MyFox
 

MissNancy's Blog

by MissNancy from Missouri

Last Post 2 days, 19 hours Ago


 A recent thread started by a self-described "commie" attempts to explain and support Socialism.  This poster implied those of us who do not recognize the superiority of Socialsim are either "right-wing" or just uneducated or lack the intellectual ability to know what is good for us.


One primary aspect of Socialism is to promote the nationalization of all industry "for the common good" of all people. Socialists say, "Let the government take over health care and then you won't have a thing to worry about". As a Medicare recipient, I can tell you the government denies more care than any insurance company.

A socialist (such as Maxine Waters and Obama) will say, "Let government take over the oil companies and then you will have nothing to worry about". Nothing except rationing when global prices rise because they won't drill domestically. The government would control our access to fuel for our cars and homes. That speaks of a lot of control over us, doesn't it?

The people who are currently enrolled in, or recently graduated from, liberal political science courses are full of this kind of misinformation.  They are too young to remember the USSR (Union of Soviet Socialist Republic) and how the people of that regime lived.  If Marxism, Socialism and Communism are too fantastic to believe, why did the people of this regime revolt and start working toward capitalism? 

In theory, all the "we're in it together" philosophies sound fantastic.  In practice, they fail miserably and what results is a dictatorial government with NO power belonging to the people.  In fact, in the USSR, they couldn't even have back yard gardens without permission from the local government.  Even when approved, the garden could not be for their own use and consumption.

Folks, whatever you give the government, regardless of how sweet and warm and cuddly it all sounds is power you will never get back. Give away one ounce of personal liberty and it is lost forever.

Commie-side, OEL, I hope you will one day realize that fact.  If you give up individual rights, if you give up motivation to succeed for the individual, if you give up opportunity to grow and rise above your current state, then you destroy the greatest social experiement in mankind's history. 

20 Comments |  Add a Comment

Member Comments Total Comments: 20
Page 1 of 2
1
Last
DogJ read my blog
Aug 8, 2008 | 10:59 AM

MissNancy,
I agree. Even I thought that Socialism and Communism sounded like great ideas when I studied them in college... then reality sank in.
I thought it was telling when I asked oel for current or past examples where Socialism exists in the form he describes, all he could come up with was the Paris Commune; over 137 years ago. With over 300 countries existing today, he had to go back 137 years to find a suitor. Obviously, this begs the question, if oel's Socialism blueprint is so good why do we have to go back 137 years to see an example? And, here's the funny part, the Paris Commune lasted less than a year; 2.5 months to be more accurate.

Searchingtoo read my blog view my photos
Aug 8, 2008 | 2:08 PM

I too have believed that OEL's idealism were from some professors romantic tales of a utopian society.... that has never existed....

One day, real life will bit him in the arse and those wimsical dreams and theories will be washed away in the sunlight...

DogJ read my blog
Aug 8, 2008 | 2:29 PM

Searching,
You should teach. That post had such a sound of poetry to it:-)

Searchingtoo read my blog view my photos
Aug 8, 2008 | 3:00 PM

LOL jdog..

jstol3 read my blog
Aug 8, 2008 | 3:10 PM

The Hippies tried communes back in the 60s and 70s and they weren't very successful either. A combination of not knowing much about agriculture and the all too common lazy folks who didn't participate very well.

OEL just doesn't get the "human nature" part of the equation.

open_eyed_liberal read my blog
Aug 8, 2008 | 4:16 PM

Nancy, I cannot say the right wing has been savvy in the research and reason department. In 2000, Bush was voted in because he was someone you could sit down and have a beer with, not because people actually thought he could do the job. Now, look at the state of the country. In this election, chain letters are often quoted as though they were the Britannica. Guess what? Chain letters can be written by anyone without fact. Your very connection of the Soviet Union with communism shows your own lack of research. That country, and all branches thereof, were and are state-capitalist. Read what Mao wrote; read "left wing" childishness by Lenin; read the works of Trotsky. My point proven.

DogJ, socialism was the original intent of pre-1917 Russia. However, Lenin's own confusion about the dictatorship of the proletariat (meaning the class as a whole takes power, not simply a single person) and his desire to pass through a state-capitalist transition period (see the pamphlet I mentioned above) caused Russia to go state-capitalist. Unfortunately, those in America who favored Marxism traveled there before they knew what was happening. After Stalin took power, all future attempts were based on this state-capitalist dictatorship. Documents to the contrary were hidden in the Soviet Union, and McCarthyism began in the US. The true meaning was lost, which is why a similar attempt has yet to be tried. Your right, it has been too long. Perhaps a group of communists should form a commune to prove the system...

gimini210 read my blog view my photos
Aug 8, 2008 | 7:54 PM

The truth about socialism is that a man who pays a fortune for a good education will earn the same a s the drop out who works at a government owned station. Socialism is where no one person owns property but everyone is suppose to. Now which countries have ever done that and where are they? Where are the happy ever afters? Socialism would have to be strictly run, who would run it? Not the people because most people do not agree on most things. And if you do not own nor will ever own then why bother to progress? You will only be where you are today tomorrow and next year. A worker with nothing to show for your work but a few dollars. Why creat a Disney World if it will not be yours and all you have to show for it is what the guy washing car windows gets.

MissNancy read my blog view my photos
Aug 8, 2008 | 9:10 PM

OEL Says: "Your very connection of the Soviet Union with communism shows your own lack of research. That country, and all branches thereof, were and are state-capitalist. Read what Mao wrote; read "left wing" childishness by Lenin; read the works of Trotsky. My point proven."

I'm sorry my friend, your point is not proven by the texts you cited. They may support your point but they do not prove it. The Union of Soviet Socialist Republic (USSR) was not a state-capitalist, it was a government that does not feet neatly into a poli-sci box. A ruling committee, headed by a dictator/premier governed the country. There was no middle class, there were only the ruling class and the workers....period. Workers earned their 2 room apartments and meager utilities as well as coupons for food. Did you never see or hear of the very long lines people stood in to buy bread, then another one for meat, then another one for milk?

A personal acquaintance of mine, here for a short time from the USSR in 1972 was amazed at our grocery stores. She could not believe the choices and so much of everything on the shelves. The only line was the checkout line with full grocery carts. She actually cried the first time she went into a supermarket. Her amazement was the same as she was taken to shopping malls.

OEL, you might think our way of life is the pits. You might think that the workers and slackers should all earn the same. You might think that we should all live in 2-room apartments and drive Yugos just so all is even, but you know what?

This country has worked and worked well f

MissNancy read my blog view my photos
Aug 8, 2008 | 9:11 PM

This country has worked and worked well for over 200 years. There is so much opportunity here for anyone with the drive, perseverance and skill to make it in any field. You won't find that anywhere else on earth and certainly not in the kind of country you would promote.

If you want to concentrate on the have-nots, then ask them why they have not. Why haven't they taken advantage of the Pell Grant and other opportunities for education? Why not go to trade school and learn a trade or skill? Why not work your way up from the bottom by showing yourself to be a dedicated and willing worker?

Why are there have-nots in America? Unless their situation is due to injury or illness, there is a myriad of opportunity to bring themselves up instead of insisting that everyone else be brought down.

open_eyed_liberal read my blog
Aug 8, 2008 | 9:31 PM

Well, Nancy, why don't you look at the number of jobs that have been lost this year alone. Those were hard working people who contributed their part, yet they were tossed out like it was trash day. We should not view the workers as mere objects to throw out. Furthermore, as the number of jobs decrease while the number of unemployed increase, your point goes further and further out the window. Trade schools are good - as long as a large number do not attend. Do you really believe thee thousand people learning how to weld in one city will be able to find a job there? They can't go to another city, their citizens are attending these schools as well. The key is free education for all.

That text actually does a pretty good job of proving my point. I assume you are able to produce a historical text (not a conservative blog or chain letter) to counter it? Let me guess, it will be from Stalin, the man who hid many texts that disagreed with his way?

Perhaps Lenin's quote from that text will help you: "...nor, I think, has any Communist denied that the term Socialist Soviet Republic implies the determination of the Soviet power to achieve the transition to socialism, and not that the new economic system is recognized as a socialist order.”

open_eyed_liberal read my blog
Aug 8, 2008 | 9:43 PM

"...[the Soviet Union] was a government that does not feet neatly into a poli-sci box."
Then why do you claim it was communist when it does not fit into that box? Your reason is lacking here.

"A ruling committee, headed by a dictator/premier governed the country. There was no middle class, there were only the ruling class and the workers....period."
Oh, like a corporate hierarchy. I guess it resembled capitalism more than you thought. The committee (board of executives) and premier (CEO, chairman) can be considered the ruling class, while the workers slave for them (a slave is indeed someone who has sold themselves or been sold into labor). Or would you prefer the term "industrial prostitutes?"

Jordan read my blog
Aug 10, 2008 | 9:56 AM

I would like to see a “true” communist commune started. Perhaps it could be on an Island somewhere and we could make it into a reality show like Survivor.

MissNancy read my blog view my photos
Aug 10, 2008 | 12:29 PM

OEL, do you remember Bill Clinton? Are you aware it was Clinton that signed both treaties that sent jobs flying out of this country and sent them to India, the Phillipines, Mexico and other countries? Do you remember why he did it? He did it to "share the wealth" with the rest of the world and to "even the playing field" for poorer countries.

Well, it worked for them and has nearly wrecked us. All those jobs flying out the window were pushed out by the socialist, Bill Clinton.

There is still tremendous opportunity in this country for hands on jobs like teaching, engineering, auto mechanics, auto body work, health care, and yes, welding. There is still tremendous opportunity for those willing to go out and grab it.

Example: My older brother was retired from the Navy as an officer and was also as a prison warden. He still wanted to work but no one would hire him at 62 even with his tremendous history and skills. The only job he could get was one of delivering Auto Trader magazines. He took the job and, within 1 year he was working 6 days a week and had the largest route in the southeast.

He took a nothing job and made it into the most profitable route in the country. That is taking advantage of opportunity and making something out of it rather than whining about this country being "just downright mean". Or, insisting we need a government and social structure that gives the "I can'ts" half of that earned by the "I cans"

open_eyed_liberal read my blog
Aug 10, 2008 | 2:24 PM

"...the socialist, Bill Clinton."
Again you prove your ignorance on the definition of socialism. Rather than actually studying, you stay in your comfort zone and give the names of people you don’t like (then wonder why I say you are unable to reason and research). You also failed to refute the text and quote I provided above. I guess you really cannot prove fact wrong.

Anyone can say they have relatives and friends who do this and that, but it is ineffective in an online debate. For example, I have a younger sister who served on first manned mission to mars. See how that works?

MissNancy read my blog view my photos
Aug 10, 2008 | 3:45 PM

The difference is, OEL, my statements are true and my brother actually did do what I said he did.

I have to laugh at your continued charge of my ignorance. Bill Clinton himself stated one of his most respected mentors was Dr. Carroll Quigley, a proponent of socialism. Also, one who helped form his economic strategy is Derek Shearer, longtime associate fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies,which is committed to socialism in America.

Please write Bill and his mentors and tell them how ignorant they are to consider themselves socialists.

"We can't be so fixated on our desire to preserve the rights of ordinary Americans ..."
Bill Clinton (USA TODAY, 11 March 1993, page 2A)

Page 1 of 2
1
Last


Write your comment below:




MissNancy

I hold a graduate degree, am passionate about politics and preserving the United States' traditions and values. Maxine and I agree: "Some people can have all the lights on and still be in the dark." (For you super serious folks, that's a joke)

Member Since: 1/25/2007