To young voters, socialism isn’t a bad word

[VaporTrail]

TIM ROESCH, a 46-year-old tea party supporter at last Wednesday’s rally on the Common, was not happy with a group of nearby college students.

Discuss

COMMENTS (185)

Featured on

 

“You should get a group picture and send it to your parents,’’ he grumbled at them. He was displeased with the signs they held, which he found offensive; one referred to folks like him with a derogatory sexual term. He blamed the youthful flippancy on a lack of critical thinking and genuine knowledge as to how the world works. “They don’t understand what socialism means. They don’t understand what democracy means.’’

 

But it’s not that the youngest voters don’t know what socialism means. It’s that most aren’t scared of it — and find it bizarre that, decades after the fall of the Berlin Wall, a political movement would center itself around opposition to it. The fact that both the tea party and the Republican Party have made vociferous opposition to “socialist’’ policies a key part of their rhetoric helps explain the tepid response among young adults.

 

Republican strategists see short-term advantages in the tea party movement’s passion. But if conservatives can’t wean themselves off of Cold-War-era rhetoric, they risk alienating an entire generation of young people. The tea party is well on its way to doing just that. A recent New York Times/CBS News survey found that three-quarters of the movement’s supporters were older than 45.

 

Behind the main crowd at the Boston Common rally, counter-protesters and protesters mixed and argued amidst a carnival-like atmosphere that included costumed provocateurs and what felt like every fringe group in the state handing out pamphlets. But younger attendees expressed skepticism about the tea party message.

 

Naveed Easton, a 19-year-old Emerson student, said he thought the group was out of touch. “You can notice the shift in society over the past 30 years,’’ he said. “It’s just getting more and more open-minded, and some people are just very resistant to a progressive society. Especially when it comes to, like, ‘Oh, that’s a socialist program!’ ’’

 

And if the health care reform bill actually were socialist? He shrugged off that concern. “Socialism itself isn’t terrible,’’ he said, unless it involves the abrogation of individual rights.

 

Easton is just one college student, of course — a liberal one in a liberal town. But his views are far from radical among his peers. A year ago a Rasmussen Reports poll found that Americans under 30 are essentially equally divided on whether socialism or capitalism is a superior economic system.

 

This may shock those who lived through the Cold War, but there’s nothing irrational about it. Young people grew up in a post-Soviet world. When they hear “socialism,’’ they think Scandinavia, not Russia. They’re much more likely to be struggling with student-loan or credit-card bills than to have been affected one iota by the sort of government overreach that can be credibly tied to socialism.

 

Conservatives can continue beating the dead horse of socialism. But if they want to finally build a youthful infrastructure they should heed the lesson of Wednesday’s rally. The graying tea party throng cheered wildly when Sarah Palin took the stage; the younger spectators stood around the edges of the crowd — looking unimpressed.

 

I'm not sure how old all of you righties are, but what do you think about this? I mean, I really have trouble seeing the GOP winning over the majority of people 18-25 if they continue to equate socialism with being unpatriotic. I think this is one of the biggest reasons people like sev, heck, and myself have a hard time finding agreement with cal, T, and steve. Your thoughts?

[SiperBowl]

i read that this morning they said that 50% of college students dont buy into the socialism ideal while the 50% dont see the difference between socialism and capatalism. damn we have a bunch of idiots comming out of school. wtf are the profs teaching today

[VaporTrail]

I thought that part of the article needs to be further clarified. Personally, I see both pure systems as equally crappy, but if the best of both worlds can be implemented, I'm all about finding where that niche is.

[calfoxwc]

Some students don't learn any world history on the subject.

 

Kinda like we take for granted a lot of aspects of our lives.

 

Loved ones' being here with us, being able to walk without pain,

 

being able to see, being healthy.

 

But lose any of those things, and the world lands on your shoulders, and the

 

hurt and anguish ensues - but not until after it happens to you or someone you know...

 

or maybe even someone you just hear about.

 

IOW's, few of us get up in the morning and say "WOW, HOW WONDERFUL IT IS TO BE ABLE TO

 

WALK !!!"

 

But, end up paralyzed from the waist down, and the desperate wish would be to walk again.

 

The point is, that we take our freedom for granted. Even some kids who do read about history,

 

are not affected by it to the point of understanding the loss of our freedoms.

 

But it's real. It's happened again, and most times the gov takes total control of peoples' lives.

 

I guess I need to post the article again about Kitty who grew up in Germany, who said they all

 

were happy about all of the "fair to everybody" promises, until they realized everybody ended up

 

completely controlled.

 

Some college students take illegal drugs, not realizing what they could lose til they lose it.

 

Some societies give gov'ts too much power, and don't realize they could entirely lose their freedoms...

 

until they lose them.

[VaporTrail]

See, this is exactly what we're talking about. You're saying that anything socialized is a slippery-slope and leads to all of us chanting "Heil Mein Fuhrer, Obamao!" Okay, maybe I exaggerate, but really, this is more or less how you come off. When you compare Obama to Hitler, I feel like you're the one who doesn't have a grasp of history, and it makes it hard for us to take you seriously. Yes, giving the government control could potentially lead to us living under a fascist state, I'd say those odds are pretty unlikely, but it is possible. However, because of that, you will not even listen to any hint of giving the government power to help its citizens whatsoever, even if it would do them good. You call it socialism, and you assume it's inherently wrong, but it isn't. Look at Europe, all those oppressed Swedes, Fins, and Swiss, look at the taxes they pay! Look at how they don't compare to America. Oh wait, they're home to the happiest people in the world, and the scientific bastion known as CERN, plus they get a university education for cheap and their treatments paid for when they are sick. They get so much more for their tax dollars than we do, but whatever, they're all really Nazis anyways. You're throwing all the possible good that could come of this away because you're sure that we'll all become part of the Obamao youth.

[Mr. T]

Your last post is humurous vapor. You have already taken it in, hook, line and sinker.

 

You are already an obama youth, one who feels that we need to try obama style socialization. But what you dont realize is that you are a minority with that kind of thinking here in the US.

 

If you read history we have fought wars against these types of governments, and all we are trying to say is that this type of government is oppressive in how it will place way to many controls on the people for it to work.

 

Henceforth we will proceed from Obama's form of socialism into communism. It just takes a little while, say 10 years on the norm.

[VaporTrail]

You are already an obama youth, one who feels that we need to try obama style socialization. But what you dont realize is that you are a minority with that kind of thinking here in the US.

 

 

That's fine, you may continue to believe that I'm drinking the Kool-Aid, T, you can continue to fight the pinkos and all other forms of un-American, anti-patriotic scum.

 

If you read history we have fought wars against these types of governments,

 

Iraq - Fascist

Afghanistan - Cave-dwellers

Vietnamese - Commies

Chinese - Commies

Koreans - Commies

Soviets - Commies

Nazis - Fascist

Japanese - Empire... Theocracy? Monarchy? Not sure

Huns - Monarchy

Confederates - Democracy

Mexicans - Democracy... kinda

Brits - Monarchy

 

Okay, you must be referring to the Rebels and the Mexicans! Having socialized medicine does not make us communists, so long as individuality is still a trait that is smiled upon, I would say we'd continue to be a democracy with socialized elements.

 

and all we are trying to say is that this type of government is oppressive in how it will place way to many controls on the people for it to work.

 

No, actually.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy

"Democracy Index as published in January, 2007. The palest blue countries get a score above 9.5 out of 10 (with Sweden being the most democratic country at 9.88), while the black countries score below 2 (with North Korea being the least democratic at 0.86)."

 

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/lif_hap_...e-happiness-net

 

Heaven forbid we do anything that has a hint of socialism in it, we might turn into Nazis, or even worse, like atheistic European homos!

[DieHardBrownsFan]

You are already an obama youth, one who feels that we need to try obama style socialization. But what you dont realize is that you are a minority with that kind of thinking here in the US.

 

 

That's fine, you may continue to believe that I'm drinking the Kool-Aid, T, you can continue to fight the pinkos and all other forms of un-American, anti-patriotic scum.

 

If you read history we have fought wars against these types of governments,

 

Iraq - Fascist

Afghanistan - Cave-dwellers

Vietnamese - Commies

Chinese - Commies

Koreans - Commies

Soviets - Commies

Nazis - Fascist

Japanese - Empire... Theocracy? Monarchy? Not sure

Huns - Monarchy

Confederates - Democracy

Mexicans - Democracy... kinda

Brits - Monarchy

 

Okay, you must be referring to the Rebels and the Mexicans! Having socialized medicine does not make us communists, so long as individuality is still a trait that is smiled upon, I would say we'd continue to be a democracy with socialized elements.

 

and all we are trying to say is that this type of government is oppressive in how it will place way to many controls on the people for it to work.

 

No, actually.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy

"Democracy Index as published in January, 2007. The palest blue countries get a score above 9.5 out of 10 (with Sweden being the most democratic country at 9.88), while the black countries score below 2 (with North Korea being the least democratic at 0.86)."

 

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/lif_hap_...e-happiness-net

 

Heaven forbid we do anything that has a hint of socialism in it, we might turn into Nazis, or even worse, like atheistic European homos!

 

I would recommend not taking everything so seriously. Just a friendly suggestion.

[VaporTrail]

[calfoxwc]

The Swedes, Fins and Swiss?

 

Those are small countries.

 

Not the same when you try a bit of utopia in

 

one of the major powers on earth, with a big population, and a big

 

driiving force to supporting Democracies around the world.

[Westside Steve]

In honesty when I was a liberal young college kid I thought Communism or Socialism seemed like good forms of government in which citiczens could be equal. The artist, the surgeon, the banker, the bricklayer all contributing what they could.

It does sound good on papaer that each would use his individual talents and abilities to make a better society for all.

 

I just think that as one gets more life experience it becomes clear that human nature will ruin those lofty ideals pretty quickly.

Are we not men?

 

WSS

[VaporTrail]

The Swedes, Fins and Swiss? Those are small countries. Not the same when you try a bit of utopia in one of the major powers on earth, with a big population, and a big driiving force to supporting Democracies around the world.

 

You're right, it's not going to be as easy to implement when we have such a large population, but I think that socializing an aspect of life that I think everyone should be entitled to (getting treatment while sick) is a good thing. The system we currently have is in need of reform.

 

In honesty when I was a liberal young college kid I thought Communism or Socialism seemed like good forms of government in which citiczens could be equal. The artist, the surgeon, the banker, the bricklayer all contributing what they could.

It does sound good on papaer that each would use his individual talents and abilities to make a better society for all.

 

I just think that as one gets more life experience it becomes clear that human nature will ruin those lofty ideals pretty quickly.

Are we not men?

 

WSS

 

I mean, that's fine, but you're going to reap what you sow. If you want to be an artist, you're likely not going to be making a bunch of money unless you excel. I think that pure Communism and Socialism, or rather, the forms that are close to those that have existed are deeply flawed, you end up with a government that is far too powerful and dictates what the individual does. The Chinese foreign exchange students at UD have really opened up my mind to how different China is from us. I don't want to end up like China, I don't think that giving everyone the right to healthcare is going to make us lose our individuality (I mean, there's a chance it could, yes, but that's not the only outcome). Working toward universal healthcare is a noble goal, and should we reach it, I'd expect us to still be a democracy.

[Westside Steve]

I mean, that's fine, but you're going to reap what you sow. If you want to be an artist, you're likely not going to be making a bunch of money unless you excel. I think that pure Communism and Socialism, or rather, the forms that are close to those that have existed are deeply flawed, you end up with a government that is far too powerful and dictates what the individual does. The Chinese foreign exchange students at UD have really opened up my mind to how different China is from us. I don't want to end up like China, I don't think that giving everyone the right to healthcare is going to make us lose our individuality (I mean, there's a chance it could, yes, but that's not the only outcome). Working toward universal healthcare is a noble goal, and should we reach it, I'd expect us to still be a democracy.

 

 

With due respect I think you're missing the meaning and ethic of socialism.

Sure the best and strongest and prettiest will want more.

The idea is that one does his best and that's equal to someone elses besia

Otherwise it's not socialism.

 

And of course socialized medicine doesn't mean we're all of a sudden Red China.

Nothing happens overnight.

"Equality" is a term the leaders use to fire up the masses to overthrow those in power.

We're nowhere near that point yet.

But when we are, it'll be time to meet the new boss; same as the, well, you get it.

WSS

[VaporTrail]

With due respect I think you're missing the meaning and ethic of socialism.

Sure the best and strongest and prettiest will want more.

The idea is that one does his best and that's equal to someone elses besia

Otherwise it's not socialism.

 

Right, but I'm not saying I want that. I didn't say that socialism was better than capitalism or vice versa. I think, purely, both systems suck, I just want the best of each.

 

And of course socialized medicine doesn't mean we're all of a sudden Red China.

Nothing happens overnight.

"Equality" is a term the leaders use to fire up the masses to overthrow those in power.

We're nowhere near that point yet.

But when we are, it'll be time to meet the new boss; same as the, well, you get it.

 

But are you not still insinuating that we'd end up like Red China, even if it takes a long time? That doesn't necessarily have to be the outcome.

[Westside Steve]

But are you not still insinuating that we'd end up like Red China, even if it takes a long time? That doesn't necessarily have to be the outcome.

 

Yes I am, but not due to anything in particular Obama is doing.

I think societies rise and fall.

China wan't always Red China, nor will it be forever.

The USA has only been what it is for a short time, historically.

 

I remember reading that in the 1700s 98 % of Americans were in agriculture.

Today it's less than 2% and one of our problems is too much food.

That's not a long time VT.

 

We tend to think of history as beginning five years ago.

 

<G>

 

WSS

[VaporTrail]

Yes I am, but not due to anything in particular Obama is doing.

I think societies rise and fall.

 

Whoa, you're thinking wayyyy bigger than I am. I figure that by the time that happens, our opinions on this will be irrelevant.

 

China wan't always Red China, nor will it be forever.

The USA has only been what it is for a short time, historically.

 

Right, but I'm talking about changes in the foreseeable future. I think we will fall from being the leading superpower and China will be on top. But that doesn't mean that the American way of life would be lost.

 

I remember reading that in the 1700s 98 % of Americans were in agriculture.

Today it's less than 2% and one of our problems is too much food.

That's not a long time VT.

 

We tend to think of history as beginning five years ago.

 

I'm thinking in terms of +/- 75 years. I think trying to think beyond that seems, I dunno, kinda pointless. We're a speck in an infinite universe, drop in the ocean, etc. We don't know what'll change in between, only that it will change. I think to view a political discussion on that wide of a scope negates a bunch of discussions that our relevant to how WE live.

[Westside Steve]

China wan't always Red China, nor will it be forever.

The USA has only been what it is for a short time, historically.

 

Right, but I'm talking about changes in the foreseeable future. I think we will fall from being the leading superpower and China will be on top. But that doesn't mean that the American way of life would be lost.

 

Maybe. Maybe not.

If you wanna shorten the window Germany was king shit in the 40s. Then defeated. Then back on thier feet.

Same with Japan.

Crushed, and then rose to the top of the worlds technological and manufacturing powers.

Then backsliding as China moves up.

The atom bomb was the arbiter of peace.

Soon it'll be as common as the once banned crossbow.

All in less than a century.

A couple years more and there were the Bolsheviks.

That's all within a human lifetime, albeit a long one.

 

WSS

[smalls1129]

I don't want to end up like China, I don't think that giving everyone the right to healthcare is going to make us lose our individuality (I mean, there's a chance it could, yes, but that's not the only outcome). Working toward universal healthcare is a noble goal, and should we reach it, I'd expect us to still be a democracy.

 

 

This is a pet-peeve of mine. Under the system that our founders laid out, rights cannot be given nor (more importantly) taken away from us by the government. The rights guaranteed to us by the Constitution literally flow from God and our given to the government by the people for safe keeping. They cannot be created nor destroyed; that was supposed to be what made our system so unique. By saying that health care is a right you are also saying it is a mandate that there are people to give such health care. In order to ensure this (in the mystical future) you would have to take away rights and force people to become doctors (assuming afford-ability causes people to leave the field). Rights cannot be contingent on another's ability, desire or education.

[VaporTrail]

China wan't always Red China, nor will it be forever.

The USA has only been what it is for a short time, historically.

 

Right, but I'm talking about changes in the foreseeable future. I think we will fall from being the leading superpower and China will be on top. But that doesn't mean that the American way of life would be lost.

 

Maybe. Maybe not.

If you wanna shorten the window Germany was king shit in the 40s. Then defeated. Then back on thier feet.

Same with Japan.

Crushed, and then rose to the top of the worlds technological and manufacturing powers.

Then backsliding as China moves up.

The atom bomb was the arbiter of peace.

Soon it'll be as common as the once banned crossbow.

All in less than a century.

A couple years more and there were the Bolsheviks.

That's all within a human lifetime, albeit a long one.

 

WSS

 

I suppose I wasn't taking into account major wars (or maybe just banking on us winning them), but I see what you mean.

 

This is a pet-peeve of mine. Under the system that our founders laid out, rights cannot be given nor (more importantly) taken away from us by the government. The rights guaranteed to us by the Constitution literally flow from God and our given to the government by the people for safe keeping. They cannot be created nor destroyed; that was supposed to be what made our system so unique. By saying that health care is a right you are also saying it is a mandate that there are people to give such health care. In order to ensure this (in the mystical future) you would have to take away rights and force people to become doctors (assuming afford-ability causes people to leave the field). Rights cannot be contingent on another's ability, desire or education.

 

I think that's one of the challenges of it, but even that is being addressed by the newly passed bill. I don't think they're ever going to be able to force people to become doctors. People will still enter into the field even if the pay is lower, I consider myself one of those people. The key to making it work is ensuring that the exorbitant costs of med school are manageable, and they are addressing it with a ROTC type program. There is a program outlined in the bill in which the government will pay for medical school, and for each year paid for, you owe the government one year as a primary care doctor. I know half of doctors said they'd change fields if they switched, but I really have a hard time believing that the turnover rate would be that high. Making 50k a year as a doctor (I'm pulling this number out of my ass, but it seems reasonable, though if anything I'd say it's low) for every year of med school they paid for is very attractive. No one would force anyone to do it, but it's quite the incentive considering the costs of medical school.