Socialism in the USA - Kurt Vonnegut

Kurt Vonnegut on Socialism and Christianity, and America's demonisation of the former. (NB Please ignore the 'links' - a mistake!)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------­---------------

Obama's ever dwindling number of ardent critics are resorting to calling Obama a 'socialist' (is this just a cover up for straightforward racial prejudice?)

Of course, Obama's policies are influenced by socialism, but his version seems even more watered down than the 'socialist democracies' of Europe. And anyway, as Kurt asks, what are we so afraid of anyway?

From 'A Man Without a Country', available as an Audiobook from Audioeditions.com

http://www.audioeditions.com/audio-book.cfm/title/A-Man-Without-a-Country/pco...

Category:

Education

Tags:

• Obama
• Socialism
• Socialist
• Communist
• Communism
• Atheist
• USA
• Marx
• Stalin
• Obamunism
• Command
• and
• Control
• Obamrades
• Kurt
• Vonnegut
• Muslim

[WaleedRahman]

What is he reading from?

[dogblessamerica]

His final book, 'A Man Without A Country'.

[AntiVenomFangX]

yea, i noticed that all of these loud christians are against socialism.... do they not know about the teachings of jesus?

[snapplepeachtea56]

tbh i think that socialism might be better for us right now and this video has a point it has the same aspects as Christianity

[strummeresque]

@AntiVenomFangX As Kurt Vonnegut himself pointed out numerous times, the only words we know for certain that were spoken by Jesus, the only words that HE saw fit for recording, were the words of the Sermon on the Mount. Christians, by and large, seem to pay much more attention to what OTHER people say about what Christ thought was right than what Christ HIMSELF said...

[TeboFire]

@fateola Wow you surprise me.

2 things you got right:

Yes, different socialist ideologies define and treat dependents in different ways. Some put you in work camps others pass the burden on.

What I really like is your astute observation that any “imposed” distinction between willful dependence and classic dependence is arbitrary.

This is exactly why freewill is so important and in turn is exactly why socialist rules invariably imposed on a dissenting portion of the population FAIL.

[TeboFire]

@fateola The only short coming here is that the distinction between willful dependence and classic dependence is not exactly arbitrary.

That is; it is only arbitrary when imposed by others. A willful dependent knows exactly what their intentions are; are rightfully in control of their destiny; and will always be motivated to achieve their goals.

Because of this it must be that individuals have freedom so that the willfully dependent may fall and the classic dependent rise.

[TeboFire]

@fateola This can only happen in a free market society that is protected from corruption by a judicial system founded on correct principles. Unfortunately that vision of the USA fades because people would rather force their values on others.

[fateola]

@TeboFire

Well that's not true either; again, you're generalizing too far. Different socialist ideologies define dependents in different ways. Moreover, there is no clear distinction between those who are willful and those who are not. Any imposed distinction is arbitrary. Besides, the police and fire departments, and the military are all socialist institutions. I wonder if you are opposed to being dependent upon them?

[TeboFire]

@fateola As to the more intellectual part of your last statement I say:

Good point I should have been more specific. Let me modify to say “willfully dependent”.

Socialist ideologies are ravaged because they fail to discriminate between the “dependent” (those you have pointed out) and the “willfully dependent” in any meaningful ways.

[TeboFire]

@fateola Well, usually when people mock someone else’s words there is a connection between the statement you are mocking and the statement that makes the mockery.

Of course you were only mocking my statement to point out the generalization and I assume that people know the rules of generalizations so for me it was a moot point.

Since I assumed you were intelligent it naturally follows that there should be a deeper point than just that. Sorry for overestimating your inelegance.

[fateola]

@TeboFire

Read this carefully:

I am NOT associating homosexuality with socialism. I have no idea how you came to that conclusion. I suggest you reread from the beginning, possibly with external assistance.

Regarding your pet topic of socialism/dependency, which you seem desperate to talk about regardless of context.... Society necessarily contains many dependents: children, the unemployed, disabled, and elderly. If you would leave these groups to the wolves, then we differ in opinion.

[TeboFire]

@randy95023 Theft is a form of dependency; charity is a form in interdependence which cannot exist without respect for the freewill of others. Christ teachings inherently show respect for the freewill of others above all else.

But the real question in all of this is whether or not you see the connection between socialism and dependency? And why you would think that dependents could provide a solid foundation for society?