American Politics · Religion · Sociology · The Lighter Side

Socialism, the political epithet

In the democratic world preaching socialism is considered almost as much of a taboo as preaching Judaism would be in Saudi Arabia, well they would probably kill you for doing that in the Kingdom, but then again, they pretty much kill for anything there. But on a serious note, one of the major allegations on the American President is that many of his policies are socialistic. The allegation is nothing but a political epithet. The fall from grace of socialism, in my opinion, is the fungibility with communism. Marxism, and I promise that’s the last ism I bring in the discussion, which is the utopian form of socialism is far cry from communism. I have spent many an hours preaching the difference. Problem is, when you grew up in the eighties, and Reagan was acting away to the tunes of the republican world, and Russians were so hated, Stallone was running in the snow to beat some Communist ass, the communism, socialism mumbo jumbo all seemed the same.

While making sure that we are on the lighter side of life, I want to take a shot at differentiating the lot. All the isms are obviously ideologies, but one needs to first and foremost differentiate the economic and the political dimensions. Capitalism is purely an economic ideology and goes in well with a democratic political ideology. Marxism on the other hand is a societal concept that amalgamates socio political system. Now Marx and Engels were two men with long beards in 19th century Europe who thought the Bourgeoisie sucked and the dominant capitalistic economic model bread social classes leading to economic unrest. Democracy was not the prevalent political system at the time, but was fighting its way against monarchies. I call Marxism utopian because Marx envisioned a classless stateless society. The Communist party governments of USSR and China are essentially not Marxist societies as those in the communist party obviously enjoyed superior social and economic status. Given the natural tendency of humans to fuck around, it would be a utopian concept. When you give somebody extraordinary authority and ordinary remuneration, they are bound to exploit that authority to make some money on the side. The tendency to acquire more probably is driven by admiring the superior social status of those in capitalist societies. What is needed is a pseudo perpetual revolution that turns the entire world into a uniform state. Essentially, to create a utopian Marxist society, all capitalist societies must be eradicated.

Once you create the utopian society, not only do the Kardashians become classless, so do the Pitts and the Jolies. All those Drogbas and Ronaldos would be classless. Not to mention the Ulrichs and the Beyonces. Imagine that, and speaking of Imagine…the Joel Osteens would be classless as well. And that to me is one of the best things about Marxism, and the worst thing about Capitalism. I am not sure about the correlation, but Capitalism goes hand in hand with the fear of God. Giving to God is considered pious, because God needs your money. It’s really Joel’s wife that needs your money to buy more diamonds, but Americans feel good and closer to Jesus by giving to church. Consider giving that money to the state who then takes care of all the homeless that the church has taken upon itself to take care of. And they say the government would exploit those taxes, and Joel’s wife would not!


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s