesters” along with other communist groups and Antifa during the infamous “Unite the Right” rally in Charlottesville in August 2017, for example. One prime example of the DSA–Antifa alliance is evident in the violence-promoting organization, the Knights for Socialism, a front for Young Democratic Socialists of Orlando at the University of Central Florida. The members of the Knights for Socialism are largely DSA members, and leader Dylan Tyer has prominent positions with the local DSA and YDSA. It should be noted that the former regional field director of the Florida Democratic Party, Adam Whitmer, was elected chair of the Democratic Socialists of Orlando last year. The Knights for Socialism gained notoriety for its “Bash the Fash” event held last year, billed as a “self-defense seminar” held “in response to the record number of hate crimes against Latinos, Immigrants, Muslims, Women, the LGBTQIA+ community, Jews, African Americans and other minorities since the rise of Donald Trump and other Alt-Right Neo-Nazis.” The Knights for Socialism logo is the Antifa flag. In addition to their association with Antifa, DSA members can be credited for starting the politically embarrassing trend of ambushing immigration officials. The event that started the short-lived but media-hyped movement was an impromptu ambush organized by the Metro DC chapter of the DSA on Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen on June 19 while she dined with a colleague. In that case, the chair of the Metro DC chapter, Margaret McLaughlin, posted the restaurant’s address on Twitter, prompting fellow comrades to come shout “Shame!” at Nielsen during dinner. Other DSA members included Allison Hrabar, Jesse Rabinowitz and Austin Kendall. Instead of being condemned, the event received glowing coverage in The New York Times and CNN, among others. The day after the ambush, and in response to media coverage referring to the participants as “activists,” the Metro DC DSA tweeted indignantly: “We’re not ‘liberals,’ not vague ‘activists.’ We’re socialist organizers.” That initial action spurred a wave of ambush-like actions on the homes of immigration officials. But the glowing coverage of those actions ended abruptly after California Rep. Maxine Waters took the rhetoric too far a couple of days later, when she instructed Americans to “absolutely harass” White House officials. In the aftermath, DSA member Allison Hrabar received a bit of attention, considering her work in the anti-trust division of the U.S. Justice Department. It appears that Hrabar, a member of the Metro DC chapter’s steering committee, is still employed by the federal government while continuing to be very much involved in her socialist activism. While DSA claims to fight authoritarianism at home, it is quite happy to support totalitarianism abroad. In February, long-time DSA comrade Daniel Adkins published an article in Democratic Left daring to argue that the United States was in economic competition with “mercantilist” China. This prompted a furious response by the Seattle DSA, Boston DSA, and the Communist Caucus of East Bay DSA claiming that his article “was both irresponsible and morally inexcusable” and “pits the U.S. working class against the Chinese working class.” The critics insisted that the article be removed and further demanded that a “statement [be] published on DSA’s blog in due time affirming a commitment to internationalism, acknowledging that the Adkins piece should not have been published, and refusing to publish pieces promoting national chauvinist or anti-Chinese perspectives in the future.”
Global Alliances
During their annual convention in August 2017, DSA dropped its longstanding affiliation to the Socialist International (SI), the more-than-a-century-old alliance of socialist and social democratic parties—because they are too moderate! According to the revolutionary publication Left Voice: “The resolution that passed stated, ‘Our affiliation with the Socialist International hinders our ability to develop stronger relationships with parties and social movements that share our values and which, in many cases, are bitterly opposed to their country’s SI affiliate(s),’ and, ‘In many countries, they have helped to lead the attack on the welfare state and on the rights of workers and unions.’” After ditching the SI, the Democratic Socalists began looking around for new foreign friends. According to an article published by Democratic Left on Nov. 25, 2017: “In early November, DSA Deputy Director David Duhalde spoke on two European United Left/Nordic Green Left panels at the European Parliament—building ‘real global party ties for a post-Socialist International DSA.’ “Then he appeared on a Sinn Fein program and ‘shared a special moment’ with a former political prisoner about the Irish and Chilean struggles against authoritarianism.” European United Left/Nordic Green Left is a caucus of communist, Marxist, and Green parties in the European Parliament, formed in 1995. “They have taken special note of DSA as part of the larger surge of interest in socialism in the U.S. and the popularity of Bernie Sanders,” the article said. Sinn Fein is the socialist legal wing of the former Marxist-Leninist terrorist Irish Republican Army. When communists run for public office in America as openly communist, they are lucky to break 100 votes. Yet when they run covertly as Democrats, they can win seats on school boards, county commissions, and even in Congress. DSA is now 48,000 members strong. It has locals in every state and is busily taking over Democratic branches from Texas to Maine, from Nebraska to Hawaii. Americans should demand that the Democratic Party be held accountable for allowing their party to be infiltrated by radical DSA Marxists.



Today’s Naive Enthusiasts for Socialism Should Heed Its Reality
The Epoch Times

URL https://www.theepochtimes.com/socialism ... 20447.html
Category: Politics
Published: August 12, 2018

Description: As a teenager, every year I had to sit through indoctrination classes on “scientific socialism.” This ersatz science was invented by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels as a theory to explain the processes of transforming society from capitalism to communism, to define the “laws” of the revolution that would occur, and to describe the tactics to be employed by the “proletariat” against the “bourgeoisie.” I watched my bleary-eyed classmates sit through these sessions, knowing full well that the theory discussed in class had nothing to do with the reality outside. The constant rhetoric about how we should transform socialism from Utopian theories into “science” using “historical materialism” was heard on empty and growling stomachs. We were told that if we merged scientific socialism with the proletariat’s turmoil, then workers would become a conscious revolutionary class and communism would be built. Knowing how many people have died trying to escape oppressive socialist countries, I am shocked at how many “useful idiots” today are clamoring for this political and economic system that has killed millions who naively believed the Marxists. Perhaps my experience may help others understand what “socialism” is.
Equality
Socialism runs the gamut of social and economic systems defined by control of the means of production and social property. Social property can be public, collective, or cooperative. Socialist doctrines focus on opposing individualism and installing “equality and solidarity,” and seek a variety of economic goals. Several types of socialism are advocated, including Marxist socialism, communism or “Utopian socialism,” libertarian socialism, reformed socialism, and social democracy. The socialism I experienced offered us equal misery, equal exploitation, and equal jail time if we did not obey the Communist Party rulers. And certainly, there was no justice for the “proletariat.” We obeyed and accepted our fate and the decisions made by the communist elites ruling over us. Socialism claims to be organized around the interest of the collective and not the interest of a group of individuals and is designed to give power to the people. To say that this theory is a joke is an understatement. We had no power, and if we had tried to claim any—or our share of ownership of the means of production—we would have been met with the barrel of a gun, held by the police, who were cadres of well-fed, well-remunerated, and well-armed goons hired by the Communist Party. We no longer had as much as a hunting rifle, as all firearms were confiscated long before the state took complete control of our lives.
Common Goods
A socialist economy advocates for the state as the supreme administrator of all common goods. The state is in charge to assure that “every individual has conditions to live, to perpetuate the species, to enjoy life, to have dignity and respect for self and others, to find happiness, and to participate in the well being of the nation.” This is canned socialist rhetoric. The socialist reality I’ve experienced was quite different. The state told each citizen how much they could eat, through inadequate distribution and production of food; how much they could consume in other goods, through inadequate five-year plans whose goals were always met and exceeded on paper while goods on the market were insufficient and were shoddily made because nobody really cared. Workers pretended to work, and the state pretended to pay them “living wages.” People tried to supplement their food supply and income through black market activities and by stealing from work and bartering with others for things they needed. The state told us through the central communist planning how much electricity, heat, and water we could have by cutting them off several hours per day, how much personal property we could amass through its ever vigilant economic police that knocked on doors and confiscated anything they deemed excessive, and how much medication we could have by leaving pharmacies empty. The Communist Party even issued legal guidelines in the 1980s of how many calories per day each person should consume. You were hard-pressed to find an obese person, unless the person had some other underlying health issue. A 1989 video showed the socialist dictator Nicolae Ceausescu visiting a Bucharest grocery store and a bread store. In the film, the shelves are bursting with food, bread, pastries, salamis, cheeses, meat, sugar, cooking oil, and other items that the poor citizens fought over in endless lines every day. This abundance had just been delivered and neatly arranged for the dictator’s visit. As soon as the dictator left, the food was taken away, leaving behind the empty and dark shelves that the equally miserable and exploited “proletariat” were accustomed to seeing. The employees looked mortified, standing at attention in their white lab coats, applauding the dear leader like he was a celebrated rock star. The cult of personality had to be fed constantly by the pretend-adoring crowds who were forced to stand in sun, rain, or snow to applaud him wherever he happened to pass by. Under socialism, there is no private property, supporters say. In the 20 years I lived through the transition from socialism to communism, elites had their private property while the proletariat had nothing. The state run by the Communist Party controlled everything, including our speech. Marx, the ever-clever theoretician and parasitic thinker who survived on the generosity of rich friends and patrons, wrote that socialism is an imperfect transition between capitalism and communism in which goods and pay are unequally distributed, according to work done. In reality, doctors and proletariat labor were paid approximately the same, removing the incentive to spend the years in college needed to become a doctor. The Democrats and leftist denizens say today that it is obscene for a doctor to make a profit and that care should be free.
Two Classes
“Socius” is Latin for “comrade or ally.” You had to be very careful whom you allied with, lest you found yourself in jail or dead. “Communis” is Latin for “shared.” In practice, nobody shared anything under communism except misery and poverty. Although communism is described in textbooks as having no classes, there were actually two: the proletariat (the majority) and the ruling elite (Communist Party members). Under socialism, there is no “leveling of the playing field,” to use the Democrats’ euphemism. There is no “economic security” but insecurity. There is no “living wage,” just a surviving wage. Socialism and communism create repressive societies. There is no “universal health care,” but instead the rationing of it. There is no “public good,” only the communist party “good,” and goodies at specialized Communist Party-only stores. There is free public education mingled with forced indoctrination into Marxist theory. We define Western civilization by our humanity. Under communism, life was worthless unless it was the lives of those in power. If a baby was born with a fixable handicap, the state spent no resources to save the child—he or she was left to die unattended. Students were vaccinated in school with the same three or four syringes and needles that were boiled in rusty pans every morning, not autoclaved. Hepatitis was rampant. Hospitals washed and re-washed bandages. Hospital personnel, from orderlies to nurses to doctors, had to be bribed in order to properly care for patients. Medical treatments and drugs were free, but families had to provide sheets, towels, round-the-clock care, food, and drugs bought on the black market. The patient who had no family caring for them lingered in a metal frame bed unattended for weeks until they got better on their own or died.
‘Small Doses’ of Socialism
H.G. Wells, the prolific British sci-fi writer who described himself as a socialist left of Stalin, interviewed the infamous Soviet dictator for three hours on July 23, 1934. The interview was recorded by Constantine Oumansky, the chief of the Press Bureau of the Commissariat of Foreign Affairs. The scope of the interview was to find out what Stalin was “doing to change the world.” Wells told Stalin that he tried to look at the world through the eyes of the “common man,” not the eyes of a politician or a bureaucrat. Indicating to Stalin that “capitalists must learn from you, to grasp the spirit of socialism,” Wells stated that a profound reorganization was taking place in the United States, the creation of a “planned, that is, socialist, economy.” He had witnessed Washington building offices, new state regulatory bodies, and “a much needed Civil Service.” The Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev said in 1959, “We cannot expect the Americans to jump from capitalism to communism, but we can assist their elected leaders in giving Americans small doses of socialism until they suddenly awake to find they have communism.” Today, those “small doses” of socialism have grown ever larger and now are being pushed by politicians, the legacy media, and academia.



Socialist ‘Equality’ Is a Lie Used by Tyrants
The Epoch Times

URL https://www.theepochtimes.com/socialist ... 56697.html
Category: Politics
Published: April 4, 2019

Description: When Karl Marx envisioned socialism, it was merely a stage of tyrannical dictatorship that would naturally collapse to bring about communism. In Marx’s time, there were not yet any socialist or communist countries. Socialism was merely seen as the stage of “state capitalism,” in which the state seizes control of all means of production in order to more rapidly achieve the communist goals of cultural, social, and moral desolation. Since communism was the goal, socialist dictators have historically always used their powers to attack and destroy the “old” values of each society. Under Vladimir Lenin, Mao Zedong, and Pol Pot, one of the first steps was a man-made famine that wiped out large portions of the population, leading to a “survival of the fittest” concept where many people survived, under intense fear, through cannibalism or corruption. According to the authors of the “Black Book of Communism,” Lenin clearly stated that these atrocities were valuable for communist goals, since they would help bring about socialism while also destroying people’s faith in their leaders and in God. Unfortunately, when many people think of socialism today, they only know its surface talking points—the vague and lofty-sounding arguments that it will create “equality,” and the branding of its social movements as a fight against so-called “slavery” and “oppression.” In reality, socialism has historically represented everything it claims to oppose. Socialism is the ideology of slavery, oppression, genocide, massive inequality, and virulent hatred. The system of communism is based on struggle, and socialist tyrants use hatred as their tool to create this in society. Under Lenin, people were told to hate the wealthy landlords, whom he called “kulaks.” Under Mao, people were told to hate landlords and anyone who still believed in tradition, whom he labeled as “rightists.” Under Adolf Hitler, who used national socialism, people were told to hate the Jews, whom he framed as a wealthy minority. And under today’s socialists in the West, people are told to hate all white people, all men, and anyone who believes in traditional culture and family values. Hatred is the fuel of socialism. Hatred is the creed of its followers. They are made to embody what they believe they oppose. This ties directly to Marx’s theory of social evolution—that society would move from capitalism to socialism, then to communism. Marxists also frame this according to the Hegelian dialectic theory that “conflict leads forward.” By fomenting conflict and hatred between various groups of people in a society, socialist tyrants use the Social Darwinist theory of survival of the fittest—believing that conflict more rapidly advances society toward the goals of communist desolation. This is what they call “progress.” During this process, these tyrants brainwash their followers into believing that the people they are agitated to hate are the “enemies of the people,” or represent “inequality.” This strategy allows a small cadre of corrupt leaders to incite mobs into acts of violence, and to use these campaigns of violence and suppression to seize power over a society. This process has been repeated by socialist leaders all throughout the 20th century, leading to the ideology’s death toll, according to the “Black Book of Communism,” of more than 100 million people. Socialist dictators use, and sometimes even create, the ills and hardships of society, then use them as tools onto which they latch social policies. These policies are then used to drive society along the “progression” toward communism, and the social ills they’ve latched these policies onto are used as the defensive tools that allow them to attack anyone who questions the policies. Under socialism, equality is a lie. That is, unless, you consider equality the flattening of society into equal misery, under the heel of a massive state bureaucracy led by a corrupt political class. Socialists accuse people of doing what the socialists themselves are doing, and that deflects criticism from their own actions. They manufacture hardship and use the label of “oppression” as a tool to attack varying segments of society. Over the last 100 years, socialism, and its tyrants who sought to create communist systems, produced famine, genocide, totalitarianism, mass corruption, moral collapse, and social collapse in almost every place it was tried. The lofty promises and high-sounding statements made by socialist tyrants are merely tools for stringing people along that hide the tyrants’ true motives. In practice, socialism accomplishes the opposite of what its purveyors preach. Socialism is the ideology of government tyranny, of granting absolute power to a small wealthy clique, and of creating mass inequality between the wealthy socialist leaders and the impoverished masses.



You Can’t Have Socialism Without State Tyranny
The Epoch Times

URL https://www.theepochtimes.com/you-cant- ... 73356.html
Category: Politics
Published: April 9, 2019

Description: When people talk about socialized health care, free education, and other programs, they often believe these things are meant to care for society. Yet these programs can’t exist without a system to enforce it—and it’s in the enforcement of these policies that socialism can’t exist without tyranny. Supporting socialist policies is often veiled as a consideration for the health and well-being of others. Yet what it replaces is the traditional value of generosity and its complement, gratitude. In place of the “old values” and “old institutions,” socialism seeks a centralized power with absolute control over society, one that’s empowered to plunder the wealth of select groups of people and trickle down this plunder through a vast state bureaucracy. Many socialists believe this bureaucratic tyranny should be allowed to direct the basic life choices of each person, including their health, education, finances, property, and even speech. Socialism is a political system based on tyranny and plunder, since its systems can’t function without threat and use of force. After all, what happens if people simply refuse to pay for the services forced on them by a socialist state? Well, the socialist tyrants, who ironically advocate against firearms, will send their police force equipped with firearms to compel that person to pay. And if that person still refuses, he or she will be imprisoned. As French economist and author Frédéric Bastiat wrote in his book “The Law” in 1850: “You would oppose law to socialism. But it is the law that socialism evokes. It aspires to legal, not extralegal plunder. “It is of the law itself, like monopolists of all kinds that it wants to make an instrument; and when once it has the law on its side, how will you be able to turn against it?” Bastiat raised the questions of what happens when systems of government that were once formed to prevent plunder then become tools for plunder, and what happens to law when government itself becomes the source of plunder. Many socialists today view the system with rose-colored glasses, yet are often unaware of the original intentions of socialism. From the very beginning, socialism was intended as a system of state tyranny. It was what Karl Marx referred to as the “dictatorship of the proletariat” and what Vladimir Lenin called “state capitalism.” Socialism is a system of totalitarian dictatorship, meant to destroy every level of free will in society, by dictating every part of a person’s life. It’s an ideology of distrust in the ability of the common person to decide for themselves the best course in life, and a belief that state leaders should be given absolute power over each individual. It was also not about getting rid of “capitalism.” It was specifically about having a massive state bureaucracy seize control of all resources and means of production, and establishing a system that could dominate every facet of society. Of course, Marx and Engels never intended socialism to be sustainable. They believed it was merely the initial step of establishing communism, where the powers of the state could be used by the “dictatorship of the proletariat” to destroy all values, morality, institutions, and other systems of the past. Eventually, they believed, either the socialist dictatorship would collapse or its leaders would somehow renounce power, leading to the envisioned stage of communism. Socialism is the ideology of state slavery. It’s a system that places the alleged interests of a collective over the life and free will of an individual, turning people into lifeless shells incapable of self-reliance and indoctrinated with an ideology of struggle. The generosity of socialists isn’t real generosity. It is, as author William F. Buckley Jr. put it, being “generous with other people’s money.” And the false generosity of socialism is one that can’t exist without the forceful arms of state tyranny. It’s a “generosity” of envy, of discrimination, of plunder that can only emerge from the barrel of a gun.
User avatar
smix
 
Posts: 1852661
Images: 1
Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2013 8:05 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Trump Is Right to Warn Democrats About ‘Socialism’

Postby smix » Thu Feb 07, 2019 7:24 pm

Trump Is Right to Warn Democrats About ‘Socialism’
Bloomberg News

URL: https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/artic ... -democrats
Category: Politics
Published: February 7, 2019

Description: Progressives have embraced the term, and that’s a dangerous mistake.
In his State of the Union address, President Donald Trump was entirely right to reject “new calls to adopt socialism in our country.” He was right to add that “America was founded on liberty and independence — not government coercion,” and to “renew our resolve that America will never be a socialist country.” Yet to many Americans, the idea of socialism seems to have growing appeal. Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, one of the nation’s most influential new voices, is a member of the Democratic Socialists of America. Senator Bernie Sanders, a leading voice among progressives, has long described himself as a socialist.

sanders-cortez.jpg

Since 2010, most Democrats have had a favorable attitude toward socialism. Recently, 57 percent of Democrats reported such a favorable attitude, well above the 47 percent who said they have a positive attitude toward capitalism. (By contrast, 71 percent of Republicans are upbeat about capitalism, and only 16 percent feel positively about socialism.) True, most of the Americans who approve of socialism are likely to be thinking of something like Scandinavian-style social democracy, rather than something out of Karl Marx. But words matter, especially when they refer to systems of governance. What, then, is socialism? According to a standard definition, socialism calls for government ownership or control of the means of production. By contrast, capitalism calls for private ownership and control — for a robust system of property rights. In capitalist systems, companies and firms, both large and small, are generally in private hands. In socialist systems, the state controls them. If they are given room to maneuver, their rights are conditional; they can be taken away at any time. Many people have identified socialism with government planning. Socialist systems give public officials a great deal of authority over prices, levels of production and wages. Friedrich Hayek, socialism’s greatest critic, showed that giving that authority to government is a recipe for disaster. The reason is that even if officials are well-motivated, they lack the necessary information. Unlike planners, free markets and the price system are able to encode the knowledge, the preferences and the values of dispersed people. Hayek rightly described the process as “a marvel.” Whether we are speaking of laptops or sneakers, coffee or candy bars, umbrellas or blankets, markets establish prices, levels of production and wages on the basis of the desires, the beliefs and the values of countless people. No planner can possibly do that. So here’s the problem. Many Democrats say that they like socialism. But it is doubtful that they want the government to own and operate the nation’s airlines, hospitals, restaurants and department stores. Nor is it likely that they would favor a political candidate who called for a National Planning Agency, establishing prices for goods, services and wages. Even if they want an increase in the minimum wage, socialist-style planning is surely a bridge too far. In his own effort to explain what he meant by socialism, Sanders did not invoke Karl Marx. Instead he spoke of Franklin Delano Roosevelt. In particular, Sanders pointed to Roosevelt’s great 1944 speech, in which he called for a Second Bill of Rights. As Roosevelt described it, the Second Bill includes a right to adequate medical care; a right to a good education; a right to protection against the fears of old age, sickness, accident and unemployment; a right to freedom from domination by monopolies; a right to earn enough to provide adequate food, clothing and recreation; and a right to a useful and remunerative job in the private sector. Roosevelt contended that “economic security and independence” are essential to individual freedom. Sanders endorsed that claim. Sanders also spoke of economic inequality, emphasizing the extraordinary wealth of the top one-tenth of 1 percent, and the distress and difficulty faced by those at the bottom. In his words, “Democratic socialism means that we must create an economy that works for all, not just the very wealthy.” That means better access to health care, higher taxes on the wealthiest, better educational opportunities for all, and an effort to “put millions of people back to work.” Reasonable people are drawn to all of those ideas. But please, let’s not call them “socialist.” Roosevelt’s own goal was to save capitalism, not to overthrow it. As he once put it, “One of my principal tasks is to prevent bankers and businessmen from committing suicide.” He believed in what Democratic Representative Joe Kennedy of Massachusetts is now calling “moral capitalism.” Roosevelt created the Social Security program. He insisted on a minimum wage. He fought to protect the interests of the working poor. But FDR was firmly committed to private property and to free markets. He spoke of economic planning, and he even did a little — but he never embraced socialist-style planning. The contemporary interest in “socialism” is (I think) mostly expressive. It is a way of raising the volume, pounding a fist and offering a signal — of saying, in shorthand, that the U.S. has far too much economic insecurity; that the current system is not working nearly well enough for millions of people; that incremental change is not enough; that bold thinking is in order. Fair enough, and also true. But Roosevelt — the nation’s greatest progressive — was no socialist. Those who now favor large-scale change should avoid a term, and a set of practices, that have so often endangered both liberty and prosperity.
User avatar
smix
 
Posts: 1852661
Images: 1
Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2013 8:05 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Millennials May Love Socialism, But Socialism Won't Love Them Back

Postby smix » Mon Feb 25, 2019 9:57 pm

Millennials May Love Socialism, But Socialism Won't Love Them Back
Investor's Business Daily

URL: https://www.investors.com/politics/edit ... socialism/
Category: Politics
Published: August 24, 2018

Description: Americans' heavy flirtation with socialism continues, and nowhere is that more evident than in America's youth. For many millennials, socialism appears to be both a viable and desirable replacement for capitalism. It isn't, on any level. America's older generations have no one to blame but themselves. They delivered their children and grandchildren into the hands of unionized public schools run by leftist administrators, with their dumbed-down, biased curricula. They sat them in front of TVs and computer screens, without paying attention to the nonstop message of civilizational self-loathing they imibed from the mainstream media. Is it any surprise that the millennial generation sees socialism as an answer to all of the world's shortcomings? After all, its utopian ideals of total equality and an end to human want are appealing to young people. Far from learning the truth — that America has been the greatest force for freedom in the history of humankind, while creating unparalleled wealth for its citizens — students today are relentlessly drilled with a progressive catechism of guilt over America's long-admitted shortcomings and history. The result: a generation raised on moral equivalency, diversity and a jaundiced view of their nation's own past. A generation of Americans that hate their own culture, even as hundreds of millions around the world dream of coming to this land of opportunity and freedom. Millennials today seem to be disgusted with a country that provides them with more opportunities than any country in history. PJ Media writer Rick Moran decided to ask millennials how they felt about New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo's disgraceful comment that "America was never that great." By and large, the young people queried by Moran backed Cuomo. "I don't believe America has been great for all folks ever," said one. "Even today." Another said: "I would have to agree with Governor Cuomo." One of those Moran spoke with elaborated, no doubt straight out of a high school or college textbook: "The idea that there was this once great America is pointing towards this false sense of nationalism...What, it's talking about white America? It's not great." "America has been great ... for straight white men," agreed another. Such anti-Americanism and socialist ideas go hand in hand. They're not strangers. As we've noted elsewhere, a shocking Gallup Poll earlier this month showed that 57% of Democrats hold a favorable view toward socialism, while a record low from the same party now say they support capitalism. These aren't just aging 1960s New Left retreads like Sen. Bernie Sanders. Among those aged 18 to 29, support for capitalism has plunged 12 percentage points in just two years. Among that age group, 51% say they have postive feelings about socialism, compared to just 45% for capitalism. Today, among the young, socialism is chic, hip, and new. Or so they think. In fact, it's more than 100 years old. And whether it's the rigid, murderous version of socialism put in place by the Soviet Union, or today's nightmare countries like Venezuela, Cuba, Nicaragua, Zimbabwe and North Korea, it's an idea that has never delivered equality, better lives, more opportunity, a sense of belonging, freedom or anything else that young people say they want. "Socialism is the ultimate Big Lie," wrote American Enterprise Institute Fellow and economist Mark J. Perry, in a recent update of his classic 1995 piece, "Why Socialism Failed." "While it falsely promises prosperity, equality, and security, it delivers the exact opposite:poverty, misery, inequality, and tyranny." Young people, lacking experience, wisdom and a broad, unbiased education, don't know that. It is a cold, hard and disturbing fact that, during the 20th century, socialist regimes — called also "communist" and "Marxist" and "People's Republic" regimes — have been responsible for the intentional or negligent murder of more than 100 million people, according to former marxist historian Stephane Courtois' now classic book, "The Black Book of Communism." As awful as Nazism was, and it was horrific by any standard, the various regimes of the extreme left in the 20th century were more murderous and equally if not more hateful. What is the greatest threat today to freedom and the U.S. way of life? It's not Nazism. It's socialism, its communism, its marxism, all variants of the same disease. To the extent we embrace any of these false ideologies, we will suffer. Calling the current leftist fantasy "democratic socialism" doesn't help. The ideas of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Sen. Bernie Sanders or Sen. Elizabeth Warren, whose "Accountable Capitalism Act" would impose Venezuela-style socialism on the U.S., are no less wrong for having "democratic" in front of the word "socialism." In socialism, all roads lead to disaster. Or, as Friedrich Hayek, the late Austrian economist, might say, to "serfdom." All forms of socialism are the same: they replace consent and personal freedom with government power on behalf of the "people". "That Democrats and millennials seem to have no idea about the horrors inflicted on the masses in countries like the Soviet Union and want to go in that direction is scary indeed," wrote Karol Markowicz in the New York Post. She should know: Her own great grandfather had his bakery taken by the Soviet government and was then sent to a Gulag. That's where he died. Confronted, diehard democratic socialists deny wanting to control things. But the Young Democratic Socialists of America website says differently: "While the large concentrations of capital in industries such as energy and steel may necessitate some form of state ownership, many consumer-goods industries might be best run as cooperatives." These might sound innocent, but remember: Behind the entire idea of socialism is that government isn't there to guarantee your rights or the rule of law; it's there to exercise power on the part of the "people." Anything can be justified. Socialism isn't power to the people, it's power to the socialist rulers. But maybe such a system looks appealing to young people: A new study shows that 52.1% of kids live in households that get welfare. It's a way of life. But it's not enough to criticize socialism. It's important for those in the center and right of the political spectrum to stand up for the one system that works better than all others: free-market capitalism.
Millennials: Raised To Be Socialists?
We should be teaching it to our kids, and remind young people that free markets are vastly superior to any alternative for organizing a workable, growing economy. For free markets to work, you must have free speech. So political correctness must be abandoned. "Indeed, history manifestly shows that neither socialism nor other alternative economic systems — and many have been tried — come close to the record of free-market capitalism in promoting peace and growth, as well as improving the overall human condition," writes Anthony B. Kim at The Daily Signal. Moreover, not only does socialism not work, it is very expensive. As Brian Riedl of the Manhattan Institute recently estimated, Sen. Warren's blue print for democratic socialism would cost the U.S. $42 trillion, requiring tax rates on everyone of 60% or higher. Millennials beware: With socialism, there will be no money left for anything other than government. You will be following the path of Venezuela and Cuba, not the path of Norway, Sweden and Denmark. Millennials need to rethink their youthful allegiance to socialist ideology. It will bring them less income, worse inequality, insecurity, hunger, despair and a loss of freedom.
User avatar
smix
 
Posts: 1852661
Images: 1
Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2013 8:05 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Mike Pence: Freedom, Not Socialism, ‘Ended Slavery, Won Two World Wars’

Postby smix » Sat Mar 02, 2019 1:05 am

Mike Pence: Freedom, Not Socialism, ‘Ended Slavery, Won Two World Wars’
Breitbart News

URL: https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019 ... orld-wars/
Category: Politics
Published: March 1, 2019

Description: Vice President Mike Pence charged thousands gathered at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) Friday to take the pro-freedom, anti-socialism message throughout America as we head into 2020. “Under the guise of Medicare for All and a Green New Deal, Democrats are embracing the same tired economic theories that have impoverished nations and stifled the liberties of millions over the past century,” said Pence. “That system is socialism”: Democrat 2020 candidates are offering “just the same old, same old: more taxes, more spending, more government, less freedom,” the vice president explained. “The moment America becomes a socialist country is the moment America ceases to be America,” said Pence. “As President Trump said 24 days ago, so we must say with one voice, ‘America will never be a socialist country.’” The crowd broke out in chants of “USA! USA!” “We know where socialism leads. You want socialism, just look at Venezuela,” said Pence. “Venezuela was once one of the richest and most vibrant democracies in the Western Hemisphere, but under Maduro’s socialist rule, it has become one of the poorest and most despotic.” Pence described the deep dive Venezuela’s people have seen from prosperity to poverty:
Today, more than nine out of ten people live in poverty in that once-rich country. More than three million Venezuelans have abandoned their homes and fled the brutality of the Maduro regime. But the struggle in Venezuela is between dictatorship and democracy. The struggle in Venezuela is between socialism and freedom.

He recalled his trip this week to Colombia, where he brought affirmation of President Donald Trump’s strong stand for the people of Venezuela and against the Maduro regime as he stood alongside leaders of several South American nations. He reiterated on the CPAC stage the message he took to Colombia: “Nicolas Maduro must go.” “Freedom is about enabling people to live their lives as they see fit, not government control,” the vice president attested. He further declared:
Freedom produces more and better goods than any system in any other place and time in any other place. Freedom produces more and better goods than any other system at any other time in any other place. Freedom is more generous, more helpful, and more humane than any other social or economic model ever attempted because it is the only philosophy that respects the dignity and worth of every single life and sees every man, woman, and child as made in the image of God. That’s freedom. That’s our heritage. Freedom works. This is what we believe. This is who we are. But this is the choice we face in the next 20 months.

Pence then charged CPAC participants, “We’ve got work to do … just as we did in 2016. Twenty months from now, the American people are going to face a choice once again.” He espoused faith that if the American people “speak freedom to the people of this nation” and lay out “a choice between freedom and socialism, the American people will choose freedom every single time.” Pence cited words inscribed on the Liberty Bell: “Proclaim liberty throughout the land and to all the inhabitants thereof.” He assured them that if they do, “the American people will rally to our cause once again. We will keep on winning. We will keep on growing. And we will preserve freedom for this generation and the next.” The vice president called on the group to go out with confidence that President Trump is “fighting every day for the ideals and values that are at the heart of American greatness” and assured in the rightness of their cause “and confidence that if we ask for the blessings of Him who established this miracle of democracy on these wilderness shores so long ago … that we cannot fail – for where the spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty. So freedom always wins.”



Larry Kudlow Charges Americans ‘Put Socialism on Trial and Convict It’
Breitbart News

URL: https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019 ... onvict-it/
Category: Politics
Published: February 28, 2019

Description: U.S. National Economic Council Director Larry Kudlow charged CPAC attendees and all Americans Thursday to join in using facts and history to put socialism on trial and convict it. “We have to keep America great,” said Kudlow, who then posed the problem, “Our opponents are proposing to overturn America’s success and it’s greatness.” He pointed to economic numbers released Thursday morning showing growth at nearly three percent. “Trump policies are working,” he said pointing to lower tax rates, deregulation, trade reform, energy opening, conservative judges, foreign policy, historic high blue-collar employment, “it’s the hottest economy in the world and I’ll let the ankle-biters just bite my ankles.” Kudlow called on the audience, their friends, and their neighbors to “put socialism on trial.” He said:
I don’t want us to stand idly by. I don’t want to let this stuff fester. I want it challenged, I want it debated, I want it rebutted, and I want to convict socialism. President Trump has already started this leadership,” he said before reciting some of the president’s rebuke of socialism including the State of the Union Address affirmation, “tonight we renew our resolve that America will never be a socialist country.

He additionally cited the president’s remarks in Florida recently against socialism’s promises of a better future, when in reality it brings back the darkest chapters of the past. “I ask you to join president Trump and me and the rest of us to put socialism on trial and convict it,” Kudlow repeated. He offered some facts for the audience against the claims of those who push socialist policies. “The top one percent of income earners actually pay about 40 percent of all the taxes…The top ten percent pays nearly 70 percent…The bottom 50 percent pays three percent.” “The Green New Deal would literally destroy the economy,” he added, pointing to the destruction of energy, transportation, airlines, and businesses. He pointed to the 180 million Americans who use private insurance as he pushed back against those who push universal health care and the end of private insurance. He laid out massive costs estimated by the American Action Forum, including approximately $35-40 trillion for universal health care, $45 trillion for “guaranteed jobs for even those who don’t want to work,” and a total cost for the Green New Deal and associated policies of around $75 trillion. “The old Soviet Union proved it won’t work and it can’t work,” he said of similar socialist, central planning policies. “We have to work hard, the stakes are very, very high,” Kudlow warned. “He has ended the war on business. He has ended the war on energy. He has ended the war on success,” Kudlow said of president Trump. He credited the president with changing the psychology from pessimism to optimism. “You are now rewarded by the extra hour worked, for the extra investment, for the extra risk taken.” “Our socialist friends want to tax and regulate more of everything,” said Kudlow. “We cannot permit that.” “We must not let government action run this country,” he charged. He pressed on:
I prefer human action. The actions of individual men and women. We prosper in America when we are allowed to use our God-given talents of creativity and ingenuity and inventiveness and our gifts from God of faith and life and life. Socialism, government controls, government coercion, and all the rest will block out these God-given gifts. And if we let that happen we will permit them to block out America’s greatness.

“I’m here with just one simple ask: please join us to keep America great and join us to put socialism on trial and then convict it.” Kudlow is the Director of the National Economic Council under President Donald Trump. He previously served in the administration of President Ronald Reagan.
User avatar
smix
 
Posts: 1852661
Images: 1
Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2013 8:05 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Next

  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Return to Politics


Mobile Device
  • 1
  • FREE CLASSIFIED ADS
    Free Classified Ads
    There are 3 ways to advertise - your choice: you can place free ads in a forum topic, in the classified display ads section, or you may start your own free blog. Please select the appropriate category and forum for the ad content before you post. Do not spam.
    Caveat emptor - let the buyer beware. Deal at your own risk and peril.
  • Advertisement