A question for liberals. Do you consider yourself to have socialistic tendencies?

Question

This is not intended as an insult. I see many liberals complaining about being charaterized as socialists, but it seems to me that many of the policies that most liberals seem to favor are of a socialist nature because they revolve around greater government control and the redistribution of wealth. (Welfare assistance, Social Security, Universal Health Care, opposition to tax cuts, etc.). Being called a socialist is not the same as being called a communist, although I will concede that some conservatives seem to incorrectly equate them as being one in the same. Again this is not intended as an insult, I am just honestly curious how you classify these particular types of views to be anything else and how you see yourself if not as a socialist. Please do not provide the "it's the right thing to do" answer. I understand why you feel the way you do, just not how you classify yourself. All decent answers will be considered, insults and bashing will be ignored.

Semper Fi Reborn: The things I mentioned are examples of redistribution of wealth. This is at the core of the socialist doctrine. Again no insults are intended and I am not questioning whether the intentions are good. I choose to accept that most people have good intentions no matter what their particular political viewpoint might be.

Answer 1

Absolutely I do. But that idea should not be instantly dismissed either. We need to have faith in our gov't.

Answer 2

I am a Liberal, Democratic Republican that has ideas that would make our world a better place. I do find myself being more of a socialist than anything, primarily because I spent some time in Sweden and the system seemed to be alright for their countrymen and women. However, they had very tight ropes on their Imigration laws.. Which would not be a bad idea if we stopped addressing it and actually did something about it. I am for capital punishment, pro choice, freedom to posses firearms, VERY strict term limits,Welfare(food and barracks only), and I think that electoral votes need to be done away with.
I am an American Capitalist to the core, however, I think that it would do our country much justice if they knew exactly what that meant for 'slave labor' in third world countries. People watch the movie, "Blood Diamonds" and write it off as a movie. Like that would never happen.

Answer 3

Ok, well since you put it this way instead of the usual, idiotic way...

I think the deal here is that people with more liberal views are perhaps more concerned with the society as a whole, the collective, while conservatives are more concerned with the individual. Both are important.

People on the Right like to talk about the great American ideal of "rugged individualism." This is more of a romantic notion than anything else. In this day and age, unless you go out like Thoreau and build yourself a cabin in the woods, the individual is pretty dependent on the collective for manufactured goods, services, technology, infrastructure, protection, etc.

I don't consider myself in either the "Liberal" or "Conservative" camps, although I lean more Left than Right on a lot of issues. No, I don't believe that a heavily centeralized government bureaucracy is necessarily the best or even a good model of government.

But, I think that this talk on the Right about the virtues of individualism and free enterprise is largely a bunch of crap as well. The fact is that powerful, rich people tend to dominate, crushing any competition, and the powers that be in the government tend to help them do so through tax breaks and other means. It's the old story of collusion between those with the power and those with the wealth. You scratch my back, I'll scratch yours.

The idea of every person being able to "pull themselves up by their own bootstraps" and become wealthy through hard work is laughably unrealistic when you look at how things really play out. In reality, the Right would like to see America divided into a small, elite bunch of super wealthy and powerful passing on their personal fortunes and influence from one generation to the next and a huge majority of impoverished slave laborers toiling for them.

It's hereditary aristocracy and peasantry all over again. The rich enjoy the best of life, they hire a military caste of warriors in the armed services to protect their wealth and interests, and the rest slave away on the bottom.

But I digress... In short, I think it is difficult to find balance between the individual and the collective. I think it is important that people in a society look out for each other. Not to do so makes for social instablity, crime, disease, squalor, etc. It's also a more compassionate way, which I think has value in and of itself. If you want to call that socialism, then be my guest.

Answer 4

Go blow, Joe.

No. I think we have too much government. I'm not a huge fan of public assistance either. I would rather we took that welfare assistance and gave people free higher education instead. If you are going to break the cycle of poverty, it will occur through increasing the poor's ability to succeed on their own, not by just giving them money.

Social security is more of an afterthought these days. What people get out of it will be negligible compared to a decent 401K. Still, some will need that money to survive. I do not agree with giving Wall Street a handout though. I think corporate welfare in any form is tantamount to robbery.

I'm on the fense about Universal Health Care. It's obvious that the system is broken, whether you want to see that or not. It's wrong and unethical that people with catastrophic health issues can easily end up having their life ruined because of a lack of adequate insurance. Still, I can not agree to Hillary's plan because again, it is corporate welfare.

Answer 5

Labels are not of concern to me. I come from what has been labeled as the "Greatest Generation." Man is a social animal and lives in a society. The 'so called' religious principles of the "Conservatives" teach that they should love their neighbors as themselves and treat others as they wish to be treated. I find that most conservatives are hypocritical, greedy and selfish.

If I see a hungry person, it is my inclination to offer them a meal. If I see somebody sick, I attempt to offer them comfort. If those ideas make me a socialist, I am proudly one. I was raised with what, at the time, were good old American principles.

In the last few decades, we have become greedy materialists, always money grubbing and not giving a damn about anybody but ourselves. Kindness and concern are great feelings to possess. America was once noted for it's principles. I' m ashamed of our current reputation.

Answer 6

Modern political classifications have become meaningless, especially on this forum where terms like liberal and conservative are so often used incorrectly. This country has always had socialistic aspects. Taxes are levied on us and used for the collective good. We are also a prosperous and historically a moral country. Because of that we have an obligation to our fellow citizens to assist them when they fall on hard times or grow too old to work.

Answer 7

Im VERY VERY VERY against wellfare, i think its a HORRIBLE system, and by welfare, i mean welfare for americans, and foreign aid, any form of government assistance, food stamps etc.

Im Pro-universal healthcare, mainly because our current system is broken, and no one seems capible of fixing it short of eradicating the current system

Social security is a crock

Pro tax cuts

Pro government accountability

Anti war

Pro Seperation church and state

Pro human rights

nope...not so socialist

Answer 8

I consider my self somewhat liberal. I truly believe we should have nationalized medicine. I'm in favor of Social Security, and some re-distribution of wealth. And I support the separtation of church and state.
In some fields I am positively reactionary. I don't believe prisons work. Put me in charge and I would tear the damn things down. Criminals, no matter their age, should be let loose, free from the restraints of society for a period of days to months, in disagreeable locations like swamps, tundra, or Montana. ( Montana was a joke, sort of..) Let them try to survive apart from society. Most wont. Those that do would be unlikely to commit further crimes and if they do, put them in an even worse spot. But we wouldn't have institutions, paid for by the public, to educate criminals in new and better techniques for commiting crimes.

Answer 9

No. I do not consider myself a socialist. I don't classify myself in any terms. I am just a human who wishes the best for home, country and humanity.

Answer 10

No. I am not for welfare abuse, but do see a need for universal healthcare. How is being concerned for the needs of others, being socialistic? All things within measure, I say.

**Edit**
Bryan, you have my utmost respect sir. I did not take it as an insult. I hope my answer does not seem as though i am offended.

Answer 11

Liberalism does have many revised socialistic ideas (some I agree with and some I don't) but by the same token the hard core neo-cons have many fascist tendencies and ideas.