And why do socialist sympathizers always reference Wallstreet? Wallstreet is a direct result of government influence of the market, which is precisely what socialism does. There is this fantasy that socialism makes everything equal for everyone, yet they fail to realize that the wealthy actually obtain more power through socialistic policies that involve more government dictating over the aspects of society.

Now that's a little confusing as Peter Schiff has constantly railed against the (not) Federal Reserve for as long as I can remember.  Just like Ron Paul.  These threads make my head hurt but not as bad as the Chinese woman who just dug up her stacks of RMB for son's wedding but only got piles of mud.

There has never been a communist state. They tried to obtain a communist society, but have never been able to progress beyond statist socialism. Why? Because those in control of socialist societies did not want to give up their power.

True, there has never been a true communist state.


And the Nazi's didn't use fear of communism to take power in Germany; they projected the economic problems created by the after-effects of WWI  that destroyed their country's infrastructure onto a race of people, the Jews, and claimed that all the problems of Germany were directly related to what the Jews were doing. You seem to forget that Germany and Russia were allies until the Invasion of Poland in 1939, five years after Hitler had become dictator of Germany.

Prior to the Nazis, the communist party was one of the most largest political parties in Germany.  In fact, the communists were so powerful that Germany needed to call her former WWI veterans to form the Freikorps to defeat the communist insurrectionist in their borders during the Weimar Republic.  In light of the realities of a communist take-over in Germany, it is absurd that the Nazi Party born in 1919 did not use the threat of a communist take-over as part of their party propaganda.


And in case you didn't know: Fascism was born out of the fact that Mussolini didn't believe socialism and communism went far enough to secure power for the state, yet Mussolini and Hitler were both avid followers of Marxism and the teachings of Lenin.

I do know that both Mussolini and Hilter had socialistic tendencies, but I find your position that both those men morphed their political ideological beliefs due to the desire for more power very weak in that Stalin apparently felt his quasi-socialistic/communistic model was sufficient for his consolidation of power.


And why do socialist sympathizers always reference Wallstreet? Wallstreet is a direct result of government influence of the market, which is precisely what socialism does. There is this fantasy that socialism makes everything equal for everyone, yet they fail to realize that the wealthy actually obtain more power through socialistic policies that involve more government dictating over the aspects of society.

Did you cut and paste from the writings of Peter Schiff?  This sounds almost verbatim Schiff's position the relationship between Wall Street and the US Government.  Is all the shenanigans of Wall Street a direct result of how they interpret government policy as Schiff suggests?  Yes.  However, the government policies that created the beasts on Wall Street were a direct result of the those same finance and banking elites who exerted their monetary influence on both the Republicans and Democrats to create this situation to begin with.  It was never some red flag and armband wearing communists sitting in the back room somewhere dictating government financial policy.


Kuleana

Democracy and Socialism are not mutually exclusive. Since FDR we have been living in a mixed Capitalist/Socialist Democracy. The crowning achievement of his career was "saving capitalism" since the Great Depression was setting the stage for an overthrow of the oligarchy. By mixing in Socialism he effectively headed off the revolution and the powers that be were able to maintain control, much to their annoyance. You see, the ultra rich live in a bubble and at some point become completely isolated from reality. They would have been very confused when the angry mobs dragged them out of their Newport mansions and strung them up from the nearest tree, because they honestly believe they have things in control and allowing workers to have Social Security, 40-hour work weeks and child labor laws would be unacceptable compromises.

I will only add that the financial capitalist elite of that time probably relented to the advancement of worker rights because of fear of a true socialist/communist transformation of the US as what happened in Russia.


Fast forward to today and we have a situation where the New Deal has almost completely eroded and the last vestiges of democracy were flushed down the toilet with the passing of Citizens United. The elites won and now naked capitalism is free to run it's course to exhaustion and collapse.

This has a lot to do with the fall of most of the so-called communist states, which ended much of the flirtation of socialism/communism amongst the masses coupled with the fact with the new Muslim Terrorist Boogieman, which scared everyone in the US to turn a blind eye to further consolidation of financial power of the elites as well as the reversal of worker rights and freedoms that was paid for in blood in the early 20th Century.


In that sense Bernie Sanders is actually a conservative, since he isn't really proposing anything radical or  new but just wants to stick to the rules that were already on the books for so many years. On the Republican side we have various shades of Neo-Liberals who want lots of foreign intervention, dismantling all worker protection,  and making trade deals like the Trans Pacific Partnership that evaporate our sovereignty to multi-national corporate overlords, which is basically everything you say you are afraid of when you use the word "socialism".

Very sad indeed that the masses can't see this reality.


But if you confused socialism and totalitarianism it's easy to understand why you would confuse conservatism with corporate oligarchy. The media has understood the importance of controlling language for a long time now. That's why banning the Hawaiian language was an act of political sabotage and (arguably) genocide.

Sound critical reasoning skills have long been lost in America for some time.  Now, we have verbally strong and most often physically attractive personalities and ideologues who spew propaganda to keep the masses in the US in-line, while the financial and civil liberties rape goes on by those financial/banking elites.


Kuleana