T Nation

Socialism

What is the difference between Socialism and the Democratic platform?

What a EXCELLENT question this is!! And to answer it, we need to define the what socialism is. and stands for vs. democracy…

Taken from…

http://www.naspino.com/entry.php?id=72_0_1_0

"…The Socialist Party of the United States opposes the Bush Doctrine and the war on terrorism. It calls for unconditional amnesty for all illegal aliens and the granting of all entitlements to said illegal aliens. It seeks the abolition of the death penalty, a strong criminal prosecution for corporate misconduct and “privileged” individuals. It seeks the expansion of community release programs, alternatives to prisons, and a moratorium on all new prison construction. It also seeks support services for prisoners and prisoners’ families to “reduce ostracism, maintain family ties, and provide for non-degrading visitation policies.” It seeks oversight for all police departments, with the stated reason being to investigate “police brutality”. It supports buyout programs for gun ownership and the prohibiting of weapons whose sole purpose is not for hunting or self-protection.

Continuing, the Socialist Party of the United States supports “comparable worth laws” regarding human rights, support and expansion of unions, support for twenty-four hour childcare facilities, support for community education to combat violence. It supports the “right” of women to birth control supplies and to all forms of abortion. It supports rotating leadership resulting in gender and racial balance. It opposes declaring English the official language of the United States. It calls for the repeal of all sodomy laws, gay restrictions, and the legalization of same-sex marriage. It fully supports the Americans with Disabilities Act, the creation of a network to track people with physical, mental, and developmental disabilities, and of course, the continuation of Social Security benefits.

The Socialist Party of the United States supports the creation of publicly funded and Democrat controlled senior centers, publicly funded retirement income, and senior advocates for tracking and monitoring of the elderly, for the expressed purpose of ensuring their rights. It opposes measures to increase responsibilities on youth, an end to military recruitment, and mandatory allowances for children. It supports free democratically controlled quality care and education for all children. It states that it supports the rights of parents, grandparents, and all other caring adults to share in the child rearing process.

Socialism perceives a person as the property of the general government, the rights of which are given and withdrawn at their discretion. This is why they state that they will allow parents to share in their child’s rearing process, unless of course they deem the parent a danger - which by the way is not inconsistent with the “Child Protective Act” - just ask the mother of Logan Marr."

“…The Socialist Party of the United States supports a national health care program publicly funded through “progressive” taxation and controlled by democratically elected boards. These democratically elected boards replace direct representation on a wide range of issues. It seeks to give special attention to the mentally and physically disabled, and call for the full funding of AIDS research. It seeks to enlarge public investment in the construction of low-cost public housing, rent control, tenet unions, and housing cooperatives…” “…the socialists consider children to be their future, understandable since grown-ups do not vote for them…”

Socialists have established government programs over the last sixty years to control every aspect of our lives. What radio programs we can listen to, what foods we can eat, what cars we can drive, and so on, but their most prized and influential program has been the Department of Education, which now oversees what our children believe, not only about their nation, but also about their individuality, their morality, and their family.

Like its predecessor, the Socialist Party of the United States is also interested in the welfare of children. It calls for the full public funding of education at all levels and an end to school vouchers that weaken the public education system. It supports public funding of childcare from infancy, with caregivers and educators receiving the same pay at all levels of the educational system. It opposes school competition and the measurement of student performance in relation to their advancement opportunities. It calls for fewer students per teacher, student input in to both curriculum formation and the hiring and dismissal of teachers. It calls for the free and public ownership of all databases of information.

Finally, the Socialist Party of the United States calls for a fifty percent reduction in the military. The existing makeup of the military presents a problem for socialists because it is comprised of, what they affectionately refer to as, cowboys. Therefore, military reduction likely means a pop-quiz for military personnel on the benefits of socialism and those that pass get to stay. It calls for the disbanding of NATO and “other aggressive military alliances”, and the closing of all overseas bases. Further, they call for the abolition of the counter-intelligence agency, the national security agency, and all other institutions of warfare. It calls for close working relations and dialogue with “like-minded” socialist organizations. It calls for a secular United States to promote “international solidarity”. It calls for the allocation of all tax generated national revenue to fund world social services such as health care, education, housing, and mass transit. It calls for the United States to end its “domination” of the United Nations, to pay off its debts to all foreign nations, to drop its veto power in the United Nations, and to remove itself as a permanent member of the Security Counsel…"

I would love to post more from this website…but it is too long but, it is a exceptional article…But it gives one real insight as to what socialists on th emain issues do and do not stand for…

Joe

Thank you chucksmanjoe for showing what we are facing in our great country and the world. I’m sure the framers of our constitution are spinning in their graves. I have to admit that I thought voting was enough to make this country work, but it is not, we must stand up to the liberal losers and let them know in no uncertain terms, that we will be happy to fight to maintain our way of life. To put this in T-Nation terms: these are the people cheat curling 5#'s in the squat rack who become indignant when you ask them if you could “work in”! Recognize anyone on our forums?

[quote]lincono wrote:
What is the difference between Socialism and the Democratic platform?[/quote]

Aparently nothing.

Chucksmanjo:

An excellent reply!

[quote]Cory089 wrote:
lincono wrote:
What is the difference between Socialism and the Democratic platform?

Apparently nothing.[/quote]

Thank you!

Appreciate lmc and Zeb, the kind remarks you made about my reply. For it really does show what Socialists here in the United States really do stand for. And we can literally see by the article, and that website, the direction John Kerry will be taking tje country in…

ANd here on a website I found several articles, which clearly show how far left John Kerry is, and who is endorsing his canidency as President:

http://www.irnnews.com/news.asp?action=detail&article=2706

Socialists back Kerry
By: John Russell | Source: IRN NEWS
July 27, 2004 6:15PM EST


Aside from a failed economic theory what do the American Communist Party and Democratic Socialists of America have in common? Well for this election at least, it?s John Kerry. They are urging their followers to vote for the Democratic Party?s candidate. Frank Llewellyn, Director of the socialists says, ??the most important concern of our members now is to defeat Bush.? Up until now the socialists had backed Dennis Kucinich in his lackluster run for the Democratic nomination.
Beijing dictators back Kerry for president
By: John Russell | Source: IRN NEWS
July 29, 2004 6:11PM EST

The Kerry campaign has picked up the enthusiastic endorsement of the communist dictators in Beijing. The endorsement is being publicized in the government-controlled press, the ?People?s Daily?. The red Chinese say that Kerry has said he won?t defend the free Chinese on the island of Taiwan. They also approve of Kerry?s promise to subvert U.S. national interests to those of the U.N. and to seek the approval foreign governments before America acts in areas of foreign policy.

July 23, 2004

The Democratic Socialists of America Political Action Committee (DSAPAC) released a statement today urging its members to work for the election of John Kerry in the 2004 presidential election.

21 May, 2004 – The Communist Party USA (CPUSA) publishes its
“Top 10 Reasons to Defeat Bush” Talking Points Guideline .
“Kerry reflects a liberal agenda, his campaign represents a moderate-progressive coalition.
He is not left. He is the vehicle by which George W. Bush,
representing the most extreme reaction, can be defeated.”

And here are the top 10 reasons:

http://www.cpusa.org/article/articleview/585/1/27/

  1. Bush is destroying workers rights and outsourcing jobs instead of protecting the right to organize and creating new jobs rebuilding schools, bridges, roads and hospitals

  2. Bush is privatizing Medicare, Social Security and public education with phony reforms instead of enacting health care for all, protecting retirement funds and full funding for public education through college.

  3. Bush is bankrupting the Federal Government with giant tax cuts for the very rich and super-funds to the military instead of securing the budget for human needs by taxing the rich and spending on human needs.

  4. Bush is rolling back civil rights gains instead of enforcing and expanding affirmative action to end racism in all areas of life.

  5. Bush is curtailing women’s rights and choice by undermining Roe v. Wade instead of upholding the right to choice and ending the gender wage gap.

  6. Bush is abusing immigrant workers in low-wage jobs instead of providing a clear path to citizenship and equal rights.

  7. Bush is exploiting and ruining the environment by protecting corporate polluters instead of conserving our natural resources for the public good.

  8. Bush’s war in Iraq is a disaster for our security and economy. He is pushing for more preemptive wars and for first strike nuclear military policy instead of negotiations and cooperation utilizing the UN.

  9. Bush is denying civil liberties and free speech in the name of fighting terrorism instead of repealing the USA Patriot Act and helping cities, towns and states fund firefighters and police.

  10. Bush discriminates against Gays and Lesbians with a Constitutional Amendment instead of expanding civil rights and liberties for all.

July, 2004 – Kerry-Edwards ticket endorsed by the
“Godless Americans Political Action Committee” (GAMPAC).

30 July, 2004 – Kerry wins endorsement from Sandanista leaders
John Kerry has picked up the endorsement of a terrorist-friendly Sandinista leader
notorious for his brutality when his old Communist regime ruled Nicaragua.

So in reality a vote for Kerry-Edwards is a vote in support of the Communist Party USA agenda. As well as the Socialists around the world. Just think if CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC, ran something like this??

Joe

Heres another question, when conservatives always bash the left for containing socialism why do they forget the right contains fascism and nationalism?

There are a lot of people calling themselves socialist when they’re really not. Instead, they’re fascists and nationalists and just plain old anarchists. The USSR, for example, was a Union of Soviet Socialist Republics; the Nazis were the National Socialist German Workers’ Party; socialism has really turned into something of a dirty word.

Unfortunately, socialism is the most fair and balanced idea yet in terms of government styles. Where the people can take care of themselves, you let them. Where the people cannot do anything at all, you do it for them. Where the people cannot do enough, you help them.

But since we’ve contaminated the word with so many stupid political movements and philosophies, calling yourself “socialist” either labels you as a complete maniac, or begins to attract a following composed of complete maniacs. The true meaning of socialism has been buried under such a tremendous load of bullshit, you can’t really extricate it to stand on its own. Instead, you have to deal with all that bullshit, too.

So, as I’m sure you’ve already noticed, Cory089 is completely right. [GDR]

Nice one John!

Its funny. Nigaragua was a great country once. The world banks hailed its progress during the 80s as ‘remarkable… laying a solid foundation for for long term socio-economic devlopement’ - Inter-American Development Bank. UNICEF stated in 1986 that with regards to healthcare Nicaragua had ‘one of the most dramatic improvements in child survival in the devolping world’. Sandinista has been trying to rebuild a country falsely accused of being a Communist threat to the US. Nicaragua wanted to develop succesfully and provide a role model for others, as stated by Sandinista leader Tomas Borg. This was taken in the anti-left paranoia of the Reagan era (and the rest of the cold war, and even today) to mean a revolution without borders. Now, were the Sandinistas brutal? Yes, but who to? The US backed terrorists who were attempting to overthrow the government. Wow, the Sandinistas faught their enemy, who the hell would do that? And because the enemy was either US troops or US backed militia that makes them terrorists too I guess. Its just all a big propaganda farce that cost Nicaraguan lives by the bucket full. There is no point painting the Sandinistas as some evil Saddam Hussein style group who killed anyone who stood in his way. They faught back when they were attacked, and they were attacked by the US.

[quote]JohnGullick wrote:
Heres another question, when conservatives always bash the left for containing socialism why do they forget the right contains fascism and nationalism?[/quote]

Agreed, most of the “isms” are problematic, but the issue today is the political pendulum; our world is too far left of the political center, and we need to move it back to the right.

When I asked the original question many weeks ago, I was hoping the ultra liberals on this forum would answer the question, but I believe their silence speaks loud and clear.

Sorry, but I expect they have been so busy laughing they couldn’t be bothered posting.

Any more gems to unload on everyone?

lincomo,

Hillary Clinton, the acknowledged front-runner for the Democrats in 2008 said, “We are going to take things away from you for the common good.”

I would create one ad in 2008. It would play in every market, every day. It would have Hillary’s picture next to this quote. Then, I would have Mao, Stalin, Lenin, and Castro with their pictures next to the exact same quote. Each picture would have a date and location showing when each of them made the exact same statement.

Hope this has answered your question,

JeffR

Thanks, JeffR, but you are not an ultraliberal, and you are preaching to the choir!! The post before yours is typical of an ultra liberal; no real facts, but plenty of yak, yak, yak. Again, UL’s, what is the difference between socialism and the democratic party of today?

[quote]JeffR wrote:
lincomo,

Hillary Clinton, the acknowledged front-runner for the Democrats in 2008 said, “We are going to take things away from you for the common good.”

I would create one ad in 2008. It would play in every market, every day. It would have Hillary’s picture next to this quote. Then, I would have Mao, Stalin, Lenin, and Castro with their pictures next to the exact same quote. Each picture would have a date and location showing when each of them made the exact same statement.

Hope this has answered your question,

JeffR[/quote]

Post the link to this quote by Hilary. Just curious where and when it was said…thanks.

Surely you have a link, don’t you?

RSU,

Glad to be of service!!!

Here you go: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/news/archive/2004/06/28/politics2039EDT0165.DTL&type=printable

It was very revealing searching for a source you wouldn’t impugn. I wanted to make sure it was either neutral or liberal leaning. The Associated Press could never be called conservative.

Interestingly, I found a ton of conservative leaning internet sites and a few conservative leaning media sources that reported on this. The interesting part is how much difficulty I had in finding it in CNN, MSNBC, NBC, etc… I just couldn’t find it. Maybe you would have more luck than I.

Please let me know if I can help you out again.

Your pal,

JeffR

Woohoo, I’m apparently an ultra-liberal now, does this mean I am supposed to organize violent protests or something, I’m not sure what this entails…

Socialist = Michael Moore :slight_smile:

These socialists aren’t half bad at all…