It seems that the Democrat party has been moving further and further left over the years. Many of the Democrats are unabashed socialists. Is this healthy for the country? Socialism scares me.
2006-08-03 09:51:12 · 18 answers · asked by Ethan M 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Brucilosis I am asking for opinions not stating any fact therefore I don't need to back up any thing. I am asking a question not stating fact.
2006-08-03 09:57:26 · update #1
KooKoo Coward, thanks for proving my point.
PS how do you know how much I make?
2006-08-03 09:58:39 · update #2
I'm inclined to agree. After all, they chose Howard Dean as their chairman, and wasn't it MoveOn.org who were boasting that they're in charge of the party now? The last I checked, neither Dean nor MoveOn.org were exactly moderate...
2006-08-03 09:58:05 · answer #1 · answered by Chris S 5 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Okay, what's confusing you all is the use of some poorly defined terms, which are: Socialist, Fascist, Conservative, Liberal. Forget those for a few minutes.
The political spectrum is not linear. It does not go simply from "left" to "right". You have to start thinking of it two dimensionally.
First of all, you have two large groups of issues. There are "social" issues and "economic" issues.
A person can be for total freedom on one, but not the other, or can be for total freedom on both, or for total state control on both.
What most people THINK is "conservative" or "right" is freedom on economic issues (less tax) but state control over social matters (abortion, gay marriage), and what most people THINK is "liberal" or "left" is state control of the economy (welfare, tax the rich, free healthcare) and social freedom (abortion, gay marriage).
The facts don't support these beliefs. So called conservatives voted for Social Security and higher taxes, and so called liberals are all for state control of private relationships (affirmative action, the War on Drugs).
What we should be concerned about is Statism. Both of the major parties are for it. To answer the original question, Ned Lamont is very much a Statist, and I have not heard of a single statement he has made in support of Liberty. Lieberman at least gets it half right half the time.
Only one party is truly for freedom, on all issues, for all people, at all times.
The Libertarian Party.
Visit their website at www.LP.org and take "the world's smallest political quiz".
2006-08-03 17:38:05 · answer #2 · answered by open4one 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Unfortunately I think you are right. I consider myself a moderate Democrat, and I don't like the way the party seems to be playing to the extreme left-wing crazy people who want state-funded everything.
Also unfortunately, the Republican party seems to be moving increasingly to the right.
I think the reason for this is that the candidates have to kiss up to the activist groups that are providing their campaign contributions. The moderate people and groups don't feel the need to pour money into a candidate, because they don't want any radical changes made.
2006-08-03 17:10:32 · answer #3 · answered by Danzarth 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Ok, here's a definition of socialism from Wikipedia. How and where are Democrats advocating this kind of stuff? Clinton pretty much abolished welfare...
"Socialism refers to a broad array of doctrines or political movements that envisage a socio-economic system in which property and the distribution of wealth are subject to social control. [1] As an economic system, socialism is usually associated with state or collective ownership of the means of production. This control, according to socialists, may be either direct, exercised through popular collectives such as workers' councils, or it may be indirect, exercised on behalf of the people by the state."
2006-08-03 17:00:06 · answer #4 · answered by TxSup 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Only smart democrat left is Joe Liberman. Maybe one days the commies will figure out hes the guy to revamp the party! But i like the way the democratic party is now, broken up and no hope!
2006-08-03 17:29:42 · answer #5 · answered by Ah Ha 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I agree with Pop....the crazies have taken over the republicans a lot more then the "extreme left" has touched the democratic party. It's impossible to even define extreme left because you'll never find one leftist who agrees with another. But the extreme right...that's easy...it's called the christian coalition but should be called the corrupt coalition.
2006-08-03 17:08:05 · answer #6 · answered by Franklin 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not anymore than the RepubliTARD party has been hijacked by the extreme right. They are very few Goldwater or Rockefeller republicans left. It's not healthy for either party to go to extremes.
2006-08-03 17:00:12 · answer #7 · answered by Pop D 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There hasnt been a true separation of political parties for some time. Politicians tend to follow the alleged general concensus of what the population wants and/or needs thus leading to a homogenization of political stance despite political affiliation.
2006-08-03 16:57:43 · answer #8 · answered by max 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Provide some credible sources and then maybe a debate could be had.
Please explain how you are certain that Democrats are "unabashed socialists."
Conversely (by your 'non-factual' statement) many Repulicans are unabashed fascists.
2006-08-03 16:55:03 · answer #9 · answered by LatexSolarBeef 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Just as the Republican party has been hijacked by the extreme Rapture Right.
2006-08-03 17:27:53 · answer #10 · answered by MishMash [I am not one of your fans] 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Certainly seems like it. I don't think the Democrats stand for much of anything anymore except maybe getting votes.
2006-08-03 16:56:00 · answer #11 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋