Is America a Socialist Country?

Bumper Statements web site, Editor's Corner ^ | December 13, 2001 | The Editor@BumperStatements.com

[John SBM]

I disagree with a caveat. I think the Dems have done a great job of confusing the notion of Christian charity with that of state-run redistribution. If you argue with government programs, you are mean and cruel and don't want to help others!

[netman]

But now they desire a better country, that is, an heavenly: wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God: for he hath prepared for them a city.

Heb.11/6

....These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth. Heb.11/13 .

[Squantos]

Agreed....... DSA.com (or .Org) says a lot about real agendas they haven't driven through the congress.......yet. Cancer is a good analogy, only a change of bad habits will prevent the growth and spread of socialism IMHO.

Sunshine Patriots be damned, Stay Safe Leto....

[verboten]

Actually I find Christians leading us right into the den of socialism. Christianity has been taken over by the socialists. And the Republicans have done nothing lately to stop the advance of socialism. In fact Bush is a compassionate conservative socialist. I guess he likes socialism, just so long as it is efficient.

The institutions that once represented our ideals have become large enough that all they care about is their own survival. And people inside them realize we are unwilling to abandon them. So don't expect them to bring us back from the abyss.

[John SBM]

Does not the notion of giving government money to faith-based institutions use the premise advanced by the Dems of government being the means to charity? I think that shows just how much the socialist principles of re-distribution have permeated even the Republican party, where Chrstian charity is now a government program.

[Always Right]

Is America a Socialist Country?

Not really a yes or no question. Socialism has always existed in this country to some degree or another. It has been getting worse, but then again we are still better than most everyone else in terms of limiting Socialism. There are a lot of things that need to get done like getting social security under control and into the private sector. Reducing the size of the federal government from about 20% of GNP down to about half that.

[KirkandBurke]

Step by step, beginning with Wilson and in earnest with FDR.

[mlocher]

thanks for the post.

the telling tale is "the total tax burden exceeds 50%".

besdes direct taxes (e.g. personal income taxes), we have property taxes, corporate taxes and sales taxes. then there are taxes we pay that we do not realize that much: gasoline tax, luxury tax, alcohol and cigarette taxes, import tariffs, etc. these all take their toll on productivity and our economy.

worse yet, the liberals have figured out how to tax us so that much of the people 'feel good' about it, or don't even realize they are being taxed.

and i did not even mention inflation, the cruelest tax of all...

we started down the path of socialism with a 4% personal income tax earlier this century and have been become one of the largest socialistic countries in the world. there have been attempts to repeal the personal income tax, all of which have ended in failure and irs audits.

[John SBM]

It can be a yes or no question in terms on the principles involved. You are referring to the degree of socialization, and I agree we are not yet "totally" socialist. But, the guiding premises today are. As Ayn Rand put it, when you adopt one set of principles to compromise another, you abandon one for the other. Tough, and strict, but philosophically true none the less.

[exmarine]

Yes - absolutely. As America has been slowly abandoning its judeo-Christian roots, it also abandoned economic freedom of the individual. The pilgrims and puritans were "self-governing christians." The fact that our nation was founded as a constitutional republic (not a democracy as so many still call it)is a testament to the importance placed on individual freedom. Socialism is anathema to individual freedom - it rewards the lazy - and gives undue power to the bureaucracy.

[bloodmeridian]

I ... uhm ... work at ... er... well... uhm....know of a university, and I can assure you that employees and students are handed their official card to the communist party the first time they walk on campus. You will, of course, note that many people are affected throughout their lives, in one way or another, by universities.

Some of us ... I mean ... them choose to file that card, which isn't made of paper but rather is more like a secret agreement sealed by handshake, in a certain container. Still others openly wave the flag and preach The Teachings of the Constitution. Why, I know of ... someone ... who has bought several of his ... er... their co-workers (even my boss) copies of The Federalist Papers for Christmas. Whether I ... uhm... this person lasts much longer after said stunt is another tale surely to unfold.

[alpowolf]

Indeed, the Republicans are co-conspirators with the Dems. The factor which determines which members of Congress are the biggest spenders is not party affiliation; it is seniority. The longer they're there, the worse they get.

[John SBM]

Thank you for your comments. And you've hit my point on taxes, there are so many, and they are so sneaky, we pay much more than we think. I prefer to think that when we get to the point where we consider the income tax to be a form of discrimination, it will be a good start. When we get then to the point of realising that we should all pay taxes equally, like a flat sales tax, so we all have equal representation and an equal stake in the size and scope of government, we will be on the way to being American again. "End Discrimination - Repeal the Income Tax!"

[fish hawk]

If not now.....soon. Vote Republican while you still can.

[Carry_Okie]

I wrote this on another thread, but it bears repeating.

Socialism is the revenge of the incompetent. It is the vain hope that, "because I am incompetent to make it in the market, I can use political power to coerce from the productive an income for myself." The socialist then adds a fake veneer of altruism to that little plan by saying, "and we'll take care of The Poor," or The Environment, or whatever the self-aggrandizing ruse happens to be today. Our satisfied leftist then goes and gets a safe government job enforcing just that.

The viciousness arises from that same self-hatred, that there is no propitiation or redemption for being one's incompetent self, and thus the demand for inflicting punishment upon the rest of humanity requires endless repetition to relieve the pain. This is of course only possible when government has the power to accommodate such sub-conscious desires, with the political pean to the democratic whim. To build that power then only requires a plurality of incompetents. All that remains is to collect these lemmings into an appropriate collection of "interest groups," that can be manipulated into exercising the VERY profitable strategies of their sponsoring mentors.

[John SBM]

Good luck! Where those gifts given a blind gift exchanges???

[exmarine]

As Ayn Rand put it, when you adopt one set of principles to compromise another, you abandon one for the other. Tough, and strict, but philosophically true none the less.

Ayn Rand was right about a few things, but any correlation with truth was purely coincidental. Absolute moral principles must come into play and Ayn Rand was severely deficient in this area. She espoused total personal autonomy did she not? Total personal autonomy is a totally selfish and self-centered worldview that has led to the euthanasia movement and other problems.