Democratic Socialism In The Real World

This entry was posted in Culture, Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

10 Responses to Democratic Socialism In The Real World

  1. Chris Peterson says:

    Lessons for America? I think not.

    About the same time that Sweden was bringing together their unions and capitalists and reaching a profitable and harmonious compromise, America, under the leadership of the late, great Ronnie Reagan, was decimating our unions and putting corporations solidly in the driver seat of our nation. Sweden, with a population of under 10 million, still has a socialist-democracy; we, with a population of 326 million, have a plutocracy with just enough democracy to give the illusion of free will.

    Instead of comparing America to other countries, people should be comparing America to its own myth. To do that, one would need a healthy dose of Howard Zinn and George Carlin. Anything else is, again, just a jingoistic fantasy left over from your Weekly Reader days, or as Carlin said, “The American dream; you have to be asleep to believe it.”

  2. rl crabb says:

    I don’t know how it is in your neck of the woods, but down here there are too many who are ready to junk capitalism for the old Swedish model. And then there are the right wingers who shit their pants anytime someone gets something they didn’t “earn”. The message here is our blonde friends figured out the happy medium that satisfies the needs of both ideologies. Still not perfect, but closer than we’ll ever get.

  3. Chris Peterson says:

    It’s pretty much the same here as it is everywhere in the US; the countryside is littered with red hat Republicans who are outnumbered by the blue cities. Even in the poorer states, like Alabama, where the majority live out in the sticks and red hats hold sway, cities like Birmingham are blue. The fight is over the smaller cities and bigger towns, where the vote can go either way.

    That’s why I mentioned Sweden’s population being a mere 10 million; the connection between political persuasions is closer to that of a small city than our spread out demographic. Unions couldn’t be destroyed by some far-away entity and a compromise was easier to come to. Reagan might have been the one to bring us to that compromise here, but for the air controller strike, which called his hand, forcing the action which started the right’s war on unions.

    But you’re correct; we’ll never get there, now.

  4. George Rebane says:

    For the uninitiated, collectivism is always best practiced by smaller culturally cohesive cohorts – e.g. from the family up to small ‘blond’ countries like Sweden. But things quickly go awry when even a small un-assismilating proportion of people with a radically different culture are allowed/invited to immigrate. Sweden is also a poster-child of this social truism.

    • Chris Peterson says:

      Collectivism is a cultural value that is characterized by an emphasis on cohesiveness among individuals and the prioritization of the group over self; neither of which are qualities found in red hat republicans.
      And while your familiarity with the uninitiated is undisputable, it puts you at a distinct disadvantage here on this blog. Best stick with those of your own group who ironically ban together out of a commitment to their claimed rugged individualism.
      By the way, there’s a large group of terrorized brown peasants headed this way. Shouldn’t you and Todd Juvinall be in a secret location checking each other’s muzzles, so to speak?
      Speaking of which; fodder for your next meeting: Melania Trump wasn’t yet a citizen when she had Cadet Bonespur’s last kid, so when/if he issues his executive order banning all anchor babies, it’s bye-bye Barron.

    • Steven Frisch says:

      Yep, in George’s world think about how much better the world would be if each ‘people’ were culturally homogeneous.

      “……ignoring the potential force possessed by a homogeneous race, bemused by the slogans of human equality, all parliaments adopted the dogma of infinite toleration. Tolerance toward the alien, the hostile, and the aggressive was seen as a highly humanitarian achievement, but was, as the history of the nineteenth and especially of our present century shows, merely an ever-greater abandoning of ourselves.”–Alfred Rosenberg in Auf Gut Deutsch magazine, February 1919

      “I didn’t say that the Jews are inferior. I didn’t even maintain they are a race. I merely saw that the mixture of different cultures didn’t work.” Alfred Rosenberg–January 12, 1946. Quoted in “Nuremberg Diary” – Page 120 – by G. M. Gilbert

      “No”–Alfred Rosenberg asked if he had any last words just before being hung for crimes against humanity at Spandau prison 10/16/46

      “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” George Santayana

      • Michael Anderson says:

        Thank you Steve. Couldn’t have laid it out any better. Perhaps Teine can weigh in at this point.

      • George Rebane says:

        Congratulations to ChrisS for his ad hominems, and StevenF for his usual practice of putting unsaid words and sentiments into the mouths of his ideological opponents, and then gleefully vanquishing his carefully constructed strawmen. Would readers of this blog be interested in how Mr Frisch connected the dots from my 1012am?

        • Steven Frisch says:

          Here, let me connect the dots.

          On your blog under the “Great Divide” tag, and regularly in other comments, you have made the case that culturally homogeneous nations are more likely to be stable nations.You have decried the loss of American “culture” to the changes wrought by immigration. You have even gone so far as to state that people in the United States should have a “right” to cultural homogeneity, and to live together in communities of their choice with the cultural homogeneity they desire. I have asked you to define how this “right” would be secured, which you have declined to provide.

          It is my contention that our founding fathers intended, expected and anticipated millions of immigrants coming to America. They created a fundamentally different government, one that welcomed and tolerated newcomers to participate in the experiment in liberty. To our founders immigration was a mutually beneficial process. Immigrants would benefit from an open society in which they participated in the nation’s political and civic life, enjoy the benefits of their labor, and contribute to the growth of our national wealth. Our founders believed that immigrants would contribute to our evolving national character, shaping it in ways that benefitted everyone.

          So I reflected on where I have heard this cultural homogeneity case made before…and remembered…from Alfred Rosenberg.

          I merely thought I would provide the quotes as context for my critique of your world view.

          I can’t help it if you sound like Alfred Rosenberg.

        • Chris Peterson says:

          “But things quickly go awry when even a small un-assismilating proportion of people with a radically different culture are allowed/invited to immigrate.”
          -George Rebane

          “I draw the line in the dust and toss the gauntlet before the feet of tyranny, and I say segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever.”
          — George Wallace

          George, if you and Wallace are not racists, then it is my distinct pleasure to announce that racism is a lie and no racist has ever existed.

          Ad hominems, my ass.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

What is 9 + 12 ?
Please leave these two fields as-is:
Please solve this math problem so we know that you are a human :-)