Calling me, and others on this forum socialists does'nt help illuminate issues that divide the world. The problem in Mexico, is virtually identical to that of the Middle-East-and that is the extreme concentration of a vast majority of resources in the hands of a few. The Mexicans have our border as a solution; the Mid-East has jihad. When 15-17 families, out of tens of millions in Mexico, hold in xcess of 95% of the resources, the consequences of that are ultimately are being paid by the the American middle-class. That this issue seems so obscure to American leaders, is extraordinarily troubling to me, and should be to others.
If you can explain to me as to how labeling others trying to discuss the issue "socialists" contributes to the solution, I'm all ears.
That is a fundamentally socialist analysis of the situation. It is also an incorrect analysis. They do have a few rich and many poor, but it's a large leap to conclude that "that's exactly the problem with Mexico." And it leads to incorrect conclusions: namely that "what Mexico needs is redistribution."
Someone else on this thread defended your posts by suggesting that you aren't defending socialism; you're merely commenting on things as they are. On the contrary, you're defending socialism.
If you can explain to me as to how labeling others trying to discuss the issue "socialists" contributes to the solution, I'm all ears.
Straw man: "labeling others" isn't what's going on. I'm clearly identifying a socialist analysis of Mexico's problems as a socialist analysis. That contributes in at least one respect: it clarifies the positions being advanced.