Is America a Socialist Country?

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

[verboten]

Well the principle is the same excercised at home or abroad. If you only feel safe by dominating other people why stop at our borders? Why not dominate your neighbor lest he attack you?

And remember the US has never really fought a sustained war on our soil. How can the world be so dangerous if the fight has never been brought to us? And 9-11 alone does not represent war as the US has prosecuted it against others. So, things have not changed. We still are VERY safe. And if anything our military adventures only gives people cause to attack us.

[Aurelius]

To think that there is even a question, you have to be braindead.

[John SBM]

I do, but wish the Republicans were not as infected with altruism as they are. Apparently they don't have the confidence to refute it, or they have bought into it. Not sure, but it really doesn't matter.

[bloodmeridian]

Where those gifts given a blind gift exchanges???

Nope. Everyone knows I'm a "Nazi," or at least that's what they call me, so I'm being quite open about the gifts I'm giving.

[tberry]

"And the Republicans have done nothing lately to stop the advance of socialism"

In fact they are now the most vehement promoters of "Big Government" and Centralized control of the individual. Big government must feel very fortunate that the 9-11 attacks occurred. Not because they are callous to the loss of life but because the attacks give them the opportunity to be seen by the mass of individuals as the only one who can protect them. Therefore, the individuals are more than willing to let the government control virtually everything.

The centralized government expansion of control and the nationalist bigotry remind me more and more of a hybrid socialist, fascist, monarchy.

[John SBM]

Great summary of motives. But those seeking revenge are in the end tolerated by those of us who accept the cover of the altruistic methods without challenging the underlying principles. As Ayn Rand phrased in a somewhat related context, it is all about the sanction we give.

[Cacophonous]

I don't think it is a matter of denial; rather too many Americans just haven't thought about it.

And to extend this, there are those that simply allowed it to happen; and I'm not talking about those that are forcing socialism on us (Kennedy, Clinton, Gore, etc...). I think much of the "anti-Kennedy, Clinton, Gore, etc..." crowd is just as culpable in many ways.

For instance, many people justified voting for candidates George HW Bush, BobDole, and George W Bush on the grounds that they are "not Clinton, Clinton and Gore". Notable, yes, but they were so blinded by this one thought that they never stopped to think what candidates George HW Bush, BobDole, and George W Bush were.

So we wound up with, in 1992 and 1996, two of the most unelectable candidates (never mind Bush41 winning in 1988; that was Reagan not Bush) running two of the most inept campaigns in American electoral history. Both won their nominations on the grounds that they were "not Clinton". Even their supporters admitted they were not ideal, but, hey, they were "not Clinton".

George W Bush was nominated with much of the same reservations. To his credit, he learned the lessons of the past and ran a good campaign. He won against a man who had the election handed to him, but could not restrain his natural inclination to be an absolute, grade-A, top-flight prick.

But what did we get, besides someone who is "not Al Gore"?

Now, he has handled the military aspects of the war in the middle east magnificently, and I am grateful he is in office instead of Gore.

But before September 11, he expanded the role of the Federal government into gift-giving, a clearly unConstitutional intrusion that will profoundly impact private charities; has promised "amnesty" to millions of illegal immigrants, thereby assuring the next wave of terrorists will have a home; and managed to strong-arm Red China into the WTO, thereby ensuring America's enemies will continues to supply her goods, and continuing the crippling of American manufacturing. And bailing out the airline industry was an abomination (and showed a disturbing lack of creativity to boot).

So to bring this all together, the guy we elected because he is "not Al Gore" has behaved in a way that make Al Gore proud.

[John SBM]

No. You are listening to her detractors more than the true Objectivist position. Try reading Peikoff's book "Objectivism, the Philosophy of Any Rand". It will address the issues you raised much better than I can.

[Don Myers]

"Actually I find Christians leading us right into the den of socialism. "

You are correct. Many Christians are so busy trying to love others and be socially correct, they cannot see the evil that they are actively trying to bring to this nation.

[LinnieBeth]

Capitalism = Private ownership of produce & Production
Fascism = Private ownership of produce, controlled by regulation and tariff
Socialism = Blend of private & state ownership of produce, proceeds distributed primarily by State through populace.
Communism = State ownership, State distribution of produce/production

I'd say still in facsism moving toward socialism.

Note: Weabster's Unabridged defines Fascism as stated above, with or without a dictator. All above definitions are "Economic" terms.

[John SBM]

I hope you are addressing the question itself, and the answer, not me for raising it!!!

[Noumenon]

The principles of socialism represent the biggest and most murderous Ponzi scheme the world has ever seen. Those who advocate socialism deserve to die.

[John SBM]

Good points! I say we are in a Fabian Socialist period because of the increasing redistribution of wealth.

[nonliberal]

No. America is a fascist country. It has aspects of socialism but overall it is a fascist country.

[bloodmeridian]

The centralized government expansion of control and the nationalist bigotry remind me more and more of a hybrid socialist, fascist, monarchy

That's a very interesting statement. In your opinion, is this nationalistic bigotry more troubling because it feeds big government or because it blinds some of us who claim to be nationalists?

[LaFontaine]

Communism,Socialism,Capitalism these are just idealistic ideas. The reality is that it really comes down to oppression vs freedom or put another way power and control.

Communism failed because it took away freedom, ran inefficiently and created an elite group of rulers that enjoyed the good life so to speak.

Would we in America really be any better of if our Government take away our freedom and ensures a lavish lifestyle for the rich and famous? And speaking of bureaucracy have you though about how much bureaucracy there is these days? When large business can dictate to the government what its policy will be and we the people have no say in the matter are we any better off. Take missile defense for example. Did you get to vote on the missile defense shield? What use is all of the comforts of home when home succumbs to a nuclear warhead?

Would it be better to have a few Marxist running the show or a few corporate executives?

The question we need to ask is does your government serve the people or do we serve the government? Remember it is supposed to be government by the people for the people.

[John SBM]

I admit to having always been fascinated with how the Dems get away with calling the Republicans fascists when they are the ones who advocate state control of privately owned resources.

[Carry_Okie]

It's the sanction of abdication: We gave up upon the idea that we were accountable for self-government. Why? Too busy paying taxes and buying goodies, while simultaneously frustrated by the very architectures that were supposed to serve those "good intentions." We somehow got the crazed idea that the purpose of life was to fill it with empty fun and that fighting to maintain our freedom and help our neighbors voluntarily weren't worth the trouble. Gratification begat addiction.

People forget the satisfaction that is brought in risk-taking, commitment, sharing, and building for generations to follow. It enriches every moment of life. That's why I am fighting to reverse the trend by developing an alternative to regulatory government.

[tberry]

"But before September 11, he expanded the role of the Federal government into gift-giving, a clearly unconstitutional intrusion that will profoundly impact private charities; has promised "amnesty" to millions of illegal immigrants, thereby assuring the next wave of terrorists will have a home; and managed to strong-arm Red China into the WTO, thereby ensuring America's enemies will continues to supply her goods, and continuing the crippling of American manufacturing. And bailing out the airline industry was an abomination (and showed a disturbing lack of creativity to boot). "

And all of this is still his plan and goals. We are in much more danger now from these proclivities because 9-11 has stirred up such a fascist nationalism that whatever he does, no matter how ultimately destructive, are being embraced by those who call themselves conservatives.