Socialism Comes to America With a Whimper, Not a Bang
52Who's Who?
The USA Adopts the Economic System of the Failed USSR
Remember back to 1989 or so.
The mighty Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, a Communist/Socialist state, imploded. Not a shot was fired. And, presumably, Capitalism triumphed.
Now look at the mighty United States of America in 2008, governed by a conservative Republican President.
In a few short months, with virtually no public debate, and certainly without a single shot being fired, we have Socialized the mortagage industry; we have Socialized the commercial banking industry; we have Socialized the Investment Banking industry; we are well on the way to Socializing the insurance industry and the automobile manufacturing industry; the medical care industry has been Socialized in all but name for decades.
Without a shot being fired, without a citizen's vote being cast, the United States has pell mell transformed its economy into a Socialist one, for better or worse.
But here in the USA, the government handouts go to the already rich and powerful, with nary a pittance tossed the way of the common man.
Maybe we should change the flag as well.
PrintShare it! — Rate it: up down flag this hub
Comments
vitaeb,
Thanks for the comment.
I wasn't particularly making a value judgment on Socialism per se. Rather, I was struck by the fact that these monumental changes in nation's economic ideologies take place non-violently, and are top-down rather than bottom-up phenomena...both in the USSR and here in the good old USA.
I do agree that our version of the Socialist Revolution is thus far undemocratic in the extreme and is noteworthy only for its lack of efficacity,...but it's still very early in the game.
You might be interested in a link on DrudgeReport.com to an article about "riots" in the streets in Iceland regarding the financial crisis. Citizens demanding the resignations of elected and other officials, etc. The American people, on the other hand, seem to be reacting with merely a stunned silence. Go figure.
FB
Hi Fredrick,
I'm a little confused here. Wasn't the USSR a totalitarian Communist regime?
Socialism, as practised successfully in numerous European countries exists very happily side by side with capitalism. Just look at the Scandinavian model with their exemplary healthcare systems, generous retirement packages and so on. Yes they do pay higher taxes, but they do not live in fear of sickness and old age, or of redundancy or lack of good education opportunities for their children., and in varying degrees this is true for much of Europe. What's so great about Capitalism?
Social programs that help people become educated, skilled, diplomatic, and healthy, also help us be a stronger nation. We don't have to be cookie cutters of other countries mistakes, we do pretty good making our own even, but I think it's just common sense to spend our money on ourselves, our infra-structure, our cities and communities, our health and welfare. If that's socialism, then give me socialism, but why can't we help finance non-government totally controlled programs, giving incentives, etc? Doesn't have to be government run, regulated, yes.
We haven't done so well by sending our money overseas - that has broken our backs. Creating an commerce situation that allowed the greedy to rob us wasn't wise. So, now, we're being told that helping ourselves by using our tax dollars to"spread the wealth" is wrong? Uh, huh. But, it's ok to let the rich get richer and sell our jobs to other countries.
I don't see how we can be a strong nation while our people are sick, dying, uneducated, unless a person supports only the wealthy being healthy and wise.
that says it all. Amen, vitaeb.
Amanda % marisue,
Thanks for commenting.
As I said in an earlier reply to a comment, I am not making a judgment one way or the other on the question of Socialism vs. Capitalism.
I am of course aware of the existence of the European Social Democracies.
Mr primary points were that I am surprised such major changes can occur in countries like the USA and USSR non-violently; and that the movement toward socialism here has thus far merely consisted of unthinkably large gifts of taxpayer money to (formerly) mega-rich institutions like Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, etc.; and that this is being done in a thoroughly undemocratic manner---we've essentially given the Executive Branch (and the Federal Reserve) what seems to be unchecked unilateral power to do whatever they please regarding the economy and the expenditure of public funds, a very dangerous precedent.
[The USSR was a socialist economy with a totalitarian political system, but that point actually re-inforces my amazement that a country like that could change systems without a violent revolution.]
I disagree with your premise. Even if the US is wacked, it isn't anything like the USSR. It's a right-wing nation that revels in ignorance and self-importance, but over here is Europe, we laugh at what you right-wingers call socialism and communism. Give me a break!
vitaeb says:
13 months ago
Quite a provocative statement. What you are calling socialism is what I call out and out banditry. The W administration has been employing for eight years the same system the Chicago gangsters of the 30's used to extort money. People paid 'protection money' to these gangsters who threatened violence. Pay me or I beat you up, destroy your place of business, etc. The W administration laundered public money via Iraq into the hands of his cronies. We all know that story. The W administration removed just about all the regulatory safeguards that kept Wall Street honest. And the final gangster act of the W administration was to use the same tactics of threat ad fear to get the legislature to hand over huge sums of money to the Wall Street bankers. We all know that story.
Calling that socialism denies the true intention of the theory. A social democracy is one in which the society serves the common good, not the elite good [the rich and powerful]. A social democracy provides universal health care [what we have is a medical industry that serves insurance and pharmaceutical companies]. A social democracy provides universal education including advanced education [what we have is a student loan system that serves the banking and education industry. Students are not so much educated but rather turned into servomechanisms for the various industries. In other words, people are used meat for the hungry industries both on the production side and on the consumer side]. The W administration did everything it could to relax EPA and other controls for the sake of these industries. A social democracy nurtures the society and the environment, promoting a healthy, balanced way of life.