As Dems Embrace Socialism, Americans and even ‘Socialist’ Countries Reject It

[Swordsmyth]

If Democrats are going to run in 2020 on a platform of driving the U.S. into socialism, they are likely to get thumped hard at the ballot box. Results of a Monmouth University Poll released this week show that 57 percent of the country says socialism is not compatible with American values. Only 29 percent say it is.

It’s alarming that socialism has penetrated as deeply as it has into our politics. For decades, Americans clearly understood what socialism is, and widely rejected it. And, despite the media’s grade-school infatuation with socialist politicians and policies, maybe they still are. The Monmouth poll found that only 10 percent of Americans hold a positive view of socialism.
Yet every Democratic candidate has to identify as a comrade in the struggle if he or she is to pick up any traction. When Noah Wall from FreedomWorks wrote in the Washington Examiner three months ago that the Democratic Party was in a socialist spiral, he was exactly right.
We need to be clear — and fully honest — about what socialism is. It’s coercion. It’s compulsion. It’s the threat and use of force. It robs its free people of choice and enslaves them. Socialism is anti-liberty, pro-servility, and soul-crushing. Its servants live in misery while those in power live in luxury.
Of course America’s Democrats say that their version of socialism is democratic socialism — not that nasty stuff that’s killed and maimed in Cuba, North Korea, and Venezuela. They want to emulate the systems of Scandinavia.
But Sweden, Norway, and Denmark are not socialist countries. They are welfare states paid for by the market economies of those nations — and the defense budget of the United States.
And they’re not even the welfare states they once were. Sweden has reformed its system because the Swedes realized more than 20 years ago its welfare state was not sustainable. Denmark has also moved to cut dependency on public dollars. Norway could have never supported its welfare programs for decades if it’s economy had not been fed by oil revenue — a stream of dollars that Democrats would cut off if they could because they want to impose a New Green Deal on the world, not just the U.S.

Today’s Democrats, both captured and captivated by Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders and the appallingly childish Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, aren’t interested in market economies. They want the economy to be centrally controlled — a hallmark of the Soviet Union, Cuba, and China before modest liberalization arrived and released millions from socialist misery in that country. Central planning wrecked Venezuela’s economy just as it razed the economies of Eastern European nations that were within the Soviet sphere.
But few learn, which is why Greece and Spain are also casualties of socialism.

More at: https://issuesinsights.com/2019/05/0...ies-reject-it/

[timosman]

Subversion.

[ATruepatriot]

Very educational article. Lays out the facts very well.

[ATruepatriot]

Jules... Come read this if you dare. lol

[juleswin]

If Democrats are going to run in 2020 on a platform of driving the U.S. into socialism, they are likely to get thumped hard at the ballot box. Results of a Monmouth University Poll released this week show that 57 percent of the country says socialism is not compatible with American values. Only 29 percent say it is.

It’s alarming that socialism has penetrated as deeply as it has into our politics. For decades, Americans clearly understood what socialism is, and widely rejected it. And, despite the media’s grade-school infatuation with socialist politicians and policies, maybe they still are. The Monmouth poll found that only 10 percent of Americans hold a positive view of socialism.
Yet every Democratic candidate has to identify as a comrade in the struggle if he or she is to pick up any traction. When Noah Wall from FreedomWorks wrote in the Washington Examiner three months ago that the Democratic Party was in a socialist spiral, he was exactly right.
We need to be clear — and fully honest — about what socialism is. It’s coercion. It’s compulsion. It’s the threat and use of force. It robs its free people of choice and enslaves them. Socialism is anti-liberty, pro-servility, and soul-crushing. Its servants live in misery while those in power live in luxury.
Of course America’s Democrats say that their version of socialism is democratic socialism — not that nasty stuff that’s killed and maimed in Cuba, North Korea, and Venezuela. They want to emulate the systems of Scandinavia.
But Sweden, Norway, and Denmark are not socialist countries. They are welfare states paid for by the market economies of those nations — and the defense budget of the United States.
And they’re not even the welfare states they once were. Sweden has reformed its system because the Swedes realized more than 20 years ago its welfare state was not sustainable. Denmark has also moved to cut dependency on public dollars. Norway could have never supported its welfare programs for decades if it’s economy had not been fed by oil revenue — a stream of dollars that Democrats would cut off if they could because they want to impose a New Green Deal on the world, not just the U.S.

Today’s Democrats, both captured and captivated by Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders and the appallingly childish Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, aren’t interested in market economies. They want the economy to be centrally controlled — a hallmark of the Soviet Union, Cuba, and China before modest liberalization arrived and released millions from socialist misery in that country. Central planning wrecked Venezuela’s economy just as it razed the economies of Eastern European nations that were within the Soviet sphere.
But few learn, which is why Greece and Spain are also casualties of socialism.

More at: https://issuesinsights.com/2019/05/0...ies-reject-it/

I was going to breakdown this article @ATruepatriot feels that I need to read paragraph by paragraph. But I am just to lazy to do the same work that I have done so many times before.

I get tired whenever these people give examples of socialist countries, they always go for the same Cuba, Venezuela and North Korea i.e. countries that are heavily embargoed, sanctioned and under military threat from the US. They never tell you Saudi Arabia, Libya, Scandinavian countries, some Western European countries with high taxes, universal post secondary education and govt pensions. Speaking of Scandinavian countries, they wanna tell you that they are not socialist countries despite the fact that most of em have universal healthcare, govt pain post secondary education and all sorts of welfare programs. So if they are not a socialist countries with all those socialist programs, why can't the US do the same?

[ATruepatriot]

I was going to breakdown this article @ATruepatriot feels that I need to read paragraph by paragraph. But I am just to lazy to do the same work that I have done so many times before.

I get tired whenever these people give examples of socialist countries, they always go for the same Cuba, Venezuela and North Korea i.e. countries that are heavily embargoed, sanctioned and under military threat from the US. They never tell you Saudi Arabia, Libya, Scandinavian countries, some Western European countries with high taxes, universal post secondary education and govt pensions. Speaking of Scandinavian countries, they wanna tell you that they are not socialist countries despite the fact that most of em have universal healthcare, govt pain post secondary education and all sorts of welfare programs. So if they are not a socialist countries with all those socialist programs, why can't the US do the same?

Denial of reality.

[Swordsmyth]

I was going to breakdown this article @ATruepatriot feels that I need to read paragraph by paragraph. But I am just to lazy to do the same work that I have done so many times before.

I get tired whenever these people give examples of socialist countries, they always go for the same Cuba, Venezuela and North Korea i.e. countries that are heavily embargoed, sanctioned and under military threat from the US. They never tell you Saudi Arabia, Libya, Scandinavian countries, some Western European countries with high taxes, universal post secondary education and govt pensions. Speaking of Scandinavian countries, they wanna tell you that they are not socialist countries despite the fact that most of em have universal healthcare, govt pain post secondary education and all sorts of welfare programs. So if they are not a socialist countries with all those socialist programs, why can't the US do the same?

Because it is bad for the economy and freedom, those countries would be much better off if they didn't do those things.

SA and the European countries can only afford those things because the US provides them with their defense needs paid for by our less socialists system, Libya was not exactly a booming economy with liberty and justice for all and neither are SA and the European countries and building your entire system on oil money as several of those countries have done will come back to bite them.

[juleswin]

Because it is bad for the economy and freedom, those countries would be much better off if they didn't do those things.

SA and the European countries can only afford those things because the US provides them with their defense needs paid for by our less socialists system, Libya was not exactly a booming economy with liberty and justice for all and neither are SA and the European countries and building your entire system on oil money as several of those countries have done will come back to bite them.

How about Scandinavian countries? they don't all have oil. They all at least have universal healthcare and free post secondary education and yet your side wants us to believe that they are not socialist countries. My question is why cant the US keep its capitalist system and just use the profit to fund those govt goodies just like they do it in those Scandinavian countries?

Libya had a relatively booming economy despite the fact that US placed economic sanction on the country for years.

[juleswin]

Denial of reality.

btw, this is how to get someone's attention to a post. Put @ before their names so they get a notification to it. Like @juleswin

[Swordsmyth]

How about Scandinavian countries? they don't all have oil. They all at least have universal healthcare and free post secondary education and yet your side wants us to believe that they are not socialist countries. My question is why cant the US keep its capitalist system and just use the profit to fund those govt goodies just like they do it in those Scandinavian countries?

Libya had a relatively booming economy despite the fact that US placed economic sanction on the country for years.

Read it again:

Originally Posted by Swordsmyth

Because it is bad for the economy and freedom, those countries would be much better off if they didn't do those things.

SA and the European countries can only afford those things because the US provides them with their defense needs paid for by our less socialists system, Libya was not exactly a booming economy with liberty and justice for all and neither are SA and the European countries and building your entire system on oil money as several of those countries have done will come back to bite them.

[timosman]

btw, this is how to get someone's attention to a post. Put @ before their names so they get a notification to it. Like @juleswin

Not required if quoting.

[Swordsmyth]

Denial of reality.

Or a dedicated communist propagandist.

He has slowly increased his advocacy for communism/socialism in the time I have been here.

[ATruepatriot]

How about Scandinavian countries? they don't all have oil. They all at least have universal healthcare and free post secondary education and yet your side wants us to believe that they are not socialist countries. My question is why cant the US keep its capitalist system and just use the profit to fund those govt goodies just like they do it in those Scandinavian countries?

Libya had a relatively booming economy despite the fact that US placed economic sanction on the country for years.

That was Ron Paul's crazy ass plan, General prosperity instead of general poverty so that welfare isn't needed. But this makes too much sense and you can't control the people with this concept. Can't you connect the dots?

[juleswin]

Not required if quoting.

Look at the his post above, I don't think he knows how to use the mention function.

Jules... Come read this if you dare. lol

But now he knows, all thanks to me

[ATruepatriot]

btw, this is how to get someone's attention to a post. Put @ before their names so they get a notification to it. Like @juleswin

I knew you were lurking...

[oyarde]

If Democrats are going to run in 2020 on a platform of driving the U.S. into socialism, they are likely to get thumped hard at the ballot box. Results of a Monmouth University Poll released this week show that 57 percent of the country says socialism is not compatible with American values. Only 29 percent say it is.

It’s alarming that socialism has penetrated as deeply as it has into our politics. For decades, Americans clearly understood what socialism is, and widely rejected it. And, despite the media’s grade-school infatuation with socialist politicians and policies, maybe they still are. The Monmouth poll found that only 10 percent of Americans hold a positive view of socialism.
Yet every Democratic candidate has to identify as a comrade in the struggle if he or she is to pick up any traction. When Noah Wall from FreedomWorks wrote in the Washington Examiner three months ago that the Democratic Party was in a socialist spiral, he was exactly right.
We need to be clear — and fully honest — about what socialism is. It’s coercion. It’s compulsion. It’s the threat and use of force. It robs its free people of choice and enslaves them. Socialism is anti-liberty, pro-servility, and soul-crushing. Its servants live in misery while those in power live in luxury.
Of course America’s Democrats say that their version of socialism is democratic socialism — not that nasty stuff that’s killed and maimed in Cuba, North Korea, and Venezuela. They want to emulate the systems of Scandinavia.
But Sweden, Norway, and Denmark are not socialist countries. They are welfare states paid for by the market economies of those nations — and the defense budget of the United States.
And they’re not even the welfare states they once were. Sweden has reformed its system because the Swedes realized more than 20 years ago its welfare state was not sustainable. Denmark has also moved to cut dependency on public dollars. Norway could have never supported its welfare programs for decades if it’s economy had not been fed by oil revenue — a stream of dollars that Democrats would cut off if they could because they want to impose a New Green Deal on the world, not just the U.S.

Today’s Democrats, both captured and captivated by Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders and the appallingly childish Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, aren’t interested in market economies. They want the economy to be centrally controlled — a hallmark of the Soviet Union, Cuba, and China before modest liberalization arrived and released millions from socialist misery in that country. Central planning wrecked Venezuela’s economy just as it razed the economies of Eastern European nations that were within the Soviet sphere.
But few learn, which is why Greece and Spain are also casualties of socialism.

More at: https://issuesinsights.com/2019/05/0...ies-reject-it/

i can give the root cause for this . In the article " For decades , Americans clearly understood what socialism is " . Well in those decades people worked hard and expected to work hard to get what they wanted. They did not expect people to give them free $#@! . Socialists are just losers who want free $#@! . A kick in the nuts is what they deserve .

[ATruepatriot]

Not required if quoting.

No need because I knew Jules was lurking about and would read it.

[Swordsmyth]

i can give the root cause for this . In the article " For decades , Americans clearly understood what socialism is " . Well in those decades people worked hard and expected to work hard to get what they wanted. They did not expect people to give them free $#@! . Socialists are just losers who want free $#@! . A kick in the nuts is what they deserve .

^^^THIS^^^

[ATruepatriot]

i can give the root cause for this . In the article " For decades , Americans clearly understood what socialism is " . Well in those decades people worked hard and expected to work hard to get what they wanted. They did not expect people to give them free $#@! . Socialists are just losers who want free $#@! . A kick in the nuts is what they deserve .

Hear hear! That is a fact!

[juleswin]

Read it again:

So you believe the US is using tax payers money to finance social programs in other countries(not true) and for some reason, the US doing the same for her citizens annoys you more than the US financing socialism in other countries.

I dunno man, but if the US is truly the reason why many countries can afford their welfare programs then I will be more worried about that than the prospect of US govt implementing said programs for her citizens

[Schifference]

How about Scandinavian countries? they don't all have oil. They all at least have universal healthcare and free post secondary education and yet your side wants us to believe that they are not socialist countries. My question is why cant the US keep its capitalist system and just use the profit to fund those govt goodies just like they do it in those Scandinavian countries?

Libya had a relatively booming economy despite the fact that US placed economic sanction on the country for years.

If socialist countries are so good, why not move there?

[ATruepatriot]

i can give the root cause for this . In the article " For decades , Americans clearly understood what socialism is " . Well in those decades people worked hard and expected to work hard to get what they wanted. They did not expect people to give them free $#@! . Socialists are just losers who want free $#@! . A kick in the nuts is what they deserve .

A move towards prosperity and productivity means they will have to get a job! They are working very hard to prevent this god awful concept.

[Swordsmyth]

So you believe the US is using tax payers money to finance social programs in other countries(not true)

It is true, we pay for their defense costs.

and for some reason, the US doing the same for her citizens annoys you more than the US financing socialism in other countries.

I dunno man, but if the US is truly the reason why many countries can afford their welfare programs then I will be more worried about that than the prospect of US govt implementing said programs for her citizens

About the same actually but it is slightly worse at home because you get the bad effects of teaching people to be lazy and depend on the government at home.

[Swordsmyth]

If socialist countries are so good, why not move there?

Yes Jules, PLEASE DO!

[oyarde]

A move towards prosperity and productivity means they will have to get a job! They are working very hard to prevent this god awful concept.

Correct . Most people can with discipline work themselves out of nearly everything bad . For those very few with serious , legitimate health issues that cannot that is where the private charity of churches etc fills the gap . There is no role for govt to redistribute .

[juleswin]

If socialist countries are so good, why not move there?

I am not a socialist and I have said on many occasions that socialism is a less efficient way of running an economy. This is why virtually all the countries in existence has a mix of socialism and capitalism.

And even if I was a socialist, I would still prefer to live in a country that the US will not strike. The warphillic nation that is the US is so ill tempered that just about any country that doesn't completely bow to her is at risk of getting bombed or sanctioned into poverty.

[Schifference]

I am not a socialist and I have said on many occasions that socialism is a less efficient way of running an economy. This is why virtually all the countries in existence has a mix of socialism and capitalism.

And even if I was a socialist, I would still prefer to live in a country that the US will not strike. The warphillic nation that is the US is so ill tempered that just about any country that doesn't completely bow to her is at risk of getting bombed or sanctioned into poverty.

Sounds like you love it to hate it.

[ATruepatriot]

Correct . Most people can with discipline work themselves out of nearly everything bad . For those very few with serious , legitimate health issues that cannot that is where the private charity of churches etc fills the gap . There is no role for govt to redistribute .

I did it twice. I was homeless a couple times and worked my way back into an apartment with a full fridge within two months. Not a dime of charity from anyone including the government.

[juleswin]

i can give the root cause for this . In the article " For decades , Americans clearly understood what socialism is " . Well in those decades people worked hard and expected to work hard to get what they wanted. They did not expect people to give them free $#@! . Socialists are just losers who want free $#@! . A kick in the nuts is what they deserve .

I think most people do not know what socialism is. They have free primary education, social security, medicare under their noses that they love and yet they still feign the idea that they hate socialism. You are already living in a quasi socialist country, stop pretending that you really hate it.

Also, what did you greatest generation do to fight social security? I hear they do not want to get free shyte.

[juleswin]

Sounds like you love it to hate it.

Love what?