The Communist Party of USA

Posted on February 6, 2008
Filed Under WTFish?, America |

This one was certainly an amusing “wtf moment”. I’ve been having many of those recently.

Who knew there’s actually one in America alive and well, and promoting socialism? Not me. They should at least change the name to Social Democrats or something. Or better still, wake up. It’s 2008.

If anything, the practice of capitalism in America needs to be tweaked because seriously, when there are war vets, and old women and men who are homeless in the wealthiest nation on earth, something is pretty screwed up. But socialism? Please. That’s not a good solution.

Yaay to communists.

Comments

11 Responses to “The Communist Party of USA”

  1. halalhippie on February 6th, 2008 10:04 pm

    Why not ? there’s a Hizb-ut Tahrir in Denmark (and a Nazi Party).. The freedom of assembly, and the freedom to be out of touch.

    “But socialism? Please. That’s not a good solution.”
    Why not ? Some say the Caliphate is _the_ solution.

  2. Matthew on February 6th, 2008 11:38 pm

    Um, Hillary Clinton said just a week ago that she would garner wages of people who don’t buy into gov’t health insurance. (http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=4235304).

    I’d say that’s pretty close to promoting socialism: if you don’t step in line with the government, they’ll take money right out of your paycheck and give it to someone else! While the whole kit and caboodle of socialism (or Communism) is certainly not strong in America, there is incredible power creep with the government. And it’s a little frightening.

  3. Drima on February 7th, 2008 3:47 am

    “The freedom of assembly, and the freedom to be out of touch.”

    Yeah I know halalhippie, nothing wrong. I was just shocked that such a thing known as the *communist* party exists *in* USA. You’d think by now it’s no more. Guess I assumed wrong.

    Mathew, Hillary’s methods could be argued against, but I believe everyone agrees that children shouldn’t be left uninsured.

  4. Andrew Brehm on February 7th, 2008 10:08 am

    “Hizb-ut Tahrir in Denmark (and a Nazi Party)”

    How do people tell the difference?

  5. Not Your Mama on February 7th, 2008 11:07 am

    but I believe everyone agrees that children shouldn’t be left uninsured.

    Ah well, I have a surprise for you…you’d be appalled at just how many Americans are ok with that, will even say so publicly. Things most sane and reasonable people would assume are not always the case here.

    I doubt that (even if elected which I do not give good odds) Clinton can make her “mandatory” insurance into reality. Rumors to the contrary both repubs AND dems still have strong libertarian tendencies with the most libertarian usually falling more towards the center of their preferred parties.

    In other words…the majority. Which has a lot to do with why neither party wants to see a nationwide move towards open primaries…but that’s an entirely other story ;).

  6. Andrew Brehm on February 7th, 2008 2:30 pm

    “but I believe everyone agrees that children shouldn’t be left uninsured.”

    If everyone believed that, why are there so many Americans who don’t insure their children?

    They can afford it. The American middle class is richer than the German middle class (and even than the Irish middle class).

    A state-sponsored insurance system would cost them the same. If they can afford to pay the taxes to support a state-sponsored system, they certainly can afford to buy insurance.

  7. Don Cox on February 7th, 2008 3:05 pm

    “If everyone believed that, why are there so many Americans who don’t insure their children?”

    Many cannot afford it, others just don’t get around to it. It was the same in Britain before compulsory health insurance was introduced, about 100 years ago.

    “A state-sponsored insurance system would cost them the same. ” Less, because it would be non profit making.

  8. Lynn Gazis-Sax on February 7th, 2008 3:39 pm

    Oh, I remember that party from way back. When I was young, in the 1970s I think, it ran Gus Hall for president (about whom I remember nothing other than the fact that he was their candidate for president). When I was in college, Angela Davis was their vice presidential candidate - probably the most famous candidate they ever had. Despite that, I saw much more of Trotskyite on campus than I ever saw of the Communist Party (and even Trotskyites were pretty fringe among the campuse left).

    I’ve been ignoring it for years, but I’m not surprised it still exists.

    The Communist Party in Greece is more significant, as in, has actually been used to form a coalition to get a parliamentary majority. At one point in the 80s, the conservative party in Greece allied with the Communists to put the socialist party in Greece out of power (corruption scandals make strange bedfellows).

    On gov’t health insurance, one thing to remember is that the government is *already* heavily involved in our health care system, but in ways that aren’t exactly the most efficient (for instance, the whole thing of poor people using the emergency room as their doctor, because that’s the one place that can’t legally refuse them, and they don’t have money for either health care or insurance otherwise).

  9. halalhippie on February 7th, 2008 10:06 pm

    Andrew: “Hizb-ut Tahrir in Denmark (and a Nazi Party)” How do people tell the difference?

    Nazi’s don’t have beards, and a slightly pinker complexion :-)

  10. Drima on February 8th, 2008 6:44 am

    Not Your Mama, I find that hard to believe and totally messed up. It’s one of those things that I still just can’t grasp - why a nation as wealthy as the United States can’t eradicate homelessness and establish health care for ALL children.

    Rudy disses Hillary and calls her plan socialized medicine, then Mitt offers some reasons as to why it won’t work (many of which seem to make sense to me) and how much crap it’s full of.

    Whatever the perspective of people on both sides (and centrists), this problem just shouldn’t even be there in the first place.

    I don’t believe in socialism but I don’t think capitalism as practiced in America is perfect. Yes, it provides a great environment for entrepreneurship (maybe the best in the world and one certainly better than those of many European countries) but the fact that it still can’t even provide for the basic needs of too many citizens, is something I simply don’t get.

    Lynn, thanks for the info.

  11. Andrew Brehm on February 12th, 2008 11:24 am

    “Less, because it would be non profit making.”

    Profits are made by people who add value. If a system is set up that replaces those people with others, the result will not necessarily be better.

    If the result is better a non-profit health insurance company will be able to out-compete profit-making insurance companies.

    I can imagine few things worse than a non-profit health care system.

    This is one area where I definitely want the best and most expensive people to stay and work for the system.

    Drima,

    The US without health insurance is not the same as most countries without health insurance. People do get medical care in the US, for free, if they cannot pay for it. It’s not good enough, but what is?

    “but the fact that it still can’t even provide for the basic needs of too many citizens, is something I simply don’t get.”

    It can provide for the basic needs, it’s just not meant to do so. In America individuals are supposed to provide for their basic needs, not the state.

    All the arguments about a public health care system being better than a private health care system ignore the fact that, apparently, the public system cannot compete and requires a government mandate to be instituted.

Leave a Reply