Special Opinion to the Mirror by Chas Cornweller
These are the days that I wish Americans were braver than we are. What I mean by that is, special interests have so ingrained themselves into the fabric of who we are, most Americans cannot even recognize when and why they are voting against their own self-interest. And yes, I am talking about Democrats voting for the guy who presents himself as a moderate, safe and firmly planted in the middle of all issues. When in reality we all know he stands with Corporations, the ongoing game of craps nightmare that is Wall Street and the continual bleeding of the middle class by leechlike taxes, roller coaster economies and endless wars.
How many Americans still alive, remember the depression of the thirties? How many are still alive who not only lived through it, but benefited from the policies of that era? How many alive today can name the programs that pulled our collected asses from the ash heap of a ruined economy and set this nation on a corrective course for a productive society? Unless you are a student of history and or an economist, probably not many. The term Socialism has been bantered about a lot lately. And mostly, it has been used incorrectly and in extreme cases used as a battering ram to accost the left. The startling truth is, the fabric of American economics is woven with the thread of socialism, whether we want to acknowledge it or not. And it mainly stems from the progressive policies of FDR and the failed economic experiment that was America in the twenties.
Socialism in America presents itself as Welfare Subsidies. That is a fact. And as someone who supports this, I cannot deny the truth of it. But who thrives from these subsidies? Who reaps the benefits of the lion’s share? Do America’s poor? How about immigrants and “illegals” or those that enter this country by skirting the “system” eluding the net that would disseminate and therefore either assimilate or deport them? What about those who work but still live below the Well, in actuality, Energy related corporations received a total of 8.4 billion dollars in 2016. In 2017, farmers received 11.5 billion in subsidies or 15% of 75.1 billion in total farm income. Ford, General Motors, Fiat Chrysler Auto and Boeing received a combined total of over 21.3 billion dollars in subsidies. Nike, Intel, Alcoa’s combined total reaches 11.54 billion dollars in subsidies. For a combined total of over 52.7 billion in corporate welfare. I call it that, because that is what it is. These corporations are all blue-chip corporations that live in the public domain on Wall Street and make a yearly profit. In other words, our government is manipulating the crap game with these numbers. Our money. This is not to mention the money our government pays out to other countries. Or money that is bantered about within the Pentagon and our national security in the form of navies, armies and the air forces. Yes, these are ALL social programs.
Now, for those of you who may want to challenge my point about our standing Army, please read Article One, Section Eight, Clause Twelve of the Constitution first before doing so. Yes, I understand to pay the debts and to provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States. Yes, I understand the laying and collection of taxes and excises to pay for this standing army and/or common defense. Again, read clause twelve. And yes, to provide a safety net for agriculture and education, this is what general welfare clause eluded to. And of course, the argument is much larger and broader than I intend on going into now, suffice to say, the National Bank and its establishment and the implications of a central government versus individual states. That said, fast forward to today, with the Federal Government, Federal Reserve (which is actually not even a governmental agency), Federal Bureau of Investigation, National Security Agency, Central Intelligence Agency and Federal Emergency Management Agency, to name just a small percentage of centralized agencies you and I pay for. These are all a form of socialized programs that have been enacted over the course of decades to solidify the power behind the central few who have dominion over the mass majority. Any authoritarian government has developed some form of these programs. Any authoritarian government has developed this. From worst case scenarios with communist Russia in 1917 and Germany with the NAZI party in 1933 to Great Britain, first with royalty coupled with the House of Commons and a political system guaranteed to perpetuate lorded power over the populace. It’s a fact and a necessary evil to ensure order and a sense of well-being. Otherwise, the alternative is anarchy.
But, the elephant in the room is this; within any form of centralized government you have the corruption of the human component to which authority is handed. With human characteristics and flaws, any number of corruptions can set in and take root. Communism, for anyone who has read the history of Friedrich Engels and Karl Marx, in its purest form is the perfect Utopian concept in which everyone flourishes. There is no argument. I intentionally did not say prospers, as that would be detrimental to the concept for which it is initiated. Democracy, as well, is the fairest in selection of authority and rulers or a ruler, giving each individual a vote and therefore a voice in his or her government. A Republic, too, is fair in that all of its people are incorporated into a government, however run, into a singular or centralized unit, protected and ruled. But the moment the human element is introduced, you have introduced the flaws of men. Greed, avarice, and even mental illness in the form of paranoia or self-possessed cruelty or intolerance can have such an adverse effect as to bring an entire nation to its knees. It has happened in the past and no doubt will happen again.
My point is this. Any form of government has its flaws. Our form of government once worked for a certain group of people. It enabled the middle class to grow and thrive. It also encouraged a class of people to amass great wealth on the backs and labors of many, many people. Our government has built roads, fire stations, police stations, schools, other great institutions of higher learning and wonderful halls and theaters from which our people can take pride of our own national heritage. Many were paid for by our taxes. These great projects were socialism in action. Socialism is an integral part of our nation’s sustained growth. Socialism is necessary to form, build and maintain a fire department, a police station, highway construction, care for the elderly, care for the unborn. It enables those with the brains and the passion, but not the income to achieve greater things. It rebuilds towns and cities wrecked by natural disaster. It conducts the research for discovery for new medicines and fund the engineering science that once took us to the moon. If you fear socialism, you truly do not understand what it can do. You do not understand what it has already done. You do not understand the mechanism of a Social Contract.
What you should fear is not socialism nor the programs, but those that want to take them away, those that demonize them. Put them on the public shelf for private consumption and profit and narrow those fields so that only a few are able to partake. While all the while they make profits on your ill health. They make profits on your freedoms. They make profits on sending your sons and daughters to war. They make profits on your miseries. Socialism levels the field. It helps to evenly distribute that what is already accessible to us. It enables those who want to do better, contribute more, to do so. It lessens the authoritative hand in revoking freedom and voice. Socialism gives rise to justice and lessens the burden that corruption brings from high, on the common man. “Socialism is a scare word they have hurled at every advance the people have made in the last twenty years. Socialism is what they call public power. Socialism is what they called Social Security. Socialism is what they called farm price supports. Socialism is what they called bank security deposit insurance. Socialism is what they called the growth of free and independent labor organizations. Socialism is their name for almost anything that helps all the people.” Harry S. Truman New York speech titled Rear Platform and Other Informal Remarks dated October 10, 1952.
This past week, and I am sure in the coming months, my fellow Americans will fearfully and obtusely enter into a new phase in American history. One where the reins of power will be handed willfully and intentionally to an authoritative oligarchy. Handed over to a group of elderly white men whose power and moneyed interest are destined to eventually bring this nation to its knees, perhaps along with the rest of world as well. They care not one wit about the working man and working woman. They care not one wit about the children nor the generations that possibly may come after them. They only care for their moment in the sun today, their self-interests, and the power structure they have so carefully nurtured and crafted. And should that power structure begin to shift and crack, then be rest assured, you will eventually see and experience the full fury of humanity without conscience, humanity run off the rails, with all its flaws, and all of its darkness, and all of the godlessness man can conjure to injure his fellow man. All of this will be done because we, as a people, voted with fear. We voted with trepidation instead of faith. We voted with our pocketbooks and bank accounts instead of our morality. We voted self-interest over the common good for all. For they sow the wind, they shall reap the whirlwind.
Mike BenAvi, (aka brother of the late Paul Skolnick)a says
Thank you Mr. Cornweller. For hitting the nail on its head.
Paul Plante says
One might indeed ask how it is that the people of America, known today as cud-chewers or consumers, have become so ignorant and cowardly as they are today as our dear friend Chas Cornweller makes clear with his lament about “(T)hese are the days that I wish Americans were braver than we are.”
I for one would like to hear that topic get better developed in here, because as a member of this fractured and disjointed and faltering society here in America, I would like to know from Chas what he sees as the causative factors, and whether it is not already too late to reverse that trend towards ignorance and cowardice that has clearly set in among the populace here in America.
I of course have my own thoughts and ideas, but what I would appreciate is how Chas sees it.
And let it be clear on the record that when our dear friend and fellow American patriot Chas Cornweller states “(T)hese are the days that I wish Americans were braver than we are,” his “we” is not all inclusive and certainly does not extend to me.
I am not one of the ignorant cowards our dear friend Chas makes mention of right in the beginning sentence of his above tome that you have put your imprimatur on.
While the many might be ignorant cowards as Chas so eloquently points out above, not all of us yet are, and some of us are active resisters to the trend towards ignorance and cowardice in America.
And my condolences with regard to your brother.
Paul Plante says
Socialism, my dear friend, Chas, is a nine-letter word that alone uses up twenty-seven percent of the average 33-character TWEET on TWITTER, and as we can see from a quick review of the subject on Wikipedia, the word “socialism” has no concrete meaning, which is probably why it is not well understood, especially among the brain-dead people in America who can now only barely assemble 33 characters in a TWEET before their mental capacity is reached and overloaded.
First off, dear friend Chas, the term socialism was coined in the 1830s and it was first used to refer to philosophical or moral beliefs rather than any specific political views.
I believe as you use the term that you are referring to specific political views, such as those of barmy Bernie Sanders or the Democratic Socialist tyrant, despot and governor of the EMPIRE state (talk about oligarchy, alright) of New York Young Andy Cuomo of Queens, as opposed to philosophical or moral beliefs, which we no longer have in this country.
Getting back to that history, Alexandre Vinet, who claimed to have been the first person to use the term, defined socialism simply as “the opposite of individualism”.
Perhaps that is what makes the term so odious here in the United States of America, Chas, the fact that for socialism a la barmy Bernie Sanders or Young Andy Cuomo to exist, individualism must be crushed out of existence, which takes us back to 2016 and Hillary Clinton, the most reviled person to ever run for president, and her blather about setting up state-run re-education centers to deal with white people who have “implicit bias.”
Getting back to history, Robert Owen also viewed socialism as a matter of ethics, although he used it with a slightly more specific meaning to refer to the view that human society can and should be improved for the benefit of all.
Which is a nice thought, Chas, but how is it to be done?
Recall from your 7th grade civics course these words of Edmund Burke in “Reflections on the Revolution in France” written in 1790, to wit:
BELIEVE ME, SIR, those who attempt to level, never equalize.
In all societies, consisting of various descriptions of citizens, some description must be uppermost.
The levelers, therefore, only change and pervert the natural order of things; they load the edifice of society by setting up in the air what the solidity of the structure requires to be on the ground.
end quotes
As I read your piece, I get the distinct feel that you are promoting “leveling” in this country.
How are you going to make that work, Chas, without the use of force to bring down those you now think are raised too high, recalling from your Bible studies the saying from Hosea 8:7 “(F)or they sow the wind, they shall reap the whirlwind,” which in its original usage was considered a warning from God to the Israelites that their idolatry would lead to ruin, and as you recall, Chas, in addition to following idols, Israel was seeking help in what were considered other, equally sinful ways – “For they have gone up to Assyria, a wild donkey wandering alone; Ephraim has hired lovers” (Hosea 8:9) – which referred to Israel making ill-advised treaties with Assyria for protection from their enemies, relying on their wealth and the help of pagan nations instead of trusting in God, as the story goes, and the “whirlwind” came upon Israel in 722 B.C., when Assyria invaded Israel, destroyed the capital city of Samaria, and deported the Israelites.
Getting back to socialism, Pierre-Joseph Proudhon claimed that socialism is “every aspiration towards the amelioration of society,” where “amelioration” is taken to mean the act of making something better; improvement; so again, dear friend Chas, it is a nice platitude, but how does it work in reality?
Moving right along here, in the first half of the 19th century, many writers who described themselves as socialists — and who would be later called utopian socialists — wrote down descriptions of what they believed to be the ideal human society.
Some of them also created small communities that put their ideals into practice.
A constant feature of these ideal societies was social and economic equality.
Because the people who proposed the creation of such societies called themselves socialists, the term socialism came to refer not only to a certain moral doctrine, but also to a type of egalitarian society based on such a doctrine.
And where are all those ideal societies today, Chas?
What was the fate of all of them?
And by the way, I would have to class you as among the utopian socialists with your views as expressed above here.
As to the word “utopia” itself, Chas, Thomas More coined the neologism “utopia” for his 1516 work that launched the modern genre for a good reason because the word “utopia” means “no place,” and that is because when imperfect humans attempt perfectibility — personal, political, economic, and social — they fail.
How do you plan to overcome that reality, Chas?
Getting back to why socialism is having such a hard time gaining attraction here in the United States of America among those who are not yet brain-dead, other early advocates of socialism took a more scientific approach by favouring social leveling to create a meritocratic society based upon freedom for individual talent to prosper, such as Count Henri de Saint-Simon, who was fascinated by the enormous potential of science and technology and believed a socialist society would eliminate the disorderly aspects of capitalism.
He advocated the creation of a society in which each person was ranked according to his or her capacities and rewarded according to his or her work.
The key focus of this early socialism was on administrative efficiency and industrialism and a belief that science was the key to progress.
Simon’s ideas provided a foundation for scientific economic planning and technocratic administration of society.
Other early socialist thinkers such as Charles Hall and Thomas Hodgskin based their ideas on David Ricardo’s economic theories.
They reasoned that the equilibrium value of commodities approximated to prices charged by the producer when those commodities were in elastic supply and that these producer prices corresponded to the embodied labor — the cost of the labor (essentially the wages paid) that was required to produce the commodities.
The Ricardian socialists viewed profit, interest and rent as deductions from this exchange-value.
These ideas embodied early conceptions of market socialism.
After the advent of Karl Marx’s theory of capitalism and scientific socialism, socialism came to refer to ownership and administration of the means of production by the working class, either through the state apparatus or through independent cooperatives.
In Marxist theory, socialism refers to a specific stage of social and economic development that will displace capitalism, characterized by coordinated production, public or cooperative ownership of capital, diminishing class conflict and inequalities that spawn from such and the end of wage-labor with a method of compensation based on the principle of “From each according to his ability, to each according to his contribution.”
So which brand or flavor of socialism are you peddling, Chas?
The candid world is curious to know.
Ray Otton says
Yeah, nice try but no sale.
Here are the realities of socialism:
– Socialism has never worked anywhere.
In any form. Marxism in the Soviet Union, Maoism in China, State socialism in India, Democratic socialism in Sweden, National Socialism in Nazi Germany have never come close to realizing the classless ideal of its founding father, Karl Marx.
Instead, over and over again, socialists have been forced to adopt a wide range of capitalist measures, including private ownership of railroads and airlines (UK), special economic zones (China), and open markets and foreign investment (Sweden).
In fact, to emulate Sweden, one of the shining stars constantly touted by wanne be socialist in this country, we would have to have more free trade and a more deregulated market.
Meaning:
No Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac
The abolition of minimum wage laws.
Abolishing taxes on property, gifts, and inheritance.
A reduction in corporate tax.
Reformation of Social Security from defined benefits to defined contributions and introduce private accounts.
A school voucher system where private schools get the same per pupil funding as public ones.
There is a perceptions that Sweden is a Democratic Socialist country but it is an aberration in Sweden’s history and it almost destroyed the country. It is but a snapshot of a very short period in time.
By 1950 Sweden was the fourth richest country in the world and there was nothing mysterious about it because Sweden was also the fifth freest economy at that time. In 1950, taxes were 21% of GDP, lower than the US, Britain, France and Germany.
Ah, but then the Social Democratic thinkers( I use the term loosely) of the 20th century struck.
Sweden was a wealthy countries with competitive businesses that could fund all the socialist programs these dreamer could envision. It has a homogeneous populations with a strong work ethic, generally non-corrupt civil services and a high degree of trust. If socialism didn’t work there, it wouldn’t work anywhere.
Slowly but steadily, the socialist intervened in education, health care and created social security systems that provided pensions, unemployment, paternal leave and sick leave benefits.
Between 1960 and 1980, public spending doubled, from 30 to 60% of GDP and taxes skyrocketed. The government started regulating businesses and the labor market. The Social Democrats even began experimenting with a system to socialize major companies.
But then came Sweden’s Atlas Shrugged moment. Talent and capital left Sweden to escape taxes and red tape. Swedish businesses moved headquarters and investments to more hospitable places.
Shockingly, (NOT) the Swedish economy started lagging behind other competitor countries. In 1970, Sweden was 10% richer than the G7 group of wealthy countries. By 1995 it was 10% poorer.
Clearly, Sweden’s experiment with socialism was unsustainable. It just didn’t work. There was no other way to go than market reform. In the mid ’90’s a new, conservative government implement radical reforms to get Sweden back to its classical model.
They reduced the size of the government by 33%
They reduced taxes and abolished them on wealth, property, gifts and inheritance.
State owned companies were privatized
Financial services, electricity, media, telecom, and markets were liberated with less regulations.
They implemented choice and competition in the public sector and created a school voucher system.
So, THE EXACT OPPOSITE OF SOCIALISM.
Free market economics turned a poor backwater country into one of the richest countries on the planet. Then it experimented with socialism in the ’70’s- ’80’s which made the country famous but almost destroyed it.
I know this is a digression from my “Socialism Sucks” general comments but extremely important to help put an end to this particular meme.
Anyhow, back to the main point.
– The founding father of socialism is Karl Marx.
An atheist socialist who insisted that his was the only “scientific” socialism based not on wishful thinking but the inexorable laws of history and class struggle.
You even allude to this with your comment ” in its purest form is the perfect Utopian concept in which everyone flourishes. There is no argument.” FWIW, about 100 million dead folks would LOVE to argue this point with you. More on that in a moment.
He believed in the collapse of capitalism and that the victory of the proletariat would end the conflict, usher in a classless society and pure socialism would thrive.
He advocated for the abolition of private property, free education for all and centralization of the means of communication, production and transport in the hands of the state.
Sounds GREAT!
– Socialism forbids the age-old right of private property.
In The Communist Manifesto Marx says, “The theory of the communists may be summed up in the single sentence: Abolition of private property.”
He knew that depriving individuals of this basic freedom would not be easy and that dictatorship by the proletariat and the use of violence would be required. However, the abolition of private property is necessary, Marx argued, because it is the central cause of the perennial clash between the classes.
Also GREAT! I could come over and borrow your I-pad, permanently.
– Socialism depends upon dictatorship to attain and remain in power.
Without exception, every socialist leader from Lenin to Castro promised to initiate basic political freedoms such as free elections, a free press, and free assembly………………………..Not one fulfilled those promises.
– Socialism is responsible for the deaths of more than 100 million victims.
At least 100 million men, women, and children died by the hand of their own government in the 20th century.
The Black Book of Communism, published by the Harvard University Press documented that each and every Marxist socialist regime has prevailed by way of a pistol to the back of the head and a death sentence in a forced labor camp.
There is no exception, whether in Russia under Stalin, China under Mao Zedong, North Korea under Kim Il Sung, Vietnam under Ho Chi Minh, Cuba under Fidel Castro or Cambodia under Pol Pot.
Interesting too that capitalist countries armed forces point their weapons OUT while communist countries point their weapons IN.
This is the reality of socialism. It is a pseudo-religion grounded in pseudo-science and enforced by political tyranny.
And while the world is coming around to this reality, here in America Democrats are fully embracing the worst possible political system ever devised.
Also sounds GREAT…………….To the rest of us.
Stuart Bell says
‘Mike BenAvi, (aka brother of the late Paul Skolnick’ ????????
WTF? I bet you voted for hillary and bath house barry, with a moniker like that.
Don Green says
As someone whose political opinions are alt-right, I could not disagree more with Mr. Cornweller’s opinion piece and with Mr. Ben Avi’s seconding of it. Socialism is inimical to creative efforts and to the prosperity of all entities who adopt it. Nevertheless, Mr. Bell’s comment on Mr. Ben Avi’s name is yet another of his periodic off-topic ad hominem attacks and is beyond the pale. The comment printed above is not the first of his ugly slurs of surnames that are not “Parks”, “Mears”, “Crockett”, “Bell”, “Green” (my own surname), and the like. Apparently, he is incapable of writing anything of substance or anything other than a smutty, irrelevant one- or two-sentence attack. Of course, he does produce an occasional, “Hear hear”. I submit that a proper use of editorial discretion is called for in instances like this one.
Stuart Bell says
Tuck your raw nerves back in, before they get plucked again. Remember, leave a number so that we may discuss this without any moderation.
Oh Yeah, you want more moderation. How does it feel to want?
Joseph Francis Corcoran says
And thank you for another non sequitur .
Sara says
Socialism is all about greed for the higher ups. Now a days, the word FREE is all they hear. Do ignorant.
Joseph Corcoran Corcoran says
Try using a dictionary .
Publius Americanus says
Try not leaving extra space between your last letter and the period.
See, two can play that game.
Or not.
Next time, try “not”.
Blue Hoss says
What is wrong with you ?
Publius Americanus says
To whom do you refer?
I am simply asking the grammar scolds to stick to the subject, if you were asking me that question.
MJM says
Balderdash. Pure and simple.
“The game of craps nightmare that is Wall Street”?
You mean the means by which investors are able to invest in corporations that help people make and lose money and those corporations grow and provide employment ? The economy that moves the entire world is a game of craps ? That the entire world copies in many markets around the world ? The capitalism that so many nations emulate as much as they can ?
We vote with our pocketbooks instead of our morality ?
Welfare subsidies are fine, and they certainly have a serious and important place in America. As well as having a great history in the United States. We learned from that and continue to do so.
You think we are going to vote out of fear ?
I think I can’t be bothered with tearing apart any more of what I consider to be your so very incorrect view of present day America. I think you have completely missed the point that we are a capitalist nation. We embrace a few socialist programs but absolutely realize that socialism being the center point and driving force of our economy would be a disaster, as it has been everywhere else. We have learned those lessons from history and sure hope you have too.
Joseph Francis Corcoran says
Thank you MGM . And thanks for not taking half the newspaper to say it .
Ray Otton says
The person writing the editorial spouts all sorts of nonsense about the wonders of Socialism but the people writing rebuttals must self-sensor?
So much for equality, eh?
Paul R. Plante says
And God bless America, ain’t it?
Only in America can you get the entire history of the subject of socialism in a 33-chracter TWEET that is democratic because by limiting the narrative to only 33-characters, you are reaching 90% of the registered Democrats in America whose level of comprehension of anything is limited to 33-characters.
Moving right along, next up, the entire history of the decline and fall of the Roman Empire in a 33-character TWEET.
And at that rate of learning, one can obtain a Ph.D. in only five easy days!
Except, we are not talking socialism in here – we are talking social transformation through the vehicle of social engineering if God forbid, barmy Bernie Sanders, the radical Democratic Socialist trying to pass as a Democrat should somehow get elected as president of the United States of America.
And Article II of our Constitution does no give a person who is president any authority, jurisdiction or discretion to use the power of the oval office to engage in social engineering, which is the use of centralized planning in an attempt to manage social change and regulate the future development and behavior of a society.
That is what is being mistaken for “socialism” in this thread – the social engineering that Bernie Sanders would engage in as president, which is not RULE OF LAW, but rule by EDICT, or DECREE.
What Bernie represents is not so much socialism, but more properly, a form of
Caudillismo, as we learn from a Britannica article by Liliana De Riz, as follows:
Caudillismo, a system of political-social domination, based on the leadership of a strongman, that arose after the wars of independence from Spain in 19th-century Latin America.
The Spanish word caudillo (“leader,” from the Latin capitellum [“small head”]) was used to describe the head of irregular forces who ruled a politically distinct territory.
These forces were governed through an informal system of sustained obedience based on a paternalistic relationship between the subordinates and the leader, who attained his position as a result of his forceful personality and charisma.
end quotes
And there is our Bernie, alright, which takes us back to that article, as follows:
Caudillismo as a concept was first used in the former Spanish colonies of Latin America (often called Spanish America) to describe the leaders who challenged the authority of the governments arising from the independence process after 1810; it also referred to the political regimes installed by such leaders.
Different interpretations of the origin of caudillismo have included such factors as the militarization of politics as a result of the wars of independence, the absence of formal rules after the collapse of the colonial order, the ruralization of power, the importance of monarchical tradition, the legacy of authoritarianism and anarchism from the Spaniards, and the characteristics of the village societies.
The militarization of politics and society that outlived the battles for independence linked caudillismo to military power and political competition with armed struggles.
The caudillo was first a warrior.
During wars of liberation, civil wars, and national wars, he was the strongman who could recruit troops and protect his people.
end quotes
And that is the vision that Bernie has of himself, and his dedicated followers have of him – the strongman who can protect his people against the likes of Donald Trump and his followers, which again takes us back to that article, to wit:
Domingo Faustino Sarmiento’s 1845 book Facundo provided the classical interpretation of caudillismo in Latin America in the 1800s, framing it as the expression of political barbarism and the antithesis of a government that ensures security, freedom, and ownership rights for a country’s inhabitants.
end quotes
If Bernie Sanders becomes president of the United States of America, and your skin happens to be white in color, things may not go well for you, because Bernie will not be your president – he will be the president of the black, brown and indigenous Americans, and he will see you as their enemy, and thus his, as well, which takes us back to that article one more time, to wit:
The terms caudillismo and caudillo continued to be used after the conditions that gave rise to what may be called “classical caudillismo” — that of the 19th century — disappeared.
The terms have been extended to encompass any kind of personalized leadership that exercises power in an arbitrary manner within a context of weak or unstable political institutions.
end quotes
All hail Bernie Sanders – our incipient caudillo of the United States of America.
Paul Plante says
The game of craps nightmare that is Wall Street was down some 2,000 points today.
Somebody took a bath is my thought.
Paul Plante says
In the beginning of this thread, our dear friend and fellow American patriot Chas Cornweller makes the existential statement about his perception of reality that “(T)hese are the days that I wish Americans were braver than we are,” as do many people, actually, myself among them, wish Americans were braver than they are, and what a world that would be, and then Chas says sotto voce: “What I mean by that is, special interests have so ingrained themselves into the fabric of who we are, most Americans cannot even recognize when and why they are voting against their own self-interest.”
So, okay.
Reading that, and parsing it for comprehension, what I think our dear friend Chas is doing is making a pitch for what are really the social justice policies of barmy Bernie Sanders, who incidentally and perhaps apropos of nothing, signed a Democrat loyalty oath swearing therein that when it comes to being a Democrat, Bernie is as Democrat as they come, when he really is a Democratic Socialist as we can see from his presidential platform that Chas is pushing, which is his privilege as an American citizen, to wit:
Bernie 2020
Issues
Racial Justice
When we are in the White House, we are going to address not only the disparities of wealth and income that exist overall in our nation, but we will address the racial disparities of wealth and income.
We are going to root out institutional racism wherever it exists.
Bernie
Reminds me of a song from back when that went along the lines of, “There’s something happening here; what it is ain’t exactly clear; there’s a man with a gun over there; telling me I go to beware!”
That’s the chilling message I get from that, anyway.
Getting back to Bernie’s message, we have:
Key Points
• Address the five central types of violence waged against black, brown and indigenous Americans: physical, political, legal, economic and environmental.
• Address a broken criminal justice system, massive disparities in the availability of financial services, health disparities, environmental disparities, and educational disparities.
• Create a nation in which all people are treated equally.
end quotes
Create a nation in which all people are treated equally?
Treated equally how?
And by whom?
And how, pray tell, is that to be enforced?
And by whom?
And how?
Staying with the program of Bernie our dear friend and fellow American patriot Chas Cornweller wants us to throw our collective weight in support of, we have:
Details
It’s time to treat structural racism with the exigency it deserves.
In order to transform this country into a nation that affirms the value of its people of color, we must address the five central types of violence waged against black, brown and indigenous Americans: physical, political, legal, economic and environmental.
Whether it is a broken criminal justice system, or massive disparities in the availability of financial services, or health disparities, or environmental disparities, or educational disparities, our job is to — and we will — create a nation in which all people are treated equally.
That is what we must do, and that is what we will do.
end quotes
And actually, Bernie, according to OUR United States Constitution, your job as president would be to take care that OUR laws are enforced.
It is not your job as president to create a nation in which all people are treated equally, because We, the People, never delegated to the president such power, which would make the president into a despot and tyrant.
Getting back to the platform Chas wants us to embrace, we have:
Voting Rights and Enfranchisement
In the last decade, more than 30 states have considered voter suppression laws whose clear intent is to disenfranchise people of color.
How pathetic and how cowardly is that.
Together we will end voter suppression in this country and move to automatic voter registration.
We are going to make voting easier, not harder.
To protect our democracy, we must:
• Restore the Voting Rights Act.
• Re-enfranchise the right to vote to the 1 in 13 African-Americans who have had their vote taken away by a felony conviction, paid their debt to society, and deserve to have their rights restored.
• Secure automatic voter registration for every American over 18.
• End voter suppression and gerrymandering.
• Abolish burdensome voter ID laws.
• Make Election Day a national holiday.
end quotes
There we have Bernie arrogating unto himself powers not delegated to the president of the United States of America by Article II of OUR Constitution.
As a veteran who swore an oath to the Constitution, I am against the Democratic Socialist Bernie Sanders forsaking an oath to protect and defend it.
His stated policies make it clear that he intends to scrap our Constitution by the simple expedient of ignoring it, knowing that nobody in the nation can make it be otherwise once he is in office and thus, is immune from OUR laws.
Paul Plante says
And Chas, in response to your comments in your essay that “(T)his past week, and I am sure in the coming months, my fellow Americans will fearfully and obtusely enter into a new phase in American history,” as if they don’t already do that every day, and “(O)ne where the reins of power will be handed willfully and intentionally to an authoritative oligarchy,” I would point out to you that in his American political essay entitled “A Freeman II” by A Freeman in the Pennsylvania Gazette, Philadelphia, an early American version of the Cape Charles Mirror, on January 30, 1788, the author spoke thusly of oligarchy (a small group of people having control of a country, organization, or institution) in America, to wit:
To the MINORITY of the CONVENTION of Pennsylvania
Gentlemen, The principal object of my last paper was to point out a variety of instances, in which the agency and power of the state governments are absolutely necessary to the existence of civil society, and to the execution of the federal constitution itself.
I therein shewed that certain important matters, which must be done from time to time, cannot be attempted or performed by the general government.
Here, then, we find, not only that the state powers will not be annihilated, but that they are so requisite to our system, that they cannot be dispensed with.
Having seen what Congress cannot do, let us now proceed to examine what the state governments must or may do.
*****
3dly. The state legislatures and constitutions must determine the qualifications of the electors for both branches of the federal government; and here let us remember to adhere firmly within our respective commonwealths to genuine republican principles.
Wisdom, on this point which lies entirely in our hands, will pervade the whole system, and will be a never failing antidote to aristocracy, oligarchy and monarchy.
end quotes
That was 232 years ago, Chas, at the time of this nation’s beginning.
At that time, at the time of this nation’s beginning, wisdom was supposed to pervade our whole system, which was supposed to be a never failing antidote to oligarchy.
Obviously, from what you are saying above, something has seriously failed since then, or we wouldn’t have this oligarchy that you are talking about.
So what went wrong?
What happened to that wisdom which was supposed to pervade our whole system, which wisdom was supposed to be a never failing antidote to oligarchy?
Any thoughts?
Paul Plante says
With respect to the statement of A Freeman in his political essay entitled “A Freeman II” in the Pennsylvania Gazette, Philadelphia, on January 30, 1788, that “(T)he state legislatures and constitutions must determine the qualifications of the electors for both branches of the federal government; and here let us remember to adhere firmly within our respective commonwealths to genuine republican principles,” there was a time in the United States of America when in the states of Washington and Oregon, in order to vote, one had to be able to read the Constitution.
Not no more, however – that was ruled to be unconstitutional, because it stripped the Democrats of a lot of potential votes, so those requirements are now gone.
And we wonder why today we have people fearfully and obtusely entering into a new phase in American history, one where the reins of power will be handed willfully and intentionally to an authoritative oligarchy.
Go figure!
Getting back to the real issue here, however, which is the social engineering of Bernie Sanders should he somehow become president, which is looking more unlikely, thank God, because the young people that cheer his insane policies on don’t actually vote, just scream, holler and demonstrate, which for them is what politics are all about, making as much noise as you can without actually trying to do anything other than screech at things they don’t like, barmy Bernie’s political platform continues as follows:
Criminal Justice
Over the last number of years, we have seen a terrible level of police violence against unarmed people in the minority community: Laquan McDonald, Sandra Bland, Michael Brown, Rekia Boyd, Eric Garner, Walter Scott, Freddie Gray, Jessica Hernandez, Tamir Rice, Jonathan Ferrell, Oscar Grant, Antonio Zambrano-Montes and others.
end quotes
And there, let me say that Bernie is simply stupid if he thinks that WE, THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, are going to shed any tears whatsoever for the thug Michael Brown, who got his **** blown away when he tried to take a police officer’s gun away from him.
Chas Cornweller says
The cognitive dissonance is strong with this group…For those of you who weren’t fortunate enough to have been educated on Civics and Economics either in High School or College, let me break it down for you. The only difference between Capitalism and Socialism are the ones who profit off of the backs of the working class. As far as demonizing Socialism, your arguments would be more sincere and concise if only it were more factual. Capitalism, and this is important so read slowly…Capitalism, at its most extreme, only benefits those whose capital has grown to the extent it can manipulate the markets for their own profits. Capitalism, at its most extreme is based upon greed. But and this is just as important, Capitalism, under a well-regulated and moderated economy can benefit everyone, rich and poor. It can be the life blood of an economy that can run as smoothly as a well-maintained engine. But, without regulation, greed will and has, crept in. Instance after instance can be shown to be true in the hundred and fifty years of the American Economy. Unfortunately, the platform of the party in control of this country stands on de-regulation of banking, commerce and ecological stewardship. Thus, my disgust with the powers that be. To me, it is perfectly clear that greed and the bleeding of funds from those that earn through production and hard work is the ultimate goal of this freeloading class. You laugh? You think welfare queens are a real thing? What is a real thing is multi-generational families working the system through inherited wealth, manipulated through the Stock Market and grown as dividends by doing absolutely nothing. Basically, that dollar you earned, has been used seven to eight more times as loans, collateral and dividends to create a false sense of wealth. This economy of ours of which we are so proud, is inflated by stocks, bonds and mutual funds giving a sense of profitability to all who want to play the market. This…this, dear reader is Capitalism at its worst. It is literally a platform with a beautiful garden on top supported by four rickety, rotting and destabilized legs of which can come tumbling down at any time. And here’s the kicker, dear reader. Socialism was the solid foundation upon which strong legs were erected to support that garden all throughout the depression years. It literally saved your grandparents’ and parents’ generation from starvation, desperation, revolution and destitution. But, you all (save for one Mike BenAvi) have put your heads in the sand, your trust in those who are the ones literally bleeding your profit margins from you (think taxpayer payout to Wall Street in 2008 – did you get reimbursed?) and a system that time and time again fails to bring up a class of people who so desperately work for it and deserve it. Lastly, for those of you curious enough to want to know more, may I recommend two books? The Shock Doctrine by Naomi Klein and The Creature from Jekyll Island: A Second Look at The Federal Reserve by Edward Griffin. Then come talk to me about the evils of Socialism versus Capitalism. Be careful which horse you bet on
Publius Americanus says
“Socialism is like a dream. Sooner or later you wake up to reality.”
Winston Churchill.
EDIT:
SOME people wake up.
“A wise and frugal Government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, which shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government, and this is necessary to close the circle of our felicities.”
Some guy named Tom from Virginia.
But I’ll spot you the Jekyll Island book, you got that one spot on.
Paul Plante says
Chas, dude, I’m a Viet Nam combat veteran, an infantryman twice wounded.
I don ‘t bet, period.
It is stupid to bet, Chas, which is why I don’t.
You don’t survive in the jungle by being stupid, Chas.
Things in the jungle eat stupid for lunch, and they thrive on it.
So maybe some do, bet, that is, and we both know they are out there, but because they are ******* stupid, by choice, since there is no other way you can get there but by choice, doesn’t mean that I have to be a part of their group photo.
And I’m not.
Look as hard as you will, Chas, scanning each face in that crowd with a magnifying glass, and look as you will, I won’t be there.
I’m not lost.
I’m not confused.
I’m not scared.
I have been following the federal reserve now on a daily basis since at least 2006, and I regularly mock them as a dangerous pack of fools who, like they did back in 1929, when they CAUSED the Great Depression, are steering our nation hard into the ground as if they were themselves a faulty flight controller on a Boeing 737MAX.
They have no credibility.
Even Trump regularly mocks them, and they are his own appointees, especially Jerry Powell, who isn’t sure if he is afoot or horseback, so the solution is as always – panic, then slash interest rates, then start the QE money flowing – you know the drill – like Europe, China and Japan, it is necessary to keep the ZOMBIES going, or there will be chaos.
This is where being dirt poor is of great benefit to me, Chas, precisely because I am already there, and am so adapted to the condition, as I am sure a lot of readers of the Cape Charles Mirror who don’t live in beachfront McMansions can tell you – country boy can survive.
Freedom’s just another word for nothing left to lose, and nothing ain’t worth nothing, but it’s free, so when you are poor, Chas, you can have all of it that you want, and more.
As to everybody else?
“Ah, let me have your attention, this is the captain speaking, that crunching and grinding sound some of you were hearing was an ice burg ripping a wicked big hole in the side of the ship, but trust us when we say she was designed to be unsinkable, and by the way, the band will keep playing and, oh yes, open bar, drinks on the house, so dance on and enjoy your cruise!”
Paul Plante says
Whose cognitive dissonance is strong, Chas, very strong, indeed, is barmy Bernie Sanders, who insults our intelligence as a people, and proves himself to be decidedly unfit to be the chief magistrate of a free people in a nation based on RULE OF LAW with his statement in his platform about “(O)ver the last number of years, we have seen a terrible level of police violence against unarmed people in the minority community: Michael Brown.”
There is seemingly no criminal, no thug, no matter how hardened, no matter how violent, that Bernie Sanders does not love, to the point of being worried about the Boston Bomber’s right to vote while incarcerated in prison for bombing the Boston Marathon.
As to Bernie insulting our intelligence in the case of Michael Brown, a thug who sought his own end and then found it, with this absolute BULL**** about the hulking Michael Brown being some kind of “victim” of “police violence” towards black dudes, let us see what the background really is by going to a Marketwatch article entitled “Justice Department finds no evidence for Hands Up, Don’t Shoot” by Steve Goldstein published Mar. 4, 2015, where the facts Bernie ignores are laid out as follows:
WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) Hands Up, Don’t Shoot became a rallying cry in protests last year over racially motivated police brutality but a Justice Department report released Wednesday says the facts don’t support the alleged incident at its heart.
The Justice Department released a report on the shooting death of 18-year-old Michael Brown by Ferguson, Mo., police officer Darren Wilson.
To be sure, the report finds widespread racial bias in the department and unreasonable use of force, as well as a focus on revenue over public safety.
But it did not back the narrative that helped spur the protests in the city and around the country namely, that Brown had effectively surrendered peacefully to Wilson.
As the report states: “Although there are several individuals who have stated that Brown held his hands up in an unambiguous sign of surrender prior to Wilson shooting him dead, their accounts do not support a prosecution of Wilson.”
“As detailed throughout this report, some of those accounts are inaccurate because they are inconsistent with the physical and forensic evidence; some of those accounts are materially inconsistent with that witness’s own prior statements with no explanation, credible for otherwise, as to why those accounts changed over time.”
“Certain other witnesses who originally stated Brown had his hands up in surrender recanted their original accounts, admitting that they did not witness the shooting or parts of it, despite what they initially reported either to federal or local law enforcement or to the media.”
While some witnesses say Brown held his hands up at shoulder level with his palms facing outward for a brief moment, the same witnesses said Brown then charged Wilson, according to the report.
The prosecutors concluded that Brown did in fact reach for and attempt to grab Wilson’s gun, that Brown could have overpowered Wilson, which was acknowledged even by Witness 101, and that Wilson fired his weapon just over his own lap in an attempt to regain control of a dangerous situation.
Witness 101 said Brown was shot in the back, but three autopsies concluded Brown had no entry wounds in his back, the report said.
Even clearer was this footnote: The media has widely reported that there is witness testimony that Brown said, Don’t shoot as he held his hands above his head.
In fact, our investigation did not reveal any eyewitness who stated that Brown said, Don’t shoot.
end quotes
There, Chas, is your cognitive dissonance on display, by the radical Democratic Socialist Bernie Sanders.
Paul Plante says
Chas, dear Chas, where on earth would we all be but for yourself, and the joy you bring into our lives when you make your appearances in here to provoke thought and discussion as you do, and as an older American, Chas, I am glad to see you recommending books for people to read, in the hopes that there are still some out there who still can read, and those of you who weren’t fortunate enough to have been educated on Civics and Economics either in High School or College, let me break it down for you – as we all can clearly recall from our eighth grade Civics and Economic classes, Iraq under Saddam Hussein was a socialist country.
In that case of socialism, the ones who were profiting off of the backs of the working class in socialist Iraq in the time of Saddam Hussein were the members of the Ba’ath party.
For those who unfortunately got a lesser education than did our dear friend and fellow American patriot Chas Cornweller, who has the advantage of the vigor of youth on his side, Ba’athism is based on principles of Arab nationalism, pan-Arabism, and Arab socialism, as well as social progress.
According to Wikipedia, for those of us who like it kept as simple as possible, just as the socialism of Chas Cornweller, Arab socialism is a political ideology based on the combination of Pan-Arabism and socialism, so we are not talking a strictly economic system.
Getting back to Wikipedia, Arab socialism is distinct from the much broader tradition of socialist thought in the Arab world, which predates Arab socialism by as much as fifty years.
The term “Arab socialism” was coined by Michel Aflaq, the principal founder of Ba’athism and the Arab Socialist Ba’ath Party in Syria, in order to distinguish his version of socialist ideology from the international socialist movement.
end quotes
So, there we have another kind of socialism to add to the mix – Arab socialism.
With respect to Ba’athist socialism in Iraq, and this brings to mind the political platform of Bernie Sanders and the Democratic Socialist party in this country, the Ba’ath party constitution of 1947 called for a “just redistribution of wealth”, which is what Chas Cornweller is calling for today here in the United States of America, along with Bernie Sanders and his young supporters who can be counted on to turn out and scream their little hearts out in demonstrations, but not to vote.
That Ba’athist party platform also included state ownership of public utilities, natural resources, large industry, and transport, state control over foreign and domestic trade, limiting the agricultural holdings of owners to the amount the owner could cultivate, an economy under some sort of state supervision, workers’ participation in management and profit sharing, respected inheritance and the rights of private property.
end quotes
One could well think that Bernie Sanders and the Sanders Revolution have adopted that Ba’athist party platform, which was quite successful in making Iraq into a model of the modern Arab state.
Prominent in Ba’athist writings from the 1940s and the 1950s, was the concern of exploitation of one group of citizens by another and the party forbade exploitation in its constitution, further calling for the abolition of class and class differences in the future envisaged society, with Aflaq in 1955 defining socialism as “the sharing of the resources of the country by its citizens.”
However, as our dear friend and fellow American patriot Chas Cornweller well knows from his admittedly superior education, in the 1950s, changing attitudes of socialism within the Ba’ath Party began to be apparent with Jamal al-Atassi, in a writing dating to 1956, writing that while Arab socialism was not communism, the party could learn from the experience of the socialist countries of how to construct a socialist society.
That in turn was studied by Bernie when he was a college student on his way to almost becoming president of the United States, not once, but twice, like the twice-failed Hillary Clinton, which takes us back to 1955, as follows:
It was around this time communist-inspired terms such as “masses of the people” and “people’s organization” began to heavily used in Ba’athist literature, while at the same time emphasizing class conflict more than before.
He wrote that “Socialism cannot realize its goals unless it starts from the [fact of] division, difference, and conflict among society’s structures and classes.”
Atassi ended the article by calling for the “oppressed classes” of the workers, peasants and “other strugglers” to join in the effort to overthrow the oppressors to establish a united Arab society.
In short, he called for revolutionary struggle.
While Aflaq did believe class conflict existed, he believed it to be subordinate to nationalism.
Munif al-Razzaz, a Jordanian Ba’athist, wrote the Ba’athist classic “Why Socialism Now?” in 1957.
In it he takes a “very different” approach on interpreting the meaning of socialism from Aflaq.
As he wrote, “Socialism is a way of life, not just an economic order.”
“It extends to all aspects of life — economics, politics, training, education, social life, health, morals, literature, science, history, and others, both great and small.”
end quotes
And that is why a free people do not want it over here!
———->This Communication ends here<———
Ray Otton says
It’s clear you think YOUR education was better than OUR education but here’s a little tip…………………………..paragraphs are your friend.
Or is correct grammar only for us dummies who can’t grasp the wonders of Socialism? ‘Cuz that’s what exudes from your every word and we ain” buying it.
You see, history tells a very different story from yours.
Capitalism is responsible for lifting millions upon millions of people out of poverty.
Socialism always ends up in shared misery for the common man with a very few super rich, super corrupt people at the top.
FULL STOP.
.
tokenny says
…and Unions were created because Capitalism was so pure and fair? ….right?
Ray Otton says
So, capitalism bad, socialism good? M’kay.
No doubt typed on your I-pad, while relaxing in the den of your 3 bedroom house, sitting on your Pottery Barn loveseat, sipping a Starbucks latte……..all provided by……..capitalism.
Now, don’t freak out and get all pedantic if I’m not perfectly accurate in my description, you get the point, or maybe you don’t so I’ll expound.
Everything you are surrounded by has been provided by capitalism.
You enjoy the highest standard of living of any generation ever born. Your every whim can be fulfilled with a visit to Amazon.
You health is assured by the greatest healthcare system on the planet.
Your safety is assured by the greatest military on the planet.
You can hop in your $30K SUV and drive anywhere you want in this great country, unrestricted by your government.
You can protect yourself with a firearm as guaranteed in the Bill of Rights.
You can say any damn thing you want, protected by the same Bill of Rights.
In fact, the entire, unique Constitution is built upon the philosophy of personal freedom, restricting the government, NOT YOU.
The world is within your grasp, either physically by hopping a flight to any destination on the globe or virtually, while sitting on your loveseat.
And yet, you are dissatisfied. You might want to do a little navel gazing to figure out why.
Or, since I like to be as succinct as possible………………………..
Quit whining, you are not a victim….of anything.
tokenny says
Me thinks in all your hyperventilating , you are confusing Capitalism with Democracy.
You can protect yourself with a firearm as guaranteed in the Bill of Rights. You can also protect yourself with a sharpen stick too
On and by the way
IPAD made in China, made by cheap or forced labor in order to increase Apple profits.
Sitting in the den of your leaky house with the porch falling down because as fine wood craftsman you can find a steady job because Pottery Barn has all their furniture make in China …. again to increase profits. And that Starbucks barista pouring your drink has masters in Education but she can’t afford to live in the neighborhood the school on her teaching salary alone so she moonlights there.
Yup, capitalism is all good not a problem with it at all.
Paul Plante says
tokenny, dude, let me tell you, when it comes to running somebody all the way around the barn, a couple of times, actually, and getting them nowhere at all in the end, you are far superior to our dear friend and fellow American patriot and raconteur Chas Cornweller, and let me tell you, that is really saying something about your level of skill at the art of sophistry. because our dear friend and fellow American patriot Chas Cornweller is himself quite practiced at the art, which takes us to this bit of intellectual witticism from yourself @ March 14, 2020 at 5:48 pm, to wit:
Me thinks in all your hyperventilating , you are confusing Capitalism with Democracy.
end quotes
HUH?
Me thinks in all your hyperventilating, you are the one who is totally confusing Capitalism, an economic and political system in which a country’s trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state, with Democracy, a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives, as in “capitalism and democracy are ascendant in the third world.”
If you were to go to google, which is readily available to you, tokenny, as a research tool to check out what you are going to say before you blurt it out, rather than after, and ask it the question “Is America capitalist?” it would direct you to the internet site worldpopulationreview.com, where you would find thusly, to wit: The United States is referred to as a “mixed economy,” meaning that it has characteristics of both capitalism and socialism.
If you then went to http://www.businessdictionary.com, tokenny, and no, I don’t mind at all helping you out here, and asked it what a mixed economy was, it would tell you thusly, to wit: An economic system in which both the private enterprise and a degree of state monopoly (usually in public services, defense, infrastructure, and basic industries) coexist.
All modern economies are mixed where the means of production are shared between the private and public sectors.
Also called dual economy.
end quotes
In answer to the question “How is the US a mixed economy?” http://www.investopedia.com would inform you as follows: The United States has a mixed economy.
It works according to an economic system that features characteristics of both capitalism and socialism.
A “true” or “absolute” free market economy requires that all property be owned by private individuals and all goods and services be privately provided.
end quotes
So do we really have “capitalism” here in the United States of America?
Hell no, tokenny, we don’t.
In answer to the existential question you bring up with your maundering above “Why is capitalism bad for society?” we have as follows from the internet, to wit:
Prominent among critiques of capitalism are accusations that capitalism is inherently exploitative, that it is unsustainable, that it creates economic inequality, that it is anti-democratic and leads to an erosion of human rights and that it incentivizes imperialist expansion and war, but so does socialism lead to an erosion of human rights, to the point of an elimination of them, as the citizen is subsumed into regulated society, so which is less worse, tokenny?
Getting back to Investopedia, we have the informative and easy to understand article “Capitalism vs. Socialism: What is the Difference?” by Osi Momoh updated Jul 30, 2019, where we have as follows, to wit:
Capitalism vs. Socialism: An Overview
Capitalism and socialism are the two primary economic systems used to understand the world and the way economies work.
Their distinctions are many, but perhaps the fundamental difference between capitalism and socialism lies in the scope of government intervention in the economy.
end quotes
There is where real Americans balk at the thought of socialism, tokenny, that “scope” of government intervention in the economy, which government intervention right now is quite great.
With respect to the imposition of further socialism in America, as I am sure you will recall, in his “Reflections on the Revolution in France” by Edmund Burke in 1790 stated thusly about forms of government, to wit:
The science of government being therefore so practical in itself and intended for such practical purposes — a matter which requires experience, and even more experience than any person can gain in his whole life, however sagacious and observing he may be — it is with infinite caution that any man ought to venture upon pulling down an edifice which has answered in any tolerable degree for ages the common purposes of society, or on building it up again without having models and patterns of approved utility before his eyes.
end quotes
What model or pattern can you provide us with tokenny, where a socialist system has done anything other than fail miserably?
Getting back to Investopedia:
The capitalist economic model relies on free-market conditions to drive innovation and wealth creation and regulate corporate behavior; this liberalization of market forces allows for the freedom of choice, resulting in either success or failure.
end quotes
Except we don’t have a “free market” in this country today and haven’t had one for years, where a “free market” is one where voluntary exchange and the laws of supply and demand provide the sole basis for the economic system, without government intervention.
When the government is bailing out failing corporations and socializing their debt, while privatizing profits, that is not a free market.
Getting back to Investopedia:
The socialist-based economy incorporates elements of centralized economic planning, utilized to ensure conformity and to encourage equality of opportunity and economic outcome.
end quotes
In this country today, the federal reserve is in charge of centralized economic planning to encourage an economic outcome, which is what this two percent inflation per year crap is all about.
The other day, Trump flew off into a rage over how incompetent Jerry Powell and the fed really are, threatening to demote Powell, which gives you a good idea of just how far from a true free market we really are in this country today.
Going to the key takeaways in that article, we have:
• Capitalism is a market-driven economy.
The state does not intervene in the economy, leaving it up to market forces to shape society and life.
end quotes
Where the state does intervene in the economy to shape society and life, as is the case here in the United States of America today, that is not capitalism, which takes us back to the key takeaways, as follows:
• Socialism is characterized by state ownership of businesses and services.
Central planning is used to attempt to make society more equitable.
• Most countries are mixed economies, falling in between the extremes of capitalism and socialism.
What is Socialism?
In a socialist economy, the state owns and controls the major means of production.
In some socialist economic models, worker cooperatives have primacy over production.
Other socialist economic models allow individual ownership of enterprise and property, albeit with high taxes and stringent government controls.
The primary concern of the socialist model, in contrast, is an equitable redistribution of wealth and resources from the rich to the poor, out of fairness and to ensure “an even playing field” in opportunity and outcome.
To achieve this, the state intervenes in the labor market.
In fact, in a socialist economy, the state is the primary employer.
During times of economic hardship, the socialist state can order hiring, so there is full employment even if workers are not performing tasks that are particularly in demand from the market.
The other major school of left-wing economic thought is communism.
Both communism and socialism oppose capitalism, but there are important distinctions between them.
Special Considerations
In reality, most countries and their economies fall in between capitalism and socialism/communism.
Some countries incorporate both the private sector system of capitalism and the public sector enterprise of socialism to overcome the disadvantages of both systems.
These countries are referred to as having mixed economies.
In these economies, the government intervenes to prevent any individual or company from having a monopolistic stance and undue concentration of economic power.
Resources in these systems may be owned by both state and individuals.
end quotes
So, in the mixed economy we have, tokenny, which is really better – the capitalistic part or the socialistic part?
Ray Otton says
Hyperventilating?
heh
S’matter, can’t find your navel?
Paul Plante says
To the unions, tokenny, capitalism is indeed great because it is through the fruits of capitalism, which may in fact be highly destructive, that they make their living through the wages they are paid.
They may hate the capitalist pigs, which is easy to do, but they don’t mind taking the capitalist pig’s money, now do they?
As to powerful unions feeding off of the taxpayer’s dollars, two of New York’s largest public unions are the New York State United Teachers union, which represents educators in classrooms and on college campuses, and the Civil Service Employees Association, a union of blue-collar state and municipal workers.
The teacher’s union, which has an overlarge say in who holds public office in NYS don’t need the capitalist pigs so much, because they are sucking money directly from the taxpayers through the school tax levy on property.
The kind of petty and childish BULL**** that public teacher’s union, a parasitic growth on the property owners in NYS, is clearly captured in an article in the Rochester Democrat and Chronicle entitled “NYSUT president accuses second-in-command of authorizing Cuomo donation” by Jon Campbell published Jan. 24, 2014, where we property tax payers who support these childish clowns in that union leeching money off of the taxpayers were treated to the following political nonsense, to wit:
When Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s most recent campaign disclosure filing was made public earlier this month, it showed a $10,000 donation from the state’s teachers union.
It raised a few eyebrows.
It was the New York State United Teachers union’s first contribution to Cuomo’s campaign since 2009, and many teachers have expressed dissatisfaction with the state’s new evaluation system and rollout of the Common Core.
Now, NYSUT President Richard Iannuzzi is accusing the union’s second-in-command of unilaterally purchasing a $10,000 table at Cuomo’s birthday fundraiser last night despite only being authorized to buy three seats.
end quotes
Given the endless spigot that the property owners of the state are to these parasites, they are free to use our tax dollars to influence policies that benefit them at our expense, as our property taxes continue to rise and drive older people on fixed incomes out of their homes and off their property, which goes to developers through tax sales and then gets sold as building lots by teachers with real estate licenses, which is a real good gig for them.
That story of high political drama and intrigue continues as follows, and gets better and better as it goes, to wit:
“When the request came for a fundraiser for Governor Cuomo, I directed (NYSUT Executive Vice President) Andy Pallotta’s staff to purchase me a ticket to the event and suggested that Andy and UFT President Michael Mulgrew also attend,” Iannuzzi wrote on a website for his backers.
“Upon my arrival, I learned that Andy had unilaterally authorized (NYSUT’s political action committee) to purchase a $10,000 table for 10 — highly unusual given the sentiments of our members statewide.”
end quotes
So, there they are, having spent TEN GRAND of our tax dollars that go to support their political games as if that money was to them an entitlement, which is what it has become.
Getting back to the high drama, we have:
The allegation comes as Iannuzzi seeks another three-year term as the union’s president and faces a challenge from a slate of candidates looking to oust him.
He’s being challenged by Karen Magee, the president of the Harrison Association of Teachers in Westchester County.
Pallotta is running for executive vice president on Magee’s ticket, known as Revive NYSUT.
end quotes
And talk about political intrigue alright and games playing with out tax dollars for political gain, along with plain old garden variety skullduggery, there we have it right out in plain sight, which takes us back to the story, to wit:
On the Ianuzzi-backer website, Iannuzzi accused Pallotta of using the table at Cuomo’s fundraiser to invite Magee and others seeking to oust him.
end quotes
Aren’t unions just great, tokenny?
Paul Plante says
But we don’t need to talk about Iraq or Venezuela when we are talking about corrupt socialist ****holes, because you never hear them called “socialist paradises,” for the reason they are not – we have the corrupt socialist ****hole of New York State right here in our midst.
The degraded environment with its foul air so characteristic of socialist ****holes (think air quality in Beijing where you can see the air you are going to breathe before you breathe it), the crumbling infrastructure, indifferent and irresponsible “public servants” who because they are party apparatchiks, are immune from the law, the endemic public corruption, the bribes.
And the massive debt to pay for free college for illegal immigrants!
Consider the recent Bloomberg article “Cuomo Runs Up $6.1 Billion N.Y. Deficit Despite Strong Economy” by Henry Goldman on Dec 13, 2019, to wit:
Now, as Cuomo prepares to propose a 2020-2021 budget in January, lawmakers and interest-group advocates are already quarreling over whether to impose more taxes on the rich or cut services to the poor and middle class.
If current spending trends continue, the state would face an $8.5 billion deficit in 2023.
end quotes
It should be noted that some of that money is going to pay (socialize) the legal bills of Andy Cuomo with respect to the rampant corruption in his office, which takes us back to that article on how great socialism has been for the EMPIRE state, to wit:
Spending cuts may also collide with demands for more school aid.
Education advocates and teacher-union leaders say the state has failed to comply with a 2006 court order to fully fund its public schools, an obligation that may exceed $3.4 billion.
The homelessness problem has also created demands for more state spending in the form of rent subsidies to prevent evictions and as an alternative to shelters, said New York City Councilman Stephen Levin.
He’s calling for the state legislature to spend millions of dollars to pay most of the cost of such subsidies.
Tenant advocates also have demanded that Democratic lawmakers spend more on affordable housing.
“Albany needs to make the billionaires pay by a tax surcharge on the super-rich,” said Michael McKee, treasurer and spokesman for the statewide Tenants Political Action Committee.
“A solution is not yet in sight,” Moody’s said in their Dec. 3 comment, warning that budget officials will find it “considerably more difficult for the state to tackle recurring operating deficits, especially if there is any pause in state revenue growth.”
end quotes
Yes, indeed, socialism is sure great, ain’t it, Chas?
Paul Plante says
tokenny, dude, you and our dear friend and fellow American patriot and noted raconteur Chas Cornweller have to be positively giddy with glee as this nation turns socialist overnight.
Paul Plante says
Going to the store today reminds me of the socialist Soviet Union back in the 1950s, with all the bare shelves – no toilet paper, no Kleenex, no rice, no beans, no pasta, water rationed, as we watch how poorly the federal and state governments are able to meet the most basic needs of people in a crisis situation caused by hysteria mongering by the government itself which has resulted in CHAOS and INSANITY.