The Democrat Party and Socialism


Recently discovered video shows Howard Dean, former chair of the Democratic National Committee, telling a group of people in France that the debate for “the new generations, instead of capitalism or socialism, is we’re gonna have both and then which proportion of each should we have in order to make this all work.”  He goes on to say that this is a new innovation from Obama.

Most of us have been reluctant to call Obama socialist, even those of us who know what socialism looks like through first-hand experience.  During the campaign and beyond, the word was not only dismissed, but quickly shot down as being out of line.  The same way the “lies” and “fishy statements” about healthcare have been dismissed.  The same way those who actually want a debate about global warming and the questionable data are shut down by shouts of “denier” and declarations that the debate is over.  As far as I can see, the debate on each of these issues has never taken place (Al Gore matching wits with Lord Christopher Monckton, anyone?)

In place of debate, the believers have called names and attempted to blackball and denigrate, as we’ve seen from the alleged emails of leaders in the field of climate science, some of whom are substantially behind the “data” used to “prove” global warming.  When that hasn’t worked, as with the healthcare question, they’ve asked for all “fishy” information to be reported to the central authority – the White House; that is, until public uproar interrupted that program.

Unlike the typical favorites in political rhetoric (hatemonger, stupid, bigot), socialist is a term used to identify one who subscribes to a particular set of beliefs and values.  Nevertheless, it has been treated as slander.  The language has become so co-opted by those who want to control the debate instead of having debate that, unfortunately, confusion reigns.

It appears as though the debate that is finally over is that which questions whether the Democrat party is a party with a socialist bent.  Howard Dean was their leader from 2005 until 2009 and claims to have instituted the “permanent campaign,” one whose purpose is to influence policy.  Throw that in with the calls coming from the White House to convince members of the National Endowment for the Arts (a federally-funded organization, paid for by you and me) to produce propaganda in support of President Obama’s agenda.  It all makes sense now.

I have never heard Obama, publicly, endorse a socialist agenda (except for all those policies he supports which certainly look like one).  According to Howard Dean though, Obama is the author of this new innovation to meld socialism with our existing economic system.

The part very most disturbing is the complete lack of transparency and honesty.  I’m just not sure why obfuscation would be necessary if the Democrat party truly believes socialism, to any degree, is ultimately best for our country.  Is it because Americans would never stand behind such policies, en masse, if they really knew the basis for the current legislative plans of this administration and its party?

If socialism is a goal of the Democrats, come on out and say it.  It’s okay.  Then, and only then, can we have a debate about the merits of such a system v. a capitalist system v. a hybrid of the two.  I’ll be waiting.

Leave a Reply

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