Rewriting Socialism

“We have the first time in the history of the profoundly stupid American debate between those who do not fear socialism and those who do, something of an agreement as to what socialism is and isn’t.”

Why Americans can’t accept that the plain fact that they have a mixed economy has always escaped me.

Advertisements

5 Comments

Filed under Political Ideology, Socialiasm

5 responses to “Rewriting Socialism

  1. Because Americans subscribe to a national ideology (& mythology …) as potent as communism once was to Russia between 1917 and 1989 – liberalism.

    Any political theorist recognises this fact. The polar opposite of communism is liberalism.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberalism

  2. Conservatism – on the other hand opposes the radicalism and anti-traditional nature of liberalism.

    (Real) conservatism and social-democracy are vaguely mid points in the continuum between liberalism and communism.

    Fascism is synthesis of liberalism and communism hiding behind the veneer of traditionalism and populism.

    Conservative nations and peoples do not accept or propose revolution(s). Revolutions are radical, violent, and disruptive of social peace. Conservative people do not believe in “isms”. Instead, they believe in the collective nature of individuals working towards a general and common good. Conservative people only accept equalitarian notions if it contributes to the social peace and common good. Conservative people accept that there is a hierarchy to life, and that these hierarcies cross-cut amongst many aspects of human existence. Conservative people do not cut the head off of their Kings and Queens. Instead they revere them as living symbols of the Nation, and the fount of honour and the law. To dishonour the Sovereign it to dishonour the nation – by dishonouring each other as moral and civil obligants to each as part of a social compact composed of those who have gone before us, those who live now, and those who will replenish and supplant us as future generations. In essence they seek to “conserve” what is good about our civilisation and seek reform those parts that are less desirable or efficacious.

    Thus, a conservative not only can be an environmentalist, but to my mind would have to be an environmentalist if they wish to be considered truly “conservative”.

  3. I really hate ideological labels.

  4. That’s point. Traditional conservatism is not an ideology, but rather a philosophy of life.

  5. I really hate ideological labels.

    So do I. Fortunately, the labels that most accurately describe the maggots currently crawling over Canadian conservatism’s rotting carcass–“cretin”, “scumbag”, “jackass”, etc.– are not ideologically driven in the slightest.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s