Mediaboss Marketing

Islam, Socialism, Measles, ISIS - Mel Brooks, Bill Maher MORE! LiberalViewer Sunday Clip Round-Up 93
Support my videos on Patreon at http://bit.ly/1tBnWX5 1:35 Socialism and whether US tax, benefit policies are or have been socialist, plus current budget fight 9:04 Islam and muslim extremist...

By: LiberalViewer

Excerpt from:
Islam, Socialism, Measles, ISIS - Mel Brooks, Bill Maher MORE! LiberalViewer Sunday Clip Round-Up 93 - Video

During the latest episode of Real Time with Bill Maher, Maher took out time to explain how socialism helped create a strong middle class in the United States.

The Huffington Post reports that Maher called out Republicans for showing fake support toward the middle class. Maher also acknowledged that socialism played a key part in building the middle class of the 1950s and 60s.

"The large, thriving middle class that America used to have didn't just appear out of the blue. It was created using an economic tool called socialism," said Maher.

Maher explained how after World War II the U.S. government heavily taxed the rich and redistributed the wealth through the G.I. Bill allowing Americans free access to college and job training among other benefits.

"We can debate whether that's a good thing or a bad thing to go back to, but what is beyond debate is that, that is what happened." Maher said.

Maher has not been one to shy away from controversy with this statement and recent comments about American Sniper.

Credit: Revolution Pix/INFevents.com

See original here:
Bill Maher says socialism built middle class

Published: January 31, 2015

In Paul Krugmans Jan. 22 facts dont mattercommentary, on the emotional denial of environmental, health, and economic realities by the right, he says Republican rage is bound up with rejecting any role for government that serves the public interest. Fear and ignorance of socialism is indeed fueling the irrational hatred of self-government.

Socialism, secular government in the public interest, begins with the American Revolution, followed by the French and successive revolutions. One result: today, two of the worlds poorest nations, North Korea and Cuba, have universal education and health care, important components of governments that serve the public interest.

Contrast that with America where, shortly before assuming control of Congress, Republicans repealed the anti-bail-out Wall Street law and severely underfunded the Internal Revenue Service and Environmental Protection Agency, encouraging tax cheats and polluters to open businesses financed by New York bankers. The GOP will be more outraged than its base when the bill for this falls due, correctly blaming the federal government. Currently they are busy passing more anti-socialist legislation, and facts dont matter, particularly the constitutional one spelled out for Congress in a Supreme Court decision in 1819, formally establishing the public interest as the guiding principle in making federal laws.

A basic assumption of the Founding Fathers, including Alexander Hamilton, whose twisted interpretation led to the Whiskey Rebellion, was that popular support for secular government serving the public interest replaced loyalty to British rule almost overnight through the pamphlets of Thomas Paine. But by 1819, the spirit of 76 was so weak that the purpose of the revolutionary generations sacrifices needed to be codified in the Constitution, now mocked with every Republicans oath of office and assault on the public interest. Not only facts dont matter for them, history, cause and effect, common decency, international law and opinion, and human rights are all trumped by anti-socialism.

Jim Greenwood

Washington

See original here:
The public interest under assault

Politically NKU - Anarcho-capitalism and Socialism
NKU grad Marc Kennedy sits down with NKU history major Tyler Weber to discuss Anarcho-capitalism and Socialism, defining the pros and cons of each ideology.

By: Holland Rains

Link:
Politically NKU - Anarcho-capitalism and Socialism - Video

After an advertisement issued by the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting carried an older version of the Preamble to the Constitution that did not have the words "secular" and "socialist" in it, the Shiv Sena has demanded a "permanent deletion" of these terms from the Constitution. Dipankar Gupta, sociologist, distinguished professor and director at Shiv Nadar University's Center for Public Affairs and Critical Theory, speaks to Manavi Kapur about whether India still needs socialism

Is socialism still relevant in the current political and economic context? Does India still retain its socialist character?

Firstly, it is important to understand that socialism is not the same as communism. Our Constitution will never pass muster in a communist society, and neither is a communist society as democratic. Socialism, on the other hand, is an option that is available within capitalism. It is closer to the concept of welfarism, with a left of centre mindset. This means that there is greater government expenditure on welfare activities, an emphasis on controlling market volatility and privileging certain norms that are essential for democracy. Issues and agendas such as the welfare of the poor, ensuring proper healthcare and access to education get greater prominence within a socialist paradigm. Socialism is not anti-capitalism, it is merely a means to regulate the markets' volatility and allow all citizens to live with dignity.

Globally, is socialism considered to be dead?

No, this is not the case. Here too, socialism is confused with communist regimes. Socialism and market forces swing back and forth, just like a pendulum. It is the same as an ongoing debate between the conservatives and the democrats. Socialism may often take a back seat when it is less relevant, just as market forces have good days and bad days.

In Britain, the same socialism is called labour, and other countries too have different names. The prime minister of Greece is left-oriented and has been an admirer of Che Guevara. With his focus on healthcare, even United States President Barack Obama is somewhat socialist, despite being the leader of a capitalist economy. Socialism sees a revival whenever the normative element comes into the policy-making arena.

India, as other democracies, should allow the play of market forces as long as the principles of democracy are not violated. Our country will not do well within a communist framework since it will be at odds with the basic principles of democracy and freedom of speech, among other things. Even Jawaharlal Nehru was clear that communism brings a certain totalitarianism and violence with it, but he did lay emphasis on socialism.

Why is it that some political parties in India still consider socialism as their core character?

In India, socialism is basically understood as being pro-village and anti-West. No manifesto or mission statement from political parties spells socialism the way it should be. Ram Manohar Lohia had a fair idea about the correct definition of socialism, but he was influenced by his bitterness against the elite.

Has the socialist term outlived its relevance and should be taken out of the Constitution?

Go here to read the rest:
Socialism is not about keeping the poor alive, but about removing poverty: Dipankar Gupta