Socialism in America, or Much Ado about Nothing

Being called a socialist is the gravest, most wounding insult in America. Everyone and Glenn Beck knows that socialism is pure evil.

Or so Americans are led to believe, just in case they would get into their heads some dangerous ideas about social justice, equality and other such silliness. As it happens -- and not surprisingly so -- socialism, as defined by Tea Partiers and right-wingers, is none of those things they believe it is.

Bill Quigley, Legal Director at the Center for Constitutional Rights and law professor at Loyola University New Orleans, looks at the 9 most pervasive American myths about socialism and debunks them, one by one, below (via ICH).

Myth #1. The US government is involved in class warfare attacking the rich to lift up the poor.

There is a class war going on all right. But it is the rich against the rest of us and the rich are winning. The gap between the rich and everyone else is wider in the US than any of the 30 other countries surveyed. In fact, the top 10% in the US have a higher annual income than any other country. And the poorest 10% in the US are below the average of the other OECD countries. The rich in the U.S. have been rapidly leaving the middle class and poor behind since the 1980s.

Myth #2. The US already has the greatest health care system in the world.

Infant mortality in the US is 4th worst among OECD countries – better only than Mexico, Turkey and the Slovak Republic.

Myth #3. There is less poverty in the US than anywhere.

Child poverty in the US, at over 20% or one out of every five kids, is double the average of the 30 OECD countries.

Myth #4. The US is generous in its treatment of families with children.

The US ranks in the bottom half of countries in terms of financial benefits for families with children. Over half of the 30 OECD countries pay families with children cash benefits regardless of the income of the family. Some among those countries (e.g. Austria, France and Germany) pay additional benefits if the family is low-income, or one of the parents is unemployed.

Myth #5. The US is very supportive of its workers.

The US gives no paid leave for working mothers having children. Every single one of the other 30 OECD countries has some form of paid leave. The US ranks dead last in this. Over two thirds of the countries give some form of paid paternity leave. The US also gives no paid leave for fathers.

In fact, it is only workers in the US who have no guaranteed days of paid leave at all. Korea is the next lowest to the US and it has a minimum of 8 paid annual days of leave. Most of the other 30 countries require a minimum of 20 days of annual paid leave for their workers.

Myth #6. Poor people have more chance of becoming rich in the US than anywhere else.

Social mobility (how children move up or down the economic ladder in comparison with their parents) in earnings, wages and education tends to be easier in Australia, Canada and Nordic countries like Denmark, Norway, and Finland, than in the US. That means more of the rich stay rich and more of the poor stay poor here in the US.

Myth #7. The US spends generously on public education.

In terms of spending for public education, the US is just about average among the 30 countries of the OECD. Educational achievement of US children, however, is 7th worst in the OECD. On public spending for childcare and early education, the US is in the bottom third.

Myth #8. The US government is redistributing income from the rich to the poor.

There is little redistribution of income by government in the U.S. in part because spending on social benefits like unemployment and family benefits is so low. Of the 30 countries in the OECD, only in Korea is the impact of governmental spending lower.

Myth #9. The US generously gives foreign aid to countries across the world.

The US gives the smallest percentage of aid of any of the developed countries in the OECD. In 2007 the US was tied for last with Greece. In 2008, we were tied for last with Japan.

Despite the opinions of right wing folks, the facts say the US is not on the path towards socialism.

But if socialism means the US would go down the path of being more generous with our babies, our children, our working families, our pregnant mothers, and our sisters and brothers across the world, I think we could all appreciate it.

There is a version of this article with footnotes for those interested. Quigley77@gmail.com

For dessert, a reminder from Noam Chomsky about what socialism is and isn't (mostly the latter):


And to round up our already rich meal, a quiz from inquiring minds at Ironic Times who want to know what is so socialist about Obama, exactly:

Which of the following has prompted Republicans to call Barack Obama the “most liberal President in our nation's history?”

A ) Calling for an end to the moratorium on construction of new nuclear plants.

B ) Calling for an end to the moratorium on new offshore drilling.

C ) Reforming healthcare along insurance industry guidelines.

D ) Escalating the war in Afghanistan.

E ) Ignoring abuses of power by his Republican predecessor.

Hint: Please tell us, we'd like to know.

Borrow and buy and blame it on the other guy

I hope I'm not hammering on this issue too hard, but as I keep hearing the argument that our growing debt is an isolated and dangerous problem only now to be addressed because we have a Democratic president and Democratic is another word for Communist insurgent, I can't be accused of beating a dead horse. No matter how smelly, the horse is still running and in fact, may be moving into first place.



I hope the data shown above will dispel some of the smoke clouds from our cold civil war. Of course data is data and interpretations will vary, but can't we tell that the steepest declines in debt Vs. GDP occurred, like economic expansion, during years when top marginal brackets were over 50% and as high as 90%? Doesn't it appear that the alleged expansion during Reagan's years was really only a manifestation of surging debt ratios? Doesn't it also look like anything one might call growth during W's terms was simply exploding debt which caused so much liquidity, so many dollars flowing into hot air derivatives and overpriced real estate and unregulated, over valued securities that the worst boom/bust cycle since the 1920's blew up in our face? Isn't it obvious that any apparent prosperity under Reagan fell hopelessly short of offsetting his profligacy in running up the debt? Isn't it obvious that the market boom under W. was the result of people like me having more money than they know what to do with and pumping up the markets to the point of the biggest bang in 14.7 billion years?

Isn't it hard, seeing the upward momentum to expect anything the current president could do would cause a 180 degree reversal in the time he's been in office?

A poor sort of memory

Once I built a railroad, I made it run, made it race against time.

Once I built a railroad; now it's done. Brother, can you spare a dime?*

No, I'm not that bad off by any means, but there was a time, not long ago, when I bought yachts and sports cars and houses on a whim; gave houses and condos to my kids without the slightest worry and used the Queen Mary the way some people take the bus. I should have worried. I should have heeded the warning I gave my handful of readers: George W. Bush and the Republicans are playing a shell game with the economy. They're the house, we're the rubes and the house always wins.

Of course I was laughed at. I no longer hear from the guffawing gulls who insisted I was further to the left than Chairman Mao, that the market was sound, the war was going to pay for itself, that "Liberals" were not only focusing on the negative, but trying to precipitate a market panic just to make St George the Genius and God's favorite son look bad so they could bring on an era of Socialist/Fascist oppression. They've long since invented a new mythology to hide what they said and did; how I was right and they were wrong.

Of course we Liberals were being quite conservative in worrying about the fact that Reaganesque tax cuts have always done just what they just did again: worrying that trying to finance the most expensive war ( toldya so) we've had by depending on a solidly disproved dogma, by borrowing abroad rather than domestically and firing anyone who suggested fiscal or military foresight, worrying that the light at the end of the tunnel only they could see, was only the fires of fiscal hell.

Debt doesn't matter,
Don't you know,
St. Ron the Reagan told us so.

The born-again believers are washed clean and born again into a new mythos, one where the Black Satan caused the massive recession which continues to deepen because of government spending that used to be good but now is bad. That means that economists who say that not only has a 1929 reprise been averted, but it's slowly getting better are the new Liberals talking down the economy by talking it up. If you're a TeaParty twit, you need things to be getting worse and indeed they do believe. They need to believe that their taxes went up with Obama and believe they do.

'The market is up, all's well with the world' won't be their Christmas carol again this year. Even though the market is up -- the Teabaggers think it's not and is going down. They insist the recession is deepening, that we have a tyrant in office and they insist their taxes are up when they aren't. They still rage about Death Panels and rally around the Witch of Wasilla like she were Joan of Arc.

That means that a conservative approach to economic realities is once again seditious, once again farleftliberal propaganda and those liberal people from Business Week must be talking up the economy to undermine freedom, prosperity and free enterprise.

"If Obama was a Republican, we would hear a never-ending drumbeat of news stories about markets voting in favor of the President." says Dan Greenhaus, chief economic strategist for Miller Tabak + Co.

It's just the kind of farleftliberal stuff you might expect from an institutional trading firm in Jew Controlled New York rather than the illiterate hordes sucking up seditious stupidity from the teats of Mother Fox who know better.

"It's a poor sort of memory that works only backwards," said the Queen to Alice,

but of course she wasn't American and couldn't be expected to understand.


* "Brother, Can You Spare a Dime," lyrics by Yip Harburg, music by Jay Gorney (1931)

Believing is seeing.

"I'm not in politics, I'm in ratings. We're winning"

-Roger Ailes, Chairman, Fox Television Stations Group -


It's remarkable and a bit sad that media outlets like MSNBC or NPR or the New York Times are so easily dismissed by the very people their job it is to expose as charlatans, liars, thieves, hypocrites and enemies of Democracy. There are so many possibilities to disembowel the people who are in turn disemboweling our values and our history and our nationhood and the very stability of our country, but bundled into a package like bad loans and labeled as Liberally biased, the non-Fox media simply give in, afraid to do what anyone who knows how to use Youtube can do they ignore the lies and emulate the deceivers or turn to celebrity gossip.

But of course in a different way, it's just as sad to see people like Newt Gingrich and Sean Hannity shown as naked and pathetic as the newly clothed emperor by one of the only news programs with nothing to lose by telling the truth: The Daily Show. I had tears in my eyes Thursday night as the scrolling text of President Obama's Nuclear Position Report was followed by the Foxed up report clothed as a conversation between the very god of hypocrisy and America's own Rasputin. Using someone's own recorded words against him makes it very hard, in theory to drown out the truth with the usual brass band of Obamahate or simply continue to lie and deny with brass balls. why sad? because it doesn't matter, because the people who want to believe won't willingly leave their fantasy faith and view the real, sad world and because there are a lot of them and because they're angry as hell that Democracy overturned their perceived entitlement. As with evolution deniers, no amount of proof is enough even to raise the terrible spectre of doubt. For reasonable people seeing is believing, for Teabaggers, Fox Folk and the vermin who write viral e-mails, it's the other way around.

Yes, indeed, The United States pledges never to make or threaten a nuclear attack against a non-nuclear enemy save for the provision that a chemical or biological attack could exempt an enemy from that pledge, but within seconds we see Gingrich saying that we're endangered because a chemical or biological attack could not provoke a nuclear response. Within seconds we hear Hannity affirm "yes, that's what he said."

It's always quite an experience to see someone look you in the face and lie when you have proof positive that's just what it is. One feels betrayed, embarrassed, angry: one never wants to trust or listen to that person again. But not if you need that lie. Not if your entire life revolves around that lie.

Will MSNBC or CNN or the networks address the Fox crew's responsibility to report the truth? Would they risk running such dramatic proof that their competition is no more honest or reliable than the Legendary Iraqi Defense Minister? What will they say about Fox's assertions that our widely radical president will put us all in danger by reducing our huge stockpile of nukes, some over 40 years old, by a third, or by looking forward to a world without them? Will they, like Jon Stewart simply run clips of Ronald Reagan telling the world that he looks forward to a world without nuclear weapons and that we should reduce the count by one third as a first step? No, they won't. Reagan will remain right and Obama will, by being exactly the same be irrevocably wrong -- and a far left radical liberal trying to weaken our defenses. Truth is irrelevant.

According to Newt Gingrich, President Obama believes that words are a substitute for reality: he's referring to words the President never said, or words that the Hero Reagan also said. His smirking riff, only meant to perfume a pointless smear and to deflect notice that this is precisely what Newt is doing: knowingly lying about the President, creating a false substitute for reality and knowingly trying to enrage people against the elected government. As Roger Ailes said, they're about ratings.

Who in the "Liberal Media" is going to expose him as a seditious insurgent? Who on CNN is going to put together clips of McCain calling himself a Maverick and denying he ever called himself a Maverick? Clips of McCain telling us to avoid extremists like Jerry Falwell and then praising Jerry Falwell? McCain espousing views and then calling Obama an extremist for agreeing? Only an entertainment show, a fake news show. You won't often see such stunning journalism on a real news program or in a real paper or magazine, because it's quick, because it doesn't allow the concocted "balance" of dignifying a baseless lie as "another point of view," because you can't speculate and expatiate and flap your jaws hysterically about it all day and all night. That's not what journalism is any more. Truth isn't even what truth is any more and Journalism isn't journalism, it's entertainment, it's a Roman circus and we're not the lions.

Is it over yet?

Yonder stands your orphan with his gun
Crying like a fire in the sun
Look out the saints are comin' through
And it's all over now, Baby Blue.

At what point do I give up and admit it's all over? The anti-Obama hate cult permeates every waking hour of my day, from technical seminars between engineers about packet radio networks interrupted by someone handing out disreputable Republican figures showing what a spendthrift radical socialist Obama is, from e-mails and phone calls asking me to participate in tax protests from people who won't have to pay taxes at all this year to the constant snide comments about Obama not saluting to this or apologizing for that. There are e-mailed clips of Gingrich preaching about the "most radical president" e-mailed jokes about him firing "cattle guards" and just about every captious hoax you'll find at Fact Check.org or Snopes.com or UrbanLegends.about.com. The mad blood is pumping like it's 1861, and US Rte 1 as it runs through my county, sports shiny new billboards for gun shops and firearms training.

"But these are real numbers" said a friend I should have thought would question any estimates published by the RNC about what "Obamacare" will cost.

"Real from the same people who predicted the Iraq war would cost nothing?" I replied? He looked puzzled. One doesn't suggest any doubt concerning the Party of God in these parts. One doesn't mention that 47% of American families won't owe any Federal income tax this year to a sign waving teabagger or that Iraq has cost us as much as WWII and isn't nearly over yet, not unless you want to invite hate mail and stuff thrown on your lawn, put your job at risk and have no friends at all. Want to know how Dr. Mudd felt? Just suggest that George W. Bush had anything to do with the policies that allowed Enron to ruin so many people, precipitated the bubble and credit crunch, started the most expensive war we've ever had on false pretenses. I spent years being called a traitor for suggesting that what has come to pass would come to pass, but exoneration is going to have to wait for the second coming.

Local papers have become unreadable and dripping with foamy saliva in their raving about Obama's religious agenda, secular and Islamic and I suspect that like many papers today, the owners thereof are writing some of them to use the power of insane hate to boost circulation.

One doesn't mention that Fox News, the fair and balanced network that is run entirely by and for Republicans, doesn't employ a single Democrat and not only slants stories, it invents them and remains silent when their hoaxes are revealed by every other outlet on earth. The Acorn Hoax, the Climategate hoax, the "Two Planeloads of Democrat Lawyers descend on Wasilla" hoax. People think you're crazy, or worse yet a Liberal -- you know, one of those black clad bearded guys who carry bombs and hate America. No one here will even listen for fear of being branded a liberal and people who call themselves skeptics can't imagine the Republican version of anything might be biased. No one will accept that Obama was elected because of the failure of a long Republican administration and Republican controlled congress.

The fact is that Dwight Eisenhower took equal flack for implementing integration to the horror of people who called him a radical, FDR took worse for Social Security, Johnson for his war on poverty and support of civil rights legislation and of course Medicare. Jefferson was called a tax and spend radical, because in America you can't just be wrong, you have to be the Devil, even the irrefutable facts can be the devil or the work of his hand.

What's the use of opposing it? Could any amount of truth or blather have stopped the civil war or done away with the institution of Slavery? Can anyone save America from the metastatic madness?

DON BLANKENSHIP: “MINE! UP YOURS! DROP DEAD!”

Considered the worst mining disaster in 25 years, the death toll in Tuesday’s mine explosion near Whitesville West Virginia has reached 25 fatalities. Thus far, seven bodies have been identified and 18 remain underground. Four persons are still missing.

According to a spokesperson for Massey Energy, the owner of the mine, the rescue mission has been suspended because rising levels of methane gas made further rescue and recovery operations unsafe. The mission will continue after boreholes are drilled to vent the mine of combustible gas.

One deceased miner, Benny Willingham, age 62, was only five weeks away from retirement, according to his sister-in-law, Sheila Prillaman, who said family members only learned of Willingham’s death from a list posted by the company.  Prillaman is angry because no company representative contacted the family in person to inform them of their loss.

Don Blankenship, the Chairman and CEO of Massey Energy, confirmed the casualty count with this statement (source):

”Our top priority is the safety of our miners and the well-being of their families.”

For a nation so jaded by corporate spin and the lack of investigative journalism, the statement renders itself invisible to scrutiny. Too bad it takes a tragedy of this magnitude to shed light on an Inconvenient Truth: Massey Energy, the nation’s sixth largest mining concern, is a repeat offender, a notorious scofflaw, and now … mass murderer.

According to federal records, Massey Energy has amassed over 3,000 safety violations (including 57 in the last month alone) for failing to develop and follow a safety plan. Data kept by the Mine Safety and Health Administration show three fatalities at the Upper Big Branch mine in the past 12 years. Last year, Massey paid a record $4.2 million in criminal and civil fines for “willfully violating mandatory safety standards” that led to the deaths of two miners (source).

Mining operators such as Massey Energy thwart new safety rules by overloading the regulatory system with appeals that clog the system and bog down enforcement. Operators employ this tactic to avoid paying fines, evade scrutiny, and stop regulators from shutting down mines for violations that put workers’ lives in risk. To date, the backlog of outstanding appeals has risen to 16,000 cases (source).

Blankenship is the epitome of a corrupt and morally bankrupt plutocrat. As the highest paid coal executive in the land, he has used his fortune to corrupt the system, bust unions, buy politicians, and influence justice. He is infamous for spending $3.5 million to defeat the election of a West Virginia Supreme Court Judge in order to overturn a $50 million fraud verdict against his company (source). These days, it has never been easier for a crook like Blankenship to dodge charges of graft.

How does the energy industry literally get away with murder? Companies such as Massey Energy and Koch Industries spend millions of dollars each year to confound the issues and distract the public by enlisting unwitting citizens to serve as their proxies. Here is Don Blankenship inviting the public to a Labor Day Tea Party event called Friends of America Rally:



Environmental extremists? Corporate America? Destroying your jobs?  It is an audacious deception worthy of Grima Wormtongue. Certainly we understand how free markets, union busting, and lower wages put more money in the pockets of Don Blankenship and David Koch. How does the gutting of occupational safety regulations benefit American workers? How do higher allowable levels of arsenic in public drinking water benefit growing children? How does toxic wash from mountaintop removal benefit downstream communities? Our news media covers the Tea Party rabble while our most pressing questions go unanswered.

At the 1992 Republican Convention, Vice President Dan Quayle attacked the concept of progressive taxation with this question: “Why should the best people be punished?” His remark affords us a glimpse into a mindset where the richest people are considered “the best people” at the pinnacle of an economic, social, and moral order (source) while the rest of us are mere serfs and vassals for their self-enrichment. What profits the plutocracy is defined as “freedom;” what benefits middle-class America is derisively termed ‘socialism.’

Priests' paradise -- Alaska

Every time I think the Catholic-priest-molestation scandal can't get any worse -- it does.

On the morning of January 14 in Seattle, Ken Roosa and a small group Alaska Natives stood on the sidewalk outside Seattle University to announce a new lawsuit against the Jesuits, claiming a widespread conspiracy to dump pedophile priests in isolated Native villages where they could abuse children off the radar. "They did it because there was no money there, no power, no police".....

These abusers in Alaska, Wall said, were specifically sent to Alaska "to get them off the grid, where they could do the least amount of damage" to the church's public image.

Read the whole thing (found via PZ Myers, who has plenty to say too). The leaders of the Church cared nothing for the children who had been victimized, nor for those whom they knew full well these creatures would go on to victimize in Alaska, so long as everybody kept quiet. They cared only for the Church's reputation. So it's most appropriate that that reputation is now being slowly and publicly shredded, lawsuit by lawsuit.

Too bad it comes too late for the kids who committed suicide.

Internet neutrality and the Courts

Marconi was still a young man when the need for government control of communications became all too obvious. Newsmen using the new wireless telegraph began to jam each others' transmissions accidentally and on purpose and battles were fought over frequency allocations. Someone had to step in with some rules to allow the technology to develop, to prevent it being used as a weapon in restraint of free trade and to make sure that those using the public airwaves would use it without disregard for the public interest.

I can almost hear throats clearing at those last two words, almost see lips forming words like collectivism, socialism, Communism, but without it, the guy with the most money has the podium and the guy who owns all the podiums: press, broadcast and now the Internet, might just as well be the government with all that power. The difference between a fair trial and murder; between a Hockey game and a viking raid (if there is a difference) is the rules, so save your breath. I don't want to hear it.

The FCC was formed for these reasons, but during the last administration, it's been almost exclusively concerned with promoting the interests of power companies who want to use the power lines to get into the internet business, and sometimes to the serious harm of other users of the frequency spectrum. Whether or not this has changed under the Communist/Fascist Antichrist from Kenya seems to matter less than the current posture of the courts. The District of Columbia Federal Appeals Court decided yesterday in favor of Comcast and against the authority of the FCC in it's attempt to mandate "net neutrality."

The new administration has been in favor of equal treatment for all internet users; in favor of a policy that would prevent Comcast, for instance from slowing down and restricting the content they don't like and making content they approve of faster and cheaper. Yes, yes, I know all about free market competition, but I'm talking about the real world here and that's a world where corporations collude rather than compete. It's a world where a small group can control information to the point where no one can compete successfully. As I said, the difference between boxing and assault and battery or even murder is the rules.

It's too soon to make scary assertions about how this will work out, but as restrictions on how much of all media outlets can be owned by one person, real or corporate have been loosened along with restrictions on how much information they can restrict in their own interest, it looks to me like we're once again shooting ourselves in the foot, slow motion style. Our obsessive fantasy of a 'no holds barred' marketplace leading to peace and order, prosperity and a well informed electorate is, along with our phobic horror of phrases like "public interest" may be making corporate demagoguery a more valid vision of the future.

Freedom's just another word

Somehow I've never been able to understand why preventing enormous and hugely profitable insurance corporations from dropping you because you kid was born with a heart defect or not covering your leukemia treatments because you forgot to tell them you had acne in high school makes us no longer a free country -- or perhaps only a "mostly free" country according to the Heritage Foundation.

But more confusing and more difficult to reconcile than quantum mechanics and relativity is the idea that allowing warrantless wiretaps and other unconstitutional government abuses don't have the same effect. Seems that President Ford was comfortable with giving the FBI discretion on whether or not to seek a warrant for probable cause for wiretapping on the advice of his Attorney General William B. Saxbe. That's a long time before the Patriot act that cemented the "almost free" condition into law - a law that the Democrats haven't yet repudiated. Silly of me that this might have interfered with my freedom nearly as much as an extra 2% on what I might make over a net $375,000. Freedom's just another word for profit.

Is it the threat to monopolistic and feudalistic aberrations of free-market Capitalism that make us almost free or is it things like restrictions on civil rights? I think the answer is obvious. Freedom isn't at stake when Exxon-Mobil payed less in income tax last year than a minimum wage worker did, but the minimum wage itself is a threat to freedom and a harbinger of a Communist takeover. But don't ask me to explain. Ask some other millionaire from the kind of "think-tank" funded by the oil cartel.

Because that's exactly who is telling us what freedom means. That's who would rather you didn't think of it in terms of freedom from want, fear, privation - or the FBI rummaging through your life looking for anything they like. There's little profit in privacy -- in your privacy anyway. There is big profit in usury so our freedom hasn't suffered by finance companies that can charge 200% and ask for more, but it's damn near communist tyranny to ask Exxon to pay what my gardener pays.

No, Obama is a tyrant and he's made us less free, not for the things he's done or hasn't done to force responsibility on Wall Street, not for failing to undo constitutional infractions or abuses of executive power, not for actually give most of us a tax cut, but for giving some of the protection we've been asking for against financial ruin, against having to choose between feeding our kids or dying of a curable disease.

I'm glad we have people like the Heritage Foundation around to explain things like freedom to us. We might have gone on thinking that being able to vote, to use public facilities, to be served in restaurants and hotels, to buy property wherever we can afford it, to get a job if we're not white or protestant or male or young or to send our kids to school had something to do with being free -- all those things that such grand sounding patriotic spokesmen like the Heritage foundation assure us are nothing of the sort. Without them we might have forgotten how free we were years ago when we had slavery, segregation, race laws, male suffrage, restricted housing, poll taxes and lynching parties. I'm glad they continue to keep up the good fight.

Tea Party Express...to the Moon

Despite a smudge on my camera lens (it was impossible to see on the LCD screen in broad afternoon sunlight), I'm very proud of this video. The Tea Party Express is either a brilliant piece of surrealist theatre or a massive exercise in cognitive dissonance. Enjoy.