Skip to comments.Defining 'Social Democracy'
Posted on 03/23/2002 2:14:06 AM PST by rambo316
Americans tend to react emotionally to words such as Nazi, communist and socialist, with very little understanding of what distinguishes one from the other. The term "social democracy," stirs little emotion, because it too, is not well understood.
Democratic socialism is a kinder, gentler form of Marxism, which arose throughout Europe after World War II. The Scandinavian countries Britain, France, The Netherlands all proudly wear the "Democratic Socialist" label. The United States wears no such label but, increasingly, it should.
The credo of all forms of Marxism is: "from each according to his ability; to each according to his need" with the government being the supreme arbiter and enforcer of the redistribution. What distinguishes the various brands of Marxism is the means by which this basic goal is achieved.
From the start, the system of self-governance devised in America rejected the notion that the government is the supreme anything. Just the opposite. The U.S. Constitution defines the government to be the creation of the people, empowered by the people's consent, and severely limited in the powers it may exercise over its citizens.
For nearly 200 years, this limited government power unleashed the unlimited power of free people, who built the most prosperous society the world has ever known. Since the early 1970s, however, America has been gradually moving more toward the Democratic Socialist model and away from the limited government created by our founders.
In Europe, people are proud to be called Democratic Socialist. Not so in America. The word "socialist" still has a negative connotation politicians work hard to avoid, even while promoting socialist policies. The Congressional Progressive Caucus is the label under which the Democratic Socialist agenda is advanced in America, working closely with the Democratic Socialists of America.
Program after program, the government has consolidated more and more power to dictate how people should live by taking wealth from those who have ability and redistributing it to those who have need as determined by the government.
Social Democrats in both political parties are transforming America from a system of limited government, empowered by the consent of the people, to a social democracy in which the government is the supreme arbiter and enforcer of the redistribution of wealth, and the dictator of socially acceptable behavior.
This fact is indisputable, as evidenced by the increasing government control of land and resource use, of education, of health care, of industry, and even of speech and personal behavior.
Socialists welcome this transformation and continue to push for more government control. The socialists are winning, not because the people have debated, considered and voted to become a social democracy, but because the people have not resisted the socialist initiatives.
In fact, the very people who would violently oppose changing our form of government to a social democracy often support socialist initiatives because they are carefully labeled "smart growth," "sustainable development," "comprehensive land-use planning," "School to Work," "campaign reform," and on and on and on.
Programs regardless of their labels which take power away from individuals, and local and state elected officials, and increase the power of the federal government advance the transformation of America to a social democracy.
On the other hand, programs that leave land-use decisions to local elected officials, that leave education curriculum to local elected school boards and, perhaps most importantly, leave the dollars earned by individuals in the individuals' pockets advance the principles of freedom and reject the principles of social democracy.
The American experiment in self-governance has proven to be among mankind's highest achievements. We who have benefited from this experiment owe a debt to our forefathers and have a responsibility to our posterity, and to the world. We cannot let this experiment be negated by a revised version of the Marxism that has crushed the hopes of all who have been victimized by it.
We must recognize this subtle, sinister effort to transform the American system of self-governance and, as have previous generations, rise up and create the means to extinguish the threat. Our fathers and grandfathers battled with bullets to save our great nation.
Ballots are the ammunition for this generation, cast by an army of awakened patriots.
Federal to local, our governments are no longer restrained by our Constitution and Rule of Law. Millions of government employees are one of the strongest organized labor unions empowered to control the control of the population. The holders of high office have contempt for their oath of office and the citizen. We have become regulated servants of government under threats of penalty of usually incomprehensible law. American's individual freedom and rights to private property are vanishing in one life time. Judicial fiat is efficient. Sovereign immunity is the rule.
Two useful quotes that have been around for awhile:
"The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism. But, under the name of 'liberalism,' they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program, until one day America will be a socialist nation, without knowing how it happened." - Norman Thomas, former U. S. Socialist Presidential Candidate (1936 and many other years)
"We cannot expect Americans to jump from capitalism to communism, but we can assist their elected leaders in giving Americans doses of socialism until they suddenly awake to find out they have communism." - Nikita S. Khrushchev
The distinction is lost upon me
Incidentally Khrushchev always said that the downfall of America would not be an externally event, but an internal one.
"America will destroy itself from within" is attributed to Lenin, I think. Khruschev also said they would use the 'public education' system, but I've never found a decent quote on it. The fact that this has been happening over the past 30 years is obvious for me to see, all I have to do is to look at what has happened to the once fine public schools I attended.
Not as I remember it. And I remember hearing it from when I was a kid. It was during Khrushchev's visit to the US during the Kennedy years. Of course what I posted was not an exact quote, but basically the gist of it.
"all I have to do is to look at what has happened to the once fine public schools I attended."
I was talking with a co-worker of mine the other day who has two girls in college. She was telling me that they say you cannot even begin to take a conservative stance on anything or you are immediately shut down. And of course whites can't even begin to understand discrimination because they have always been the oppressor.
My daughter just started kindergarten this year, I had children late in life, so I am just starting to get back to looking at what the school system is doing. And I am watching them like a hawk.
However living in the Midwest their might be hope. I did notice that at the Christmas show this year the kindergarten group stated their set with the pledge of allegiance, and ended it with God bless America.
For more on the Socialist mentality, see The Lies Of Socialism.
Freedom in our lifetimes is impossible while the Democratic Party lives. One state will secede before the end of this decade. I can hardly wait. I loved the United States, but it died thirty years ago. It is high time we bury it and get back to the business of restoring our freedoms.
Yep, and with the exception of Ron Paul, ALL the rest of them are social democrats, -- or social republicans.
-- As defined by the article, BOTH political parties are dominated by socialistic agendas.
And have been since Goldwater.