Skip to main content

Not a Socialist

Here is another small entry.  This is solely to debunk the silly notion that President Obama is a socialist.  It is made again and again by those on the radical right.  Unfortunately, others keep buying in, I fear because they do not pay attention to any outlet that doesn't spew conservative dogma.

So, here are the basics.  Socialism means to advocate government or employee ownership of industries. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism )  If the steel worker gets his paycheck from the state, and not from a private owner, that is socialism for steel production.  If all hospitals are run by the government (see England), that is social medicine.  If, on the other hand, doctors work for private hospitals who are paid for their services by various customers, including the state, this is not socialism.  If everyone received health insurance through the state, we would have socialized health insurance (but not socialized medicine).  Of course, we don't even do that.

What it appears people do is hear "more government" and use "socialist" as a shorthand term for that.  That might be fine as a redefinition if they didn't try to keep all the old baggage from the original definition, including its links to communism and to failed government policies.

The funny thing, of course, is that the Socialists say that President Obama is not a Socialist. (http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2009-11-01/news/chi-perspec1101socialismnov01_1_countercyclical-policies-moderate-democratic-president-inequality-and-insecurity )  He's way too capitalist for them to consider that he is even close to being a socialist.  But somehow the Sarah Palins and Rush Limbaughs of the world know better.  It reminds me of those arch-conservatives that say that Islam is a violent religion, then when practicing Muslims say it is not, the right winger will say, "Well, they aren't a real Muslim then."  One of the things I'm pretty sure about Islam is that the Quran says that it must be read in the original (not in translation) to be understood -- I'm guessing, though, because I haven't read it in the original Arabic.

Anyway, the President is a capitalist.  He has suggested some increases in government, such as the Affordable Care Act.  That doesn't make him a socialist.  Going to a socialist conference in college doesn't make him one, either.

For grins, here are a few other links on the subject:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Why COVID-19 is MUCH worse than the seasonal flu

This is the second in a series of posts about the COVID-19 pandemic . This installment is discussing why COVID-19 is much, much worse than the seasonal flu. Here it is, in a nutshell : COVID-19 is more contagious, more deadly, already has more known long-term impacts, has no vaccine or truly effective treatments, and has no apparent seasonality. Contagion SARS-COV-2 is much more contagious. The median R0 (average number of people infected by each person when nobody is immune) is 5.7 , or more optimistically 2.5 . For the pandemic to go away, R0 would need to effectively be less than 1.  The estimate of the 1918 novel flu was between 1.2 and 2.4 .  (An R0 of 5.7 means we need over 80% of the population to be immune to reach effective herd immunity .) Beyond that, the incubation period is long, and the number of transmissions before symptoms begin hovers near half those infected . And the duration of being contagious is longer, up to 10 days after the first symptoms. That means ...
3 comments
Read more

The problem with fundamentalism, part 2: Religious fundamentalism

This is the second part of a two part series where I discuss the problems I see with two prevalent forms of fundamentalism (the first discussed Constitution and fundamentalism: http://amusingbeam.blogspot.com/2012/05/problem-with-fundamentalism-part-1.html ).  In this part, I will be discussing biblical fundamentalism.  I will be referring to sources more frequently here, as I cannot claim the expertise I could for the last installment. Let me start by saying that I understand this is an extremely controversial topic, especially the stance I am taking.  My goal is not to offend, but it is instead to discuss why I think a fundamentalist approach to the Bible (and, in some respects, any text) has insurmountable problems.  I think that most Fundamentalists I know are quite willing to discuss why they believe their hermeneutic approach is the correct one, so my hope is that they are equally sanguine when someone explains why that pathway seems problematic. Here is t...
2 comments
Read more

Voting this year, part 1: What I think about the current political landscape

Lewis Black, in a stand-up routine a couple of years ago, said that anyone still loyal to either major political party is crazier than he was after he dropped acid in the 70s and found himself in the woods, believing his fridge had turned into a mountain lion that he had tracked down and was now trying to gut in order to get a beer.  LSD and I have never crossed paths, but I have to agree that anyone that is an active supporter of either party is crazy. They are both riddled with intellectual inconsistencies brought upon by the perceived need to pander to various groups in order to secure votes. What is even worse is that both sides are self-righteous. My own personal philosophy is to look at what works. We have to find balances between helping ourselves, our fellow citizens, our fellow humans, and our descendants. A productive populace that works through various channels, including industry, media, governments, and civic organizations, to achieve progress in as many areas as pos...
2 comments
Read more