"I never ... believed there was one code of morality for a public and another for a private man."
Many people today feel the following statement may be true.
"I don't see that we're headed for socialism, though a lot of people are asserting that. It's just hyperbole, an attempt at rabble-rousing.”
When it comes to protecting our American republic this is the crutch of the whole debate, is it not? If you visit Wikipedia.com you can get paragraphs of definitions and variation there of, related to the subject. We could find one that fits our general philosophy quite well, depending on our understanding. But I believe the following one, found elsewhere best states my understanding of socialism.
1. Any of various theories or systems of social organization in which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned collectively or by a centralized government that often plans and controls the economy.
2. The stage in Marxist-Leninist theory intermediate between capitalism and communism, in which collective ownership of the economy under the dictatorship of the proletariat has not yet been successfully achieved.
I like this one because it not only defines it well, but the second definition points to the reason any acceptance of socialism is repugnant to a free market system, which America is suppose to be. So now ask yourself, “Is our government distributing and/or controlling goods or direct plans that controls our economy?” How about social security and more recent, company bail outs and now the new government healthcare system? If these are not forms of socialism then what are they? It is taxes used to redistribute the wealth.
I can not argue with the faults stated by some that the Bush administration has helped this drift we are talking about. As a matter of fact, I can think of only one recent president who might have understood this and tried to remedy it and that was the Regan administration. The subject of American socialism might seem like a hyperbole because many who adhere to capitalism have drifted so far from our founders principals and philosophies, which should control the free market that it does seem at times one is no better than the other. But the answer is not going to be to replace it with a new or different system un-related to capitalism, like socialism all progressives are trying to institute; nor any big government either party sees as the answer.
Progression away from our founders’ principles (my definition of a progressive) under any party affiliation is wrong. No big government plan is good for the republic. The difference between the Bush and Obama administration is that Bush may have been uninformed or misunderstood the principles our republic should work under, but Obama seems very direct and purposeful in his decisions directly headed for socialism. He truly believes it is the answer, but he would be wrong.
What is the answer? Why is capitalism sometimes the overbearing, power grabbing entity it should not be? As a nation we have drifted away from the principles that would help it be the positive influence our founders intended. As I mentioned in my previous post yesterday, we need to come back to the American religion. It needs to be taught once again as it use to in schools and college and lived every day by the people. We, as the people, need to be the virtuous, honest, respectful citizens as a whole the nation was founded upon. Our republic intended such and the founders expected it to be taught and practiced this way. If we are that people, then our economy (and all aspects of community) would reflect it and we would not need the government or anyone to direct us or our resources because it would be taken care of without it. Our founding fathers profoundly understood this and expounded diligently for us to hold these truths. We need to stay away from socialism and practice the principles our republic was found upon.
"I know no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society but the people themselves, (A)nd if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them, but to inform their discretion by education. This is the true corrective of abuses of constitutional power.”
"The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government -- lest it come to dominate our lives and interests."