I have been trying to make a last post about the DSA since I promised one more, but I have become super bored with it. You can click the orange posting title to see a link that has some Q& A from the organization about their purpose. It is full of contradiction and doublespeak. Here are a couple of examples:
1) In response to the question "Doesn't socialism mean that the government will own and run everything?" there is a phrase given in the answer which says "Democratic socialists favor as much decentralization as possible". That sounds nice, but then we find comments posted on this site from those who support the DSA who are adamantly against the 9th aand 10th Amendments, which necessitates decentralization of most government functions away from a centralized national power.
Why the obvious contradiction?
2) Here is a nice sounding statement from the Q&A: "The improvement of people’s lives requires real democracy without ethnic
rivalries and/or new forms of authoritarianism."
rivalries and/or new forms of authoritarianism."
Sounds dandy, but we then read this: "In the short term we can’t eliminate private corporations, but we can bring them under greater democratic control."
Does that mean their LONG term plan is to eliminate private corporations? And here is my point: How could you do that with any power shy of authoritarian? Eliminating private enterprise sounds EXACTLY authoritarian!
There is alot more hotair and fluff to be read at the link, such as the DSA saying they have been among the harshest critics of authoritarian communism that has used socialism in their name. Later in the article we read their praise of young people who "limited the options" of the US in Vietnam. Think about that for a second. The US was in Vietnam to stop the cold aggression of a communist authoritarian regime using genocide and brutal dehumanization to establish itself, and the DSA applauds the efforts of young people to "limit the US options" there.
Feel free to post comments about any of the other nauseating slants on reality found on the link.
I have done my research on the DSA so as not to be thought of as "closed-minded" or narrow-thinking or whatever others will persist in believing about an unwashed peon like myself anyhow. My reading has been from predominately from thier own materials.
My conclusion?
DSA is a waste of time and is counter-productive to the principles of freedom and happiness layed out by revelation for Latter-day Saints and the rest of the world that will heed. It is a variation of flavor of the teachings of Karl Marx, who was an antichrist, megalomaniac, sexist and racist. I dont need any Marxism in my life.
For myself I consider the case closed.
It's almost as if they know they are not making sense and are apologizing for it....
ReplyDeleteIs DSA a waste of time? Probably, but not for the reasons you suggest.
ReplyDelete1) Although I am not a big fan of the 10th Amendment, I don't speak for DSA. When they talk about decentralization, they are probably talking about more democracy in the workplace and more local community input into how things are done.
2) Democratic control of corporations and the workplace is a nice idea, but not all that practical. I don't believe the plan is to outlaw private corporations, but simply to insist that large "publicly owned" corporations chartered by the states act as responsible entities and use their power and resources to benefit the society as well as to enrich themselves.
3) You obviously are not that familiar with the history of US involvement in Vietnam. I would suggest some further reading on the subject.
4) There is nothing in democratic socialism that negatively impacts the freedom of ordinary citizens and much that would contribute to their happiness. Your characterization of Marx as megalomanic, sexist and racist could also be made of many early LDS pioneers but you don't reject their teachings.
Yes, let's consider the case closed.
Charles D,
ReplyDelete1) You say decentralization is about "more local community input into how things are done". How is the 10th Amendment not a perfect mandate for exactly that? Why would you not be a fan of the provision in our Bill of Rights to provide for exactly such a principle?
2) How do you insist that the plan is not to eliminate private corporations? The very words I quoted from your beloved DSA indicate otherwise! And if these ideas are not all that practical, then they dont really have much use in the real world do they? That makes them a waste of time.
3) You obviously like to make absurd comments such as saying that someone is not familiar with a subject if their take on the subject is different than yours. Perhaps it feeds an elitist self-image that so many socialists I have met tend to display.
I DARE you to try to justify the actions of the Viet Minh, Khmer Rouge, Ho Chi Minh, Polpot and others as NOT genocidal soviet style communist expansionism by force.
Your DSA says that they have been among the fircest critics of communist authoritarianism. That rings hollow when they were agaisnt they very measures taken to stop it.
Here is an interesting line of study you can take up: the genocide and wanton slaughter of innocents in North Vietnam by Ho Chi Minh long before the US ever got involved to try to stop it. Ho Chi Minh was a self avowed Marxist, educated in the free west. Cold blooded killing machine, hater of democracy, persecutor of religion. Militarily backed by the Soviet Union, Red China and North Korea, his very choice of allies tells us all we could want to know.
The approach of the American left toward Vietnam is a generational embarrassment. It also shows racism on the American lefts part. They alwys are quick to justify American involvement to liberate Europe from tyranny, but oppose it everywhere else if the liberated are non-white. There is no difference between what Hitler and Mussoulini were doing in Europe and what the Soviet and Chinese puppets were doing in Southeast Asia.
Whatever mis-steps the US made in the campaign, and we all know that war is tragedy, and that technolgy has allowed it to become far more surgical than ever in the past, but for whatever mis-steps taken by us then, the aims to stop the soviet communist spread was completely justified, in the name of humanity at large.
Why would the west NOT expect a domino effect, since that is exactly what happened in East Europe and parts of Asia Minor with the Soviets, who were after all the largest fuelers of the North Vietnamese war machine?
4) I have already shown that there is much in "democratic socialism" that would negatively affect happines. You make it sound like this dialogue here never happened. That has already been clearly delineated. Your characterization of 19th century LDS pioneers is completely unwarranted. Not even close by a long shot. Having some holdover European continent stereotypes about women and peoples of different skin tones is not even close to the brutal hatred of Jews and the reviling of the fairer sex as demonstrated by Marx.
For watever shortcomings in thought they had, LDS pioneers were avidly abolitionist and were among the first in the nation to grant womems suffrage. It is debated whether Utah or Wyoming first had the womans vote, but either way it was with majority LDS community. That is a far cry from the views of Marx who saw women as inferior to men in all ways, and who saw Jews as animals.
Charles D you still have never answered the question as to what fascinates you about this site, seing as how your views are the polar opposite of most everyone else here. Opposition research?
Charles are you an inactive LDS person? Were you raised in the Church?
Pahoran, Charles has said in the past he is not a member of the church. He simply seeks to discuss ideas with those who differ from his own.
ReplyDeleteThat information must have been laid out before I jumped on board heere a couple months back.
ReplyDeleteThanks.
Charles D it is interesting how you seem eager to move on past the subject of the very politcal movement you belong to: the DSA.
ReplyDeleteYou have made almost zero points in its defense. I will take that to mean it is indefensible.
Why not embrace the principles of liberty as contained in the US Constitution? Why not give up on the false socialist utopia built on Marxism and focus on building communities that actually move more toward utopian ideals based upon proven truths, that people enter into voluntarily? As Mormons we call those ideals "Zion". We labor to build a society for ourselves (and for benefit of others) that seeks many of the outcomes that socialism does, but through a voluntary means, not through legislative force or executive decree. The Zion we seek is done through mutual volunteerism and can be exited freely as well. That is the opposite of a forced collective that owns everything so that there is no getting out.
I am not trying to proselyte you to joining the Mormon quest for a Zion, but rather I implore you to find ways to express your highest ideals for societal charity and fellowship in collectives that are voluntary; whatever one that may be.
I embrace the principles of liberty in the Bill of Rights as they apply to individual natural human beings. I don't believe in a socialist utopia and I do believe in improving society through democratic action. I base my beliefs on proven truths, not on religious dogma.
ReplyDeleteOne of those proven truths is that men and women left to their own devices in a society dominated by voluntarism will let their brothers and sisters perish rather than give up some of their own little luxuries to help them. Another proven truth is that voluntary organizations regardless of the motivation and dedication of their members cannot effect systemic change in an economic or political system, especially one dominated by moneyed interests. Another is that people tend to mask their low opinion of those with less (the fat lazy poor) and their reluctance to share their wealth (taxes) by touting their commitment to voluntary methods.
Socialism is not a proven truth. In fact is is a predictably failing agenda. So attack religion all you want. But religion has worked to achieve happiness in this life more than socialism has.
ReplyDelete