Was the Civil War pension system "socialism?"?

Question

It paid elderly Union soldiers, wives, and children who could show need, and eventually even paid benefits to Confederates. (Huge mobilization for CW - covered large part of that generation)

It took government tax money and redistributed it - and was a model for Social Security. What say yee, lubbers? Have we been socialist all along or is somebody being misleading about socialism?

GOING BACK TO THE PAST TO SHOW EXAMPLES OF WHAT;S BEING CALLED SOCIALISM TODAY.

HOW IS A US GOVERNMENT PAYMENT TO A CONFEDERATE FAMILY A "retirement benefit for an employee"? IT WAS AN OLD_AGE SUPPORT SYSTEM.

""It was not until 1958 that Confederate veterans were pardoned and pensions were made available to the handful still remaining alive.""
http://www.pbs.org/now/society/vetbenefits.html

Answer 1

Socialism is just a catchall term for rightist idiots that means "anything I don't like". They have no idea what socialism really means.

Answer 2

Brian the Dog is right.

If it compensates those without a direct relationship (immediate family) of the vetern, then it is socialism. However, the plan you are discussing is a pension program offered to citizen soldiers who were employed by the government. As employees, and as a recruiting tool, it is wise to offer benefits to said employees.

I would argue that since the "confederate government' was absorbed by the Union (since we also abosorbed the debts of the Confederacy), then it is not socialism. If we had not abosorbed the rebel government, then the moment rebel soldiers received benefits, it became socialism.

Socialism is the use of the tax code to redistribute wealth from the have to the have not. It seeks to establish the government, rather than the private sector, as the decider of monetary grants.

Nader used the moral relativism of the socialists (who, BTW, give less than conservatives in blood, money, and time to charity) to justify the socialist lack of social contribution as "A society with more justice requires less charity"

He essentially argues that being a socialist in the fight for justice excuses one from actually having to give your own money to care for the poor. Socialists and leftists seem to embrace this lifestyle, as they do not donate anywhere near the quantity of money, time, or blood that conservatives donate.

However, John Adams started us down the path of Socialism, and Jefferson, his biggest rival, did nothing to stop it, when Adams engaged in the Steel subsidies that still are in place today.

Answer 3

Yeah, right...and so is the GI Bill, military retirement and pensions, CHAMPUS - come on! Where in the H E L L did you get such a twisted idea? Go find whomever gave it to you and beat the sh*t outa him for us!
By the way - the Federal Government did NOT award pensions to Confederate veterans based on their service to the Confederacy! Find the idiot who told you that and beat the dog-sh*t out of him too! What few Confederate veterans did receive pensions based on their service to the Confederate States were paid BY THOSE STATES, NOT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT!
Tell ya what: why don;t you PICK UP AND READ an actual history book? Afraid y'might learn something?

Answer 4

The Civil War ended over 140 years ago. I believe the last widow of a Civil War veteran died back in the 1960's. We've had Social Security since the 1930's and Medicare since the 1960's.

Why waste our time asking a question like this?

Answer 5

So, I suppose that ALL Americans got paid a pension? Or just the soldiers, same as today? Do All Americans get taxpayer supported healthcare, or just government workers? Socialism means ALL of society recieving the same benifits, regardless of there job or position.

Answer 6

Truthfully speaking while forgetting about anything partisan, their are aspects of all types of government enveloped in democracy. Theoretically, the US is not, nor never has been a pure democracy. And by the way, never will be. So your assumption is arguably very true.

Answer 7

Hey why not go back to the CIVIL WAR for examples? LOL

The problem isn't past socialistic tendencies it is the threat of FUTURE ones. The creeping socialism that will indeed insinuate itself into every area of our lives if left unchecked.

The problem is that liberals seem to never ever see an area of ourt lives that might be "helped" by government.

This is America and not Europe. We won't stand for the nanny state.

Answer 8

I would think of it more as an employer providing a pension system for employees as those soldiers worked for the government. Should government employees not be entitled to similar benefits provided in the private sector?...........

Answer 9

No we are not socialist...Help for needy VS redistribution...I don't have a problem with helping the truly needy...of my own free will...the government messes up everything they touch so I don't want them touching my wallet.

Answer 10

Is there not a difference between compensating those who have served for their losses and forking over money out of the pockets of the hard working to the lazy?

Answer 11

The Vet program today is "socialism" according to right wing lunatics who want to use a word associated with communist Russia in a way to mislable something. If you're simple enough to believe them though, you're Real simple, seeing as every time they're in power not only do they fail, but they're daringly corrupt. (O. North, Gonzalez, Rumsfeld, the list is too long to write all the corrup right-wing politicians in America)