Picturing A Future Socialistic America

A socialistic America would have restrictive implications that even progressive liberals would take serious exception to. This may sound a little like “Big Brother” to you, but the groundwork is now being laid for the scenario I am about to unfold before your eyes. Surveillance would be the “rule of the day” with cameras on every street light and drones monitoring traffic on interstates and major highways. Imagine receiving an “insta-ticket” from you car’s dashboard printer for entering an intersection as the light was changing to red and the funds being instantly and automatically debited from your account by the state. Imagine applying for a permit to travel from state to state and being told when you apply for your permit that you and your family have not earned enough “Good Citizen Credits” to earn this travel vacation. That can’t happen Think again. Think about earning enough “Good Citizen Points” for you wife to have a baby, then being rejected because you are a bad “genetic match” with your wife and will not be allowed to reproduce. However, the government will match you with a new wife that will produce “genetically improved” children. You will then receive literature in the mail that will dictate to you what vocation your children will be trained for, in state controlled schools. Imagine receiving a “Bad Parenting Fine” from your government-controlled printer because you child was late for school or had a disagreement with another student, and that fine being immediately and automatically debited from you account without your consent and without any recourse. Imagine Brown-shirt troopers going from house-to-house and checking to confirm that your citizenship papers are up to date and your yearly fee has been paid, for the privilege of living in a non-sovereign state within the new “Global Republic.” Does this scenario sound plausible. Many of you will be skeptical, but many may see the groundwork for this scenario being put into place by UN Agenda 21. I know there will be critical comments on this theory that I propose, of a future socialistic America, but discussion is good and I welcome it. When I look at the freedom we that we as Americans have now, I am proud to be an American. When I look into the history of our nation and remember that blood was spilled by men and women of every generation for our unalienable right to be free, I am proud to be an American. I am a patriot and belong to the Delaware 9-12 Patriots. This is only a small amount of what a social global dictatorship would look like.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.
“A nation can only be disgraced by the failure of its citizenry to take action in the face of tyranny” Donald Raleigh Ayotte August 2010

48 thoughts on “Picturing A Future Socialistic America”

  1. Once again, you seem to not know the definition of Socialism. What you are describing is Fascism, a ideology more commonly found on the right side of the political spectrum.

  2. Delaware Dem

    I don’t agree with your definition but then again, you and I probably don’t agree on much of anything politically. Thank you for commenting.

    I will be out all afternoon and will not be on the site until then.

  3. First, what you describe is not socialism. Not one bit.

    Second, you do not understand genetics.

    Think about earning enough “Good Citizen Points” for you wife to have a baby, then being rejected because you are a bad “genetic match” with your wife and will not be allowed to reproduce. However, the government will match you with a new wife that will produce “genetically improved” children. You will then receive literature in the mail that will dictate to you what vocation your children will be trained for, in state controlled schools.

    You wouldn’t need to change spouses. How could you even think that? Screening out disease would occur in a Petri dish. Fertilized eggs would be screened, not your spouse. Science, and how it works, is important.

  4. Parts of this Orwellian scenario you envision are already happening. Many local sheriff’s offices are requesting drones to add to their arsenal. In fact many of these sheriff’s offices are connected with Homeland Security. That’s right, the same Homeland Security that is an arm of the executive branch of the federal government. So much for the local sheriffs protecting us from tyranny, huh?

  5. Did you really just quote yourself in bold italics and use your middle name and the date?

    That’s AWESOME.

  6. anon
    “Did you really just quote yourself in bold italics and use your middle name and the date? ”

    Yes and why not? It’s my quote and it is in proper context.

  7. Delaware Dem on March 28, 2013 at 09:17 said: “Once again, you seem to not know the definition of Socialism. What you are describing is Fascism”

    Liberals will always say that conservatives don’t know what socialism is, BUT WILL NEVER PROVIDE THEIR OWN DEFINITION OF SOCIALISM, because that would immediately alert people to the fact that the modern Democrat party is socialist.

    Remember that socialism and communism are not the same.

    However, Socialism is fascism, when fully implemented, because socialism is government control.

    The full name of the Nazi Party was the Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (NSDAP) or National Socialist German Workers Party.

    When the Nazis were socialist, though also considered fascist, you suggest a distinction between socialism and fascism that probably doesn’t exist.

  8. pandora on March 28, 2013 at 09:30 said: “First, what you describe is not socialism. Not one bit”

    We will count the days until Pandora or any other liberal offers their own definition of socialism. Or if they do they will describe COMMUNISM, not socialism.

    Socialism is the political philosophy of the modern Democrat Party (which was totally hijacked by the New Left in the 1960’s, such as at the Chicago riots in 1968 at the Democrat National Convention).

    Therefore, liberals always try to suggest that conservatives don’t know what socialism is — because in fact we do and have them nailed.

    But liberals don’t want to put anything in writing that would point out how socialist the Democrat party has become.

    Or they will try to pass off the definition of communism as being the definition of socialism.

  9. It is amazing that the first comments are from the Democratic Liberals protesting the truth and stating that the scenario in my post is not socialism but failing to give a definition. That’s good because it gives them a chance to think about their total platform and IIC, (Idiot In Control) B. Hussein Obama.
    I welcome comments from both sides of the spectrum and true honest conversation on both sides.

  10. What you are describing is Fascism, a ideology more commonly found on the right side of the political spectrum.

    Why does that matter?

  11. Even “‘Communism” was financed and essentially run by the “hidden hand” of banksters… the same as Nazism*. I.e. they were only centralizing control and forcing everyone to give them all their wealth, as usual. That’s all it amounts to.

    You get to pick your favorite “brand” of caring/welfare or protection/warfare in the marketing of the welfare/warfare $tate. But you don’t get to pick being left alone at a local level to walk in a garden with your family, let alone an individual level to read a book. No… there’s probably some WMDs in your underpants according to psychopaths. And if not that, then there must be a war on poverty, a war on this… and a war on that. (And it’s all always expensive… so debtopacalypse incoming! But why is it expensive, if the people that own the brands and own the paper ponzi that denominates them are just full of love and care for us?)

    *Prescott Bush helped to create a veritable dynasty of fascists… didn’t he?

  12. Jon: I don’t know where you came up with the idea that “liberals won’t define socialism.” First of all, it’s not up to liberals to define it. There’s already a definition. It means public or worker ownership of the means of production. That’s it. If you nationalize the power companies or the oil companies, you would be socializing them.

    If, on the other hand, government enters into an agreement with such companies to allow them a monopoly and a guaranteed profit, that’s fascism (in its economic, as opposed to political, sense). That, not socialism, is what America has become — corporations join with government to give themselves insurmountable advantage. This was Mussolini’s definition of the movement.

  13. Don: You warn that if we think this couldn’t happen, we should think again. Why? I agree with you on the surveillance, but where does this other stuff come from? Nobody is proposing any such thing.

    It’s one thing to be alert to threats to freedom. It’s quite another to make up paranoid fantasies to be afraid of. What’s your evidence for saying people wouldn’t be able to travel between states, or get government permission to breed?

  14. …. the scenario in my post is not socialism but failing to give a definition.

    The scenario in your post is more important than the label or its brand.

    Although you probably should have included an emerging market for carbon credits, something which banksters want to monetize and include in their police $tate according to “conspiracy theorists.” (The fine print: none of these laws apply to us… but quick, someone save the planet!!!)

  15. Once again, you seem to not know the definition of Socialism. What you are describing is Fascism, a ideology more commonly found on the right side of the political spectrum.…Delaware Dum

    Huh? How so? In the days of the far-left Socialist States of the Soviet Bloc, you’d better have your papers. And you’d better be prepared for a late-night search. You see, nothing can limit the growth- or power- of a Socialist State, because disarming the civilian population (and thus, their ability to resist) is one of the first priorities of any Socialist administration.

    The moron Marx, who knew nothing of human nature, was dreaming when he concocted the notion of a “dictatorship of the proletariat,” and Lenin proved this when he declared himself and his apparatchiks as being “the vanguard of the dictatorship…” At any rate, the very authors of Socialism- Marx and Engels- defined Socialism as a dictatorship.

    Among the goals of the Manifesto: eliminate the church, eliminate the family, mandatory public education (propaganda centers), unfettered access to abortion and so on.

    Fascism is more difficult to define. It is essentially a government-corporate cooperation, as seems to be developing in the U.S. at this time. it is, at it’s roots, Socialist.

    Equality for all is simply left-wing pie-in-the-sky. It is impossible. The are too many variations in ambition, IQ, energy, resourcefulness and so on. People can’t be “equal” any more than they can be the same height.

    What is important is equal opportunity. It exists here in America, but has been subverted by the left. To endure, Socialists must foster class envy and create sub-classes of parasites, those who supposedly cannot survive without being wards of the state. The modern American ghetto is an extant example of this backward (you can’t get much more backward than Marx) political methodology, which is, of course, simply a veiled means of one party attaining permanent power. In the Socialist world, everything is political.

    Socialism is the political theology of losers; those who can’t- or won’t- compete. And a socialist economy will eventually under-produce, because only competition fosters creativity.

    Socialism is theft, and dupes are cattle.

  16. Geezer
    “but where does this other stuff come from? Nobody is proposing any such thing.”

    Hide your head in the sand so you won’t see it coming. When it’s here, it will be too late. Our children are already being taught altered history about the gay movement and the reason I know that is I took a U of D history course down at the Sussex Campus taught by a gay professor and received the most skewed view of the so-called gay movement of the 60’s and 70’s that I’ve ever read. I actually laughed out loud when he lectured.

  17. When the Nazis were socialist, though also considered fascist, you suggest a distinction between socialism and fascism that probably doesn’t exist.

    More branding!

    Meanwhile, a German plumber probably had more in common with an Italian in similar circumstances than with the ruling classes financing their military industrial complexes or the corrupt politicians sending them both off to murder and maim some other plumbers. It’s all sh*t. But those are the people who have to deal with it, not the banksters and their politicians.

  18. Here are basic definitions from the dictionary:

    Socialism: a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.

    Fascism: a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism.

    Socialism can be found in the document you love: We the people

  19. Well, according to this former marine we can all give up our citizenship and move to Iran if things get too bad here. Supposedly.

    Free of being incorporated into $50,000 in “federal reserve notes” of national debt in America , shew! Freedom! But then we might be assassinated without trial by Drones Inc. anyway…. crap. How can we work this so that we can get jobs making drones but aren’t assassinated by them later?) Anyway, five minutes in.. interesting views on Obama Inc. and later some views on Corrections Corporation of America, land of the brave and home of the “free”… for a price!

    There again, Iran will probably be obliterated or manipulated into being banksterized too in the end. (And no, I don’t think that everyone is pooping rainbows of tolerance on each other there like that guy pretends.)

  20. pandora on March 28, 2013 at 13:16 said: “Socialism: a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole. ”

    No, that is COMMUNISM.

    Pandora, is it your belief that communism and socialism are identical?

    How are they different?

    Socialism is the political agenda of the modern Democrat party in the United States of America.

    COMMUNISM is when the government owns “the means of production.:

    SOCIALISM is when the government CONTROLS “the means of production” and society through regulation

  21. Geezer on March 28, 2013 at 12:59 said: “It means public or worker ownership of the means of production. ”

    Again, Geezer offers the definition of COMMUNISM and tries to pass that off as socialism, in order to hide the socialist nature of the modern Democrat party.

    Geezer, what then is the difference between socialism and communism, under your definition?

  22. Socialism is when the government pervasively controls the economy through regulation, but does NOT directly own businesses, etc. (the means of production)

  23. Liberal Dudes:

    The National Socialist Workers Party — the Nazis — were SOCIALISTS.

    Hence, their NAME:

    The National SOCIALIST Workers Party

    not, the National Fascist Workers Party.

    Yet…. the National Socialist Third Reich

    DID NOT directly own the “means of production.”

    In the socialist NAZI Third Reich, private ownership of businsess and factories continued… but under the power of raw power of regulation by the State. The NAZI regime could regulate and control businesses, resources, and factories owned by private people.

  24. pandora on March 28, 2013 at 13:16 said:

    “Fascism: a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism.”

    Fascism = delawareliberal where anyone who posts a view opposing the dictators gets attacked by the guard dog who posts all kinds of outright lies and accusations. When the proletariat tries to defend themselves they are suppressed by being blocked from posting.

  25. Jonathon what geezer offers is very similar to Marxism, but what do I know since komrade geezer claims I’m a clown.

  26. Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause – The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial , ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc.

    For example ….

    “When I look at the freedom we that we as Americans have now, I am proud to be an American. When I look into the history of our nation and remember that blood was spilled by men and women of every generation for our unalienable right to be free, I am proud to be an American. I am a patriot and belong to the Delaware 9-12 Patriots. “

  27. delacrat
    “Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause – The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe:”

    I don’t know what you are describing delacrat but it is not the scenario I described in the post. I believe you are well aware of the fact you have no concept of the definition of either socialism, communism or fascism.

  28. Geezer
    “OK, so what do you see that could possibly lead you to conclude that in a socialist future we wouldn’t be allowed to travel between states, or that we would need a government license to breed? I asked you for evidence, not a restatement of your fears.”

    Those are examples of what COULD happen. With UN Agenda 21 moving closer to community control and a one world government without any member states being sovereign and left with only militia for crowd control, no one member state would be able to withstand a United Nation’s army of made up of non-Americans that could slaughter at will, at any attempt at a revolt.
    People have had their heads in the sand in history and have not safeguarded their freedomspeople a great line of crap.

  29. Geezer
    “I also disagree with your little axiom. I think the US disgraced itself by engaging in torture, so I find your statement untrue.”

    In a failed attempt to bolster your argument, you’ve changed the subject in a sad attempt to prove your point.

  30. Geezer on March 28, 2013 at 16:31 said: “But I do notice that you just can’t resist gratuitous insults.”

    So now historical facts are “gratuitous insults?” Since I don’t know what else you could be referring to, I assume you are referring to my statement of historical fact that “the New Left” hijacked the modern Democrat Party, a high point of which was the 1968 riot at the Democrat National Convention in Chicago.

    Unless I am missing what you are objecting to, I have to assume that you find historical truth insulting.

    o “The New Left” is what they called themselves. That is not my term.
    o Taking over the Democrat Party was their own self-described goal. That is not my interpretation. That was their goal.
    o That they succeeded is undeniable. But if all you know is what you see today you may not know that.

    The Democrat party of today has NOTHING to do with the Democrat party of John F. Kennedy. JFK could never be nominated in today’s Democrat party. (I mean if he were running for President the same way he originally ran. Today, in hindsight, he is famous and revered. But if he were running then having never been President, he would have lost the nomination battle.)

    REMEMBER: Ronald Reagan was a Democrat. Pat Robertson was a Democrat. Jerry Falwell was a Democrat. Almost every significant conservative of that age group was raised as a Democrat in a Democrat family and ACTIVE as a Democrat.

    The Democrat party lurched radically (literally) vastly to the Left. Those who did it described themselves as radicals and relished it.

    One of the hallmarks of the “New Left” is to lie.

    The Democrat party has gone from a mainstream party to a far-left socialist enterprise bent on “fundamentally transforming America” as Barack Obama announced 5 days before the 2008 election.

    How do we know?

    Ask some of the people who did it.

    David Horowitz was in the center of the inner circle planning and implementing the take-over of the Democrat party by “The New Left.”

    David Horowitz WAS “the New Left.”

    He finally realized that he was wrong, and has come out and revealed the whole story. No one has denied it or refuted him.

    The modern Democrat party has been taken over by those who announced in their own words and in their own voices their intent to take over both the Democrat party and the Republican party to become pure socialism and even Marxism, as defined by themselves in their own voices.

    Now, you might be ignorant, Geezer.

    Geezer, meet historical truth.

    It is jokingly said that “THE TRUTH WILL SET YOU FREE…. AFTER IT UPSETS YOU FIRST.”

  31. This is thought-provoking: ‘THE TRUTH WILL SET YOU FREE… AFTER IT UPSETS YOU FIRST.”

    How did I become a born-again Christian? You assume that Christians are coasting on pure momentum from how they were raised. You assume that a Christian is someone who just doesn’t know as much as you do, hasn’t experienced life, doesn’t have a broad enough view of life, or hasn’t thought things through.

    On the contrary, most serious Christians discover God entirely on their own, often in conflict with their families.

    I was the first person to become a born-again Christian in my family. (Actually, my sister did at about the same time, but I didn’t know it until a couple years later.)

    In my church, almost everyone who became a Christian was going through personal stress because their families DID NOT APPROVE of their religious beliefs, particularly the intensity and seriousness with which they were pursuing Christianity. It was almost universal that members of my church were in CONFLICT with their families over religion. So much so that when a family finally came to accept a church member’s religious beliefs, it was a cause for great sympathy and celebration and encouragement to the rest of the church.

    So….

    It was when a group of street preachers came to the University of Florida and would holler Biblical verses and warn people they were going to hell that I started to discover God.

    I would stop and listen to the crowd yell insults at the preachers and listen to the open-air preachers tell everyone, in detail, why they were going to hell.

    I disagreed with them. I would spend the next several days arguing with them in my private thoughts.

    But it caused me to stop and THINK and decide to start seeking the truth FOR MYSELF, and come to MY OWN conclusions.

    THE TRUTH WILL SET YOU FREE… AFTER IT MAKES YOU REALLY MAD FIRST.

  32. “The National SOCIALIST Workers Party not, the National Fascist Workers Party.”

    So because the Soviet Union called itself a “socialist republic,” that’s what it was? The “people’e republic” of China, that’s a true “people’s republic’ because that’s what they call it?

    Please, Jon, stop insulting my intelligence. There are commonly accepted definitions for these systems of governance and economic organization. I realize that to many here, the commonly accepted reality is some sort of liberal trick, but it makes you look like a fool to keep arguing about basic definitions of things.

  33. I really don’t care why you succumbed to the lure of born-again Christianity. You still don’t get to proclaim your value set as the default value set for the country.

  34. Back to the axiom: This nation was shamed by its resort to torture. It can never again claim to occupy the moral high ground in international events. So your axiom is wrong.

  35. Geezer

    Axiom:
    I’ve noticed when you use a new word, you use it for everything until people want to vomit, the ultimate “tautologist.”

  36. Geezer on March 29, 2013 at 11:34 said: “There are commonly accepted definitions for these systems of governance and economic organization”

    So what is the difference, Geezer, between socialism and communism?

    Surely that should be easy, Geezer.

  37. Geezer on March 29, 2013 at 11:47 said: “Back to the axiom: This nation was shamed by its resort to torture.”

    The United States of America did not resort to torture.

    It was shamed by the betrayal of those who lied about the country from within.

  38. Geezer
    What’s the difference between Progressive Liberalism, Socialism and Communism and without tautology please.

  39. Geezer
    ” It is not my job to provide your basic education.”

    Well, most of the time you act like you are everyone’s great educator.

  40. Geez

    This was just sort of a synopsis of what America could be like with a socialist or communist government. An Axiom, theory, hypothesis or postulate.
    Personally, I believe my post was severely understated.

  41. Geez

    I usually write six-hundred words at the most because people will usually read only about five or six hundred words and become disinterested because they want a quick skim read.
    You are right though, it would make an interesting short-story.

  42. Socialism can be found in the document you love: We the people

    Socialism is defined by Marx, not the dictionary.

    “We the People,” in the document we love, used to mean that our government was limited. See Article I., Section 8., the powers of Congress, and Madison’s Federalist # 41.

    Today, “We the People” are cattle, being led-around by professional parasites, with nothing on their minds but re-election and expanding bureaucratic power.

  43. Rick
    “Today, “We the People” are cattle, being led-around by professional parasites, with nothing on their minds but re-election and expanding bureaucratic power.”

    Well said. I couldn’t have said it better myself!

  44. Actually the comment above describes Karl Rove to the tee. Democrats have always worried about how the middle class is faring. No one other than a Republican would take a baby out into the woods, and chain it up for the wolf…..

    Republicans do that all the time by making laws allowing the wealthy to siphon money right out of our bank accounts after forcing us to sign a piece of paper……

    Democrats don’t. Democrats pass laws with teeth so the wealthy, if they wish to keep their wealth, have to earn it honestly, and not from brutal extortion….

    That is why those of the middle class are running away from the Republican Party. Look that the Republican’s tax policy… Tax the poor, and then give it to the rich…..

    Democrats rule by reason. Republicans drool, …. for a reason.

  45. Liberal democrats demand that everyone respect their rights and beliefs while, they denounce anything and everything remotely conservative. That can be clearly witnessed over at the left wing dl blog. They denigrate anyone who offers a differing view and goes as far as to block people from posting that refuse to agree with what the lefts philosophy. Democrats give away money like it their own, it’s not their money contrary to what they believe. The left now buys votes by promoting and allowing the generational abuse of the handout system. Nowhere does our nation guarantee anyone a free handout yet that is exactly what the left is doing, they are telling Americans it’s okay to be freeloaders even renaming these handouts “entitlements”

  46. Even though misrepresenting a replica Oakley as an genuine would be a critical crime, obtaining a check out that is obviously marketed, as a replica does not cross this line. There are loads of unscrupulous people on the World wide web who test to pass replicas off as originals, but an straightforward organization will clearly point out on their web page that their watches are not reliable. A respected web site will also checklist the variations between a replica and an authentic Oakley, which includes the simple fact that it is not drinking water-resistant. oakley dart sunglasses white

Comments are closed.