Letter: Socialism v. America

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    May 28, 2019 8:52 a.m.

    @VisiGuest
    RE: "100% of governance is collective action [socialism]"...
    ---
    No it isn't. Read the definition of "Socialism" in the dictionary. It's not any collective activity. People acting together is "Society", not "Socialism". Know your definitions before you claim words mean what they don't mean.

    "Socialism" is not any collective action. Read the actual definition of "Socialism".

    All people and governments act collectively. That doesn't make everything a government does = "Socialism" or make every person who acts collectively a "Socialist". Read the definition. It's different.

    Acting together is great, it's what people, community and society are about. But it's not "Socialism". That's a different thing altogether.

    All Government is not "Socialism".

    Please read the actual definition of "Socialism" in the Dictionary VisiGuest. It's different.

  • VisiGuest Mancos, CO
    May 25, 2019 10:19 a.m.

    Social Organization Technique

    100% of governance is collective action [socialism]

    Profit Technique

    Is profit:
    1)Whatever the market will bear?
    2)Commensurate with the value added?

    Answer Key:
    1=Capitalist
    2=Socialist

    #1 Oversight is on the honor system, operates assuming enlightened self interest , every transaction has it's own rules which may or may not be documented

    #2 Oversight is provided by an outside entity, probably government, the amount of rules & level of documentation proportional to the amount of abuse

    Here's the root failure
    Capitalism relies on
    Enlightened self interest
    Human reality is biased towards short term gain

    Counteracting this requires humans of goodwill
    5% or so are self absorbed without any restraint, exemplified by
    The Ends Justify the Means
    The vast majority of governance is in reaction to the bad behavior

  • UtahBlueDevil Alpine, UT
    May 25, 2019 7:02 a.m.

    Ranch..... show us the proof of spontaneous life creation...... go ahead. Show evidence that it happened, or that it can be reproduced. Remember, to be a scientific "fact", it must be reproducible.

    I will be waiting for your proof of spontaneous life creation..........

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    May 24, 2019 2:25 p.m.

    Google "Marx's Path to Communism - Mises Institute"...
    ---
    His books on Economics were inspirational. But his poetry was quite disturbing. This goes over some of his poetry. It's something worth reading and understanding, to know where he was coming from and what was in his heart. He had quite a relationship with Satan (by his own words). He didn't like this world much, or the people in it.

    Read his poems, you can skip the narrative provided, but read his poems. They explain a lot about what he was thinking.

    Ranch, you should read them too. I think they would especially speak to you.

    Socialists like Marx don't tend to like religion much. It kinda makes them angry. Why... I don't know. It's an individual thing. My belief in God doesn't impact you at all (unless I try to force you to believe, and I would never do that. Try to convince you, yes. But force you? Never).

    But liberty isn't the strong-suit of Socialism. Conformance is more the theme of Socialism. Forced conformance if needed. Study history.

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    May 24, 2019 2:05 p.m.

    @Ranch 11:11
    RE: "@Red; You're the one making the claim that "god" granted us rights"...
    ---
    Actually it wasn't Red who said that. It was our founding Fathers.

    ===

    RE: "You need to prove that your superstitious being really exists before you can make such a claim - therefore PROVE IT first"... (not my abuse of caps moderator, his)
    ---
    Actually he doesn't have to prove it. It proves itself.

    The "Inalienable Rights" he's talking about are: Life, Liberty, Happiness.

    Life:
    Does Government give us our life? Nope.

    And yet... we are alive. So somehow we were given life (without Government granting us that Right).

    So Life was given to us, but nature, or call it God, to me they are the same thing. These 3 are also called "Natural Rights". And no... the Government didn't give them to us. And yet we have them, naturally (every person). Call them "Natural Rights" or "God given Rights"... it's the same thing.

    Liberty:
    Every human that's been born was born with Liberty. We can take it away from that baby, but we can't GIVE them "Liberty".... because they already have it.

    Happiness:
    Government doesn't grant us the Right to Happiness. We all have it. We're born with it.

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    May 24, 2019 1:38 p.m.

    All you have to do is look at history and what happened to individual right to practice religion in countries that tried True Socialism, to see he has a point.

    We don't have True Socialism in America. Safety-nets are not "True Socialism" (according to it's definition). We have good safety-nets, but we don't have True Socialism. And they aren't the same thing.

    From what I've learned from studying History, and what's happened in countries that embraced True Socialism... I don't want it. But some radical Socialists do.

    Don't nominate those people DNC. They are not for America. They are for fundamentally transforming America from what it is... to something different. I like what America was founded to be, not what radical Socialist's think America should be.

    IMO We can handle all the problems we have in America without turning to Socialism. We would just have to cooperate more. I know... not likely. We have too many radicals now days.

    But when you have such Division... no societal system works. Not Socialism. Or Capitalism. They all fail when we have this much division and think the other person must fail so we can succeed. That's wrong-headed.

  • RedShirtUofU Andoria, UT
    May 24, 2019 1:29 p.m.

    To "Flipphone" no, if you read Amos 3:7 it states "Surely the Lord GOD will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets." That sure sounds like God would need to use prophets since that was not part of the Mosaic law that was ended with Christ's sacrifice.

    Also, the New Testament is filled with references to Prophets continuing to work AFTER Christ had died. The time of Prophets hasn't ended. God still has things to reveal to us.

    To "Ranch" the sad part is you can't even explain how you think you know that there is no God. You don't even have the ability to testify of how you gained your knowledge. It is just sad.

  • one vote Salt Lake City, UT
    May 24, 2019 1:21 p.m.

    Three steps to autocratic country without rule of law. Conservative, trump supporter, and autocracy.

  • Flipphone , 00
    May 24, 2019 12:29 p.m.

    The path to communism. Democrat, Liberal, Socialist, Marxist and Communist. Currently the Democrat party is promoting step #3 Socialism.

  • Ranch Here, UT
    May 24, 2019 12:23 p.m.

    @Red;

    That last was just hilarious. Keep making us laugh; we all need a good old guffaw on occasion.

    Your "testimony" is not very compelling.

  • Flipphone , 00
    May 24, 2019 12:21 p.m.

    RedShirtUofU - Andoria, UT

    He has revealed himself to me through my study of the scriptures in a manner that is consistent with the word given through his mouthpieces on earth, known as Prophets.
    RedShirt UofU... There are NO Prophets on earth today. Christ coming fulfilled that need from the Old Testament.

  • RedShirtUofU Andoria, UT
    May 24, 2019 11:46 a.m.

    To "Ranch" so you are saying that you can't prove that God does not exist.

    Ok, here is how I know that God exists. He has revealed himself to me through my study of the scriptures in a manner that is consistent with the word given through his mouthpieces on earth, known as Prophets.

    Now it is your time to prove to us that you have complete knowledge of the universe and can tell us with complete certainty that there is no God.

  • Nate Pleasant Grove, UT
    May 24, 2019 11:33 a.m.

    @Frozen Fractals "He's pursuing policies similar to Canada and nations in western Europe..."

    One of his policy proposals is universal health care (euphemism Medicare for All). Placing all of one industry under government control is socialism. It puts Bernie Sanders to the left of Canada and Europe, who have two-tiered, mixed, public and private systems.

    Another of his policy proposals is worker-owned businesses, where workers have control over the means of production. Not state control, but social control; that's socialism, too.

    His federal jobs guarantee cannot be delivered without adding state control over the economy.

    Bernie describes himself as a democratic socialist. We can probably take his word for it.

    (As an aside, that's pretty much how Hugo Chavez portrayed himself when he ran for office.)

  • Ranch Here, UT
    May 24, 2019 11:11 a.m.

    @Red;

    Why should I bother trying to refute the existence of your "god"?

    It has NEVER done a single, provable thing. Ever. It's all just hearsay, just like EVERY other mythological god ever created by man. Your god is just another creation of man; usually in an attempt to control other men (usually to obtain power and money).

    You're the one making the claim that "god" granted us rights. YOU need to prove that your superstitious being really exists before you can make such a claim - therefore PROVE IT first. Then, and only then, can your claims be taken seriously.

  • RedShirtUofU Andoria, UT
    May 24, 2019 10:30 a.m.

    To "Ranch" I notice that you can't refute what I stated.

    We know you hate religion, but just because you hate something that doesn't mean that it is evil or wrong. You hate it because you want to live a lifestyle that is contrary to the teachings of the LDS church.

    We could talk about all of your beliefs that are nothing more than made up replacements for religion that are all about power and money.

  • Ranch Here, UT
    May 24, 2019 10:04 a.m.

    @Red;

    God is just a con used by religious leaders to get your MONEY.

  • Leninism Bountiful, UT
    May 24, 2019 10:00 a.m.

    The author of this letter seems to conveniently forget about what happened in 2008 when Goldman Sachs, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Citigroup, JPMorgan Chase and several other billion dollar corporations got bailed out financially by our own government using tax payer money. They were basically told to back their trucks up to the US Treasury and take whatever they needed, no questions asked.

    Show me where it says in the constitution that it's the government's job to bail out its wealthy buddies every time the economy collapses? Now with Donald Trump handing out tax breaks to more billion dollar corporations our government has officially graduated from "capitalism" to corruption.

  • Frozen Fractals Salt Lake City, UT
    May 24, 2019 9:07 a.m.

    @Nate
    "One of the leading Democratic presidential candidates is a lifelong socialist. "

    Except he's not. He's pursuing policies similar to Canada and nations in western Europe and as some conservatives frequently correctly point out whenever an occasional leftie says those countries are socialist, they aren't, they're just capitalist systems with massive social programs.

  • RedShirtUofU Andoria, UT
    May 24, 2019 8:25 a.m.

    To "Ranch" how do you know that the divine is a myth? Do you have knowledge of everything in the universe? IF you don't have knowledge of everything in the universe then how can you know for certain that there is no God. If you do have the knowledge of everything in the universe, then doesn't that make you a God. If you are a God, then God exists.

  • Nate Pleasant Grove, UT
    May 24, 2019 8:21 a.m.

    "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed...."

    Rights are granted by our Creator; we are born with them. The role of government is to secure and protect them.

  • EscherEnigma Ridgecrest, CA
    May 24, 2019 8:18 a.m.

    @barfolomew
    "And please, do not point to Norway and Sweden as your shining examples of socialism. They are not socialist countries."
    Seeing as that's the kind of "socialism" that Sanders and AOC are advocating for, I think you just admitted you're freaking out over the word, and not the actual policies.

  • Ranch Here, UT
    May 24, 2019 7:42 a.m.

    The "divine" can't grant anything since the "divine" is nothing but a myth.

    Each worker participates in the generation of wealth. The owners of production take the lion's share to keep for themselves and leave the workers the crumbs.

  • UtahBlueDevil Alpine, UT
    May 24, 2019 6:10 a.m.

    "True socialists tend to believe the rights of their constituents are granted by the government, not, as the Founding Fathers believed, by divine right to the individual."

    What an interesting comment. Does the author believe that if a government were to start to suppress these God given rights, there would be divine intervention? Or that since these are God given "rights", that as true Christians we should be fighting for those very same rights all over the world since we are all children of this same deity?

    The truth of the matter is the granting and protection of rights is the role of the government. Where the whole thing gets very muddled is there are two trains of thought. One held by many hard core conservatives is that government in innately evil, and that there for should not be trusted with protecting ones rights. History has many times over proven this to be true. The other side believes in the preamble - "We the People" - are the government, and because of that "we" are the protectors of human rights.

    Each Memorial Day we as a family watch "Band of Brothers". Its a testament to how "We" the people defended human rights, fought for by average people.

  • Flipphone , 00
    May 23, 2019 5:42 p.m.

    Failed Liberalsim has lead to Socialism and failed Socialism well lead to Marxism. it's a slippery slope when governments try to equalize personal outcomes.

  • EscherEnigma Ridgecrest, CA
    May 23, 2019 4:19 p.m.

    @barfolomew
    "Both America and Russia have rejected slavery and forced labor years ago - for us, it's been 156 years."
    Nah. We just hide it better.

    Prison labor, not-quite-prison labor, contracting out with a wink and a nudge to foreign companies who *of course* would never do anything unethical, etc. and so-on.

    Just like the America government would never torture prisoners. We hand them off to our allies to do it for us and reap the benefits.

  • barfolomew Tooele, UT
    May 23, 2019 3:31 p.m.

    @ Onion Daze

    "I also perceive that some folks think that "socialism" automatically produces poverty & dictatorships."

    Every instance of socialism thus far in history has indeed produced poverty and dictatorships. And please, do not point to Norway and Sweden as your shining examples of socialism. They are not socialist countries. I know that many on the left think that, but they are capitalist based societies. Also, things like "just and moral laws, capable and uncorrupted police forces, an independent judiciary, a free and honest "press" " are not welcome in a socialist lead gov't.

    I think that the confusion lies in that they are considered only as different types of economies.

    The difference is freedom.

    Capitalism allows freedom where socialism is all about control over the populous. Socialism wins hearts and minds by promising that everything will be given to you while capitalism requires some work on your part to achieve economic stability and solvency. It relies on hard work and a little luck while socialism drains the spirit and makes everyone the same - desperate and poor (well, except for those in charge, of course).

  • patrioticAMERICAN South Jordan, UT
    May 23, 2019 2:35 p.m.

    Apparently, DN will help beat this subject to death, just like they did the "bended knee vs. patriotism" debate. All this conspiracy theory obsession w/ "socialism" tempts me to stop reading DN's Opinion page altogether!

    Believe me, America's capitalists have all the power & money they need to keep things status quo, & nothing Dems could do would ever change that. Even if the next pres. is a Dem--the SC is obviously pro oligarchy over democracy, as Citizens United proved--what could a Dem pres. do, that today's SC wouldn't quickly undo?

    The sad part is that our judicial branch, (all non-elected officials) have the real power & control in our pretend democracy, & have been consolidating that power, decade after decade.

    What's scary is that everyone in the upper echelons is a lifetime appt., & it takes a Herculean effort to get them removed.

    People foolishly think we live in a democracy. We never have--first slaves & women were denied the right to vote, then Jim Crow laws made a mockery of the 14th Amendment, & now the SC is turning back the clock on the Voting Rights Act, while Southern States get away w/their voter-suppression laws, & abt 30% of the pop. controls the govt!

  • Onion Daze Payson, UT
    May 23, 2019 2:15 p.m.

    @ barfolomew

    Putting the year "1855" in the second sentence & not in the first sentence seems to be a significant error on my part per you. Numerous posts to this letter contain far more serious errors than that!

    You ask what "...a plantation from 164 years ago has to do with our economy today."??

    From my 3rd post at 11:57 a.m.

    "I perceive that some folks think that "just and moral" societies automatically go hand-in-hand with capitalism, free enterprise & private property. It is not a given." It is not a day follows night thing that free enterprise always produces just & moral societies. Learn from history.

    I also perceive that some folks think that "socialism" automatically produces poverty & dictatorships. Slave plantations certainly produced poverty & oppression for the many & a life of ease for a few.

    All systems need just and moral laws, capable and uncorrupted police forces, an independent judiciary, a free and honest "press", public education at least through high school, etc. Without these things, all economic and political systems produce bad results.

    Also, I do not want folks to have an automatic "Pavlovian" response to words like "capitalism" & "socialism".

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, UT
    May 23, 2019 1:32 p.m.

    The Left has the right to opine, but it does not have the right to redefine the word "Socialism".

    so·cial·ism
    noun
    noun: socialism

    a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.
    synonyms:leftism, Fabianism, syndicalism, consumer socialism, utopian socialism, welfarism; More
    communism, Bolshevism;
    radicalism, militancy;
    progressivism, social democracy;
    laborism;
    Marxism, Leninism, Marxism–Leninism, neo-Marxism, Trotskyism, Maoism
    antonyms:conservatism
    policy or practice based on the political and economic theory of socialism.
    synonyms:leftism, Fabianism, syndicalism, consumer socialism, utopian socialism, welfarism; More
    communism, Bolshevism;
    radicalism, militancy;
    progressivism, social democracy;
    laborism;
    Marxism, Leninism, Marxism–Leninism, neo-Marxism, Trotskyism, Maoism
    antonyms:conservatism
    (in Marxist theory) a transitional social state between the overthrow of capitalism and the realization of Communism.

  • barfolomew Tooele, UT
    May 23, 2019 1:31 p.m.

    @ one vote

    "The radical right does not have Hillary or Obama to demonize. Certainly cannot support the failing Donald and so they are going crazy about a general political abstract concept."

    The "failing Donald?" How exactly is it that he's failing? He's probably gotten more accomplished in 2 years than any other President. And all that with the left throwing continuous road blocks, spike strips and Molotov cocktails at him every step of the way.

    Oh, I know! You're gonna tell us that Mexico hasn't paid for the wall, right?

    ________________________________

    And it's a sad day when people who believe in God, family, the lives of the unborn, and the sovereignty of our nation are considered "radical."

  • SC Matt Saline, MI
    May 23, 2019 12:43 p.m.

    @nonceleb:

    "Traditional socialism does not eliminate private property nor take government possession of it."

    Here are portions of the definitions of socialism from three major dictionaries:

    Oxford English Definition includes:
    "A political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole."

    Merriam-Webster's includes:
    "a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property
    b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state "

    American Heritage includes:
    "Any of various theories or systems of social organization in which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned collectively or by a centralized government that often plans and controls the economy."

    Is there a more reputable dictionary than these three that you believe supports your statement?

    Because from what I see, you're simply flat-out wrong.

    "Traditional Socialism" in fact *does* include government control of production.

  • nonceleb Salt Lake City, UT
    May 23, 2019 12:21 p.m.

    Socialism is one of the most misinterpreted terms. There are varying degrees from Communism on the far left, to traditional socialism, to a socialism/capitalism mix of "socialist democracies" in Europe. The letter writer is confused. Communism eliminates private property and holds it (through the state) in common for all. Traditional socialism does not eliminate private property nor take government possession of it. It taxes property just like government does in a purely capitalistic system. Through taxation, it provides a safety net and reduces the huge disparity of wealth. As for the claim socialists believe rights are granted by the government (for which the writer provides no evidence), our early patriots, like Thomas Jefferson, borrowed from John Locke that rights are guaranteed by the consent of the governed (a republic) and not any divine right of rulers (which was believed in pre-1700s Europe). Democratic socialism is no different. All of this nonsense today is being perpetuated by the ill-informed, oversimplifying, and ignorant.

  • barfolomew Tooele, UT
    May 23, 2019 12:21 p.m.

    @ Onion Daze

    "What I am saying is indeed "2019"."

    Actually, what you said was: "Here is a glaring example of totalitarian free enterprise right here in the USA. A slave plantation in the South Carolina in 1855. No holds barred free enterprise."

    Maybe if you started your rant with, "There was an example...," maybe that would have helped. But I still think you're wrong.

    I guess you should explain more clearly what a plantation from 164 years ago has to do with our economy today.

    I would love to hear this.

  • Onion Daze Payson, UT
    May 23, 2019 11:57 a.m.

    @RedShirtMIT---"Your earlier post doesn't even qualify as Socialism."

    Go back to 7:39 a.m. and re-read for better understanding of what I wrote. Here is a short review of what I wrote.

    "Here is a glaring example of totalitarian free enterprise right here in the USA. A slave plantation in South Carolina in 1855. No holds barred free enterprise. Private property (slaves) unhindered by government. In fact the governments of many states vigorously support this economic system."

    You are correct that a South Carolina slave plantation is not "socialism". I did not say it was!

    Again, It is naked capitalism. It is a textbook example of "capitalism" devoid of legitimate morals and supported by some of the governments of the day. It was driven by a labor shortage and greed.

    @barfolomew

    What I am saying is indeed "2019".

    I perceive that some folks think that "just and moral" societies automatically go hand-in-hand with capitalism, free enterprise & private property. It is not a given.

    Red China's socialist/capitalist system is so bad that a few factory dormitories have safety nets to impede successful suicides by jumping from the windows.

  • Shaun Sandy, UT
    May 23, 2019 11:48 a.m.

    Taxation is not socialism. Conservatives have no idea what socialism is. They are using it as a scare tactic.

    On the flip side democrats obviously don’t know what it is either and therefore they sound ignorant when they talk about.

  • HaHaHaHa Othello, WA
    May 23, 2019 11:27 a.m.

    "Again, no one is advocating Socialism. The GOP wants to steer the focus away from Trump, and Socialism is the topic they chose to distract the American public"

    And then we get the whole collection of DN leftist crackpots, lecturing us about "fact free" responses and letters. Don't ask any of these left wing brain trusts what color the sky is, because you might be astounded by the answers you get!

  • cthulhu_fhtagn Seattle, WA
    May 23, 2019 11:17 a.m.

    Did some elementary school teacher recently assign their students to write letters about socialism?

  • one vote Salt Lake City, UT
    May 23, 2019 10:55 a.m.

    The radical right does not have Hillary or Obama to demonize. Certainly cannot support the failing Donald and so they are going crazy about a general political abstract concept.

  • casual observer Salt Lake City, UT
    May 23, 2019 10:53 a.m.

    It's interesting that Democrats deny they are socialists when their leading spokespersons, AOC and Sanders among others, clearly state they are socialists. They should direct their efforts to their own party, not those of us in the center. Too much MSNBC and CNN has clouded the mind.

  • RedShirtMIT Cambridge, MA
    May 23, 2019 10:52 a.m.

    To "Onion Daze" the sad thing is that most liberals won't recognize that definition.

    Your earlier post doesn't even qualify as Socialism.

    You see, a plantation owner is NOT the government. The slaves were considered property. The sheriff, when capturing a run away slave, was only enforcing property rights.

    A plantation is only superficially like socialism, but they are not the same when taken in context of the times when each existed.

    Socialism has NEVER resulted in a just society.

  • barfolomew Tooele, UT
    May 23, 2019 9:49 a.m.

    @ Onion Daze

    "A Stalin slave labor camp in Siberia in 1938 and a slave plantation South Carolina in 1855 have much in common."

    I think you need to change out your calendar. It's not 1855 or 1938 anymore. I don't believe there are any "Stalin slave labor camps" or "slave plantations in South Carolina" anymore. Both America and Russia have rejected slavery and forced labor years ago - for us, it's been 156 years.

  • What in Tucket Provo, UT
    May 23, 2019 9:36 a.m.

    I would suppose the result of Venezuela going from wealthiest nation in Latin America to last would scare anyone. Cuba and North Korea are also wonderful examples of the glories of socialism. It is true that Canada, Germany, UK, Denmark have socialized medicine, but they are pretty much capitalistic in their economies. Even China which has embraced capitalism in part is still ranked #100 on the Index of Economic Freedom, but due to a huge population is still the second largest economy. If Trump is replaced by Biden or someone else we will have the privilege of seeing how socialism does. OI do not think it will be pretty.

  • The Real Maverick Spanish Fork, UT
    May 23, 2019 9:32 a.m.

    “The DN is fairly unbiased”

    Stopped reading right there.

    With daily writings from Sutherland, Heritage, Cato, the Eagle Forum, and Coal lobbyists? No, it’s not as “unbiased” as you claim.

    Maybe it’s not conservative enough for you Breitbart and daily stormer types. But the dnews has a very obvious right wing bias.

  • Matt in MI Saline, MI
    May 23, 2019 9:21 a.m.

    I really don't care what people call themselves as long as they support and, if necessary, defend the idea that a business owner is doing nothing wrong by making a profit as a result of employing others.

    Some people will mention a whole raft of "yeah, but" in response to that, but they should really stop at "yeah."

    A business owner employs others. That is unquestionably a good thing. He or she puts a lot of effort into that business, and builds the framework upon which others can earn a living, a better living than they could earn themselves.

    So, if for example, I start up a franchise restaurant, I will invest many thousands of dollars for the right to use a certain name, and do things a certain way. I will also employ a few dozen people at a legal wage, a wage they agree to when they take the job.

    I might make 10% on my investment by doing this. I might make 20%. I might lose it all.

    But the employees got paid for each and every hour they work, regardless of my success. If I succeed, they will probably get raises.

    If somebody has a problem with this, then they're a socialist of the type called out in the letter, and they deserve the title.

  • EscherEnigma Ridgecrest, CA
    May 23, 2019 9:13 a.m.

    "True socialists tend to believe the rights of their constituents are granted by the government, not, as the Founding Fathers believed, by divine right to the individual."
    Sure they did. And then they used government-granted rights to suppress the "divine rights" granted to women and blacks. And when said suppression finally ended, it wasn't due to divine intervention, but due to government action.

    So you want to claim that rights are divinely granted, and don't flow from government? Sure. Just so long as you accept that governments have been oppressing and suppressing these claimed "divine rights" for all of human history, and it's only when a government decides to grant the right that it actually has any force behind it.

    Or in summary... you can have your divine rights, but if you want them to mean something, you need government-granted rights.

    And that has nothing to do with socialism, just human history.

  • Onion Daze Payson, UT
    May 23, 2019 8:45 a.m.

    RedShirtMIT ---- asked for an explanation of what "socialism" is. Here it is sir.

    socialism

    1. any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods.

    2. a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property

    b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and
    controlled by the state

    3. a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism
    and distinguished by the unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work
    done

    The source of the above definitions is the "Merriam Webster's Collegiate Dictionary", Tenth Edition, Copyright 1994, page 111

  • Nate Pleasant Grove, UT
    May 23, 2019 8:26 a.m.

    @Impartial7 "Again, no one is advocating Socialism."

    One of the leading Democratic presidential candidates is a lifelong socialist. A few of the loudest voices in Democratic Party describe themselves as democratic socialists. Almost all of the Democratic presidential candidates have expressed support for the Green New Deal, a collection of proposals that can only be achieved by a socialist government. It should be clear to anyone who is paying attention that someone is advocating socialism.

  • pragmatistferlife Salt Lake City, UT
    May 23, 2019 8:24 a.m.

    Oh, now I get it.

    A minimum wage, and govt. assistance with the bare minimum of food to survive will lead us to an America where the policies will equalize the wealth of Gates, and the single mother in the ghettos of Chicago. Of course it's also clear now that this is possible because of a graduated income tax based on the idea that your money is my money. Yup now I got it.

    Now I understand that only communists and atheists would ever want to regulate the ability of our citizens to kill one another by enacting some restrictions on what guns you can control.

    Thanks DN for publishing these clarifications daily, I feel more informed now....and yea scared to death.

  • one old man MSC, UT
    May 23, 2019 8:19 a.m.

    Lots of words, but no facts. Sounds like one of trump's speeches.

  • lost in DC West Jordan, UT
    May 23, 2019 8:10 a.m.

    Got to love the responses that can only attack what they consider the source of the letter rather than present reasonable arguments as to why the author’s assertions are incorrect.

  • RedShirtMIT Cambridge, MA
    May 23, 2019 8:01 a.m.

    To "Impartial7" no, the DN is fairly unbiased. Remember we recently had letters about every 3 days from people that wanted to go down the Socialist rabbit hole and implement a redistribution of wealth scheme using Climate Change as justification.

    To "Happy Valley Heretic" then can you explain what Socialism is, if what the letter describes is wrong?

  • unrepentant progressive Bozeman, MT
    May 23, 2019 7:50 a.m.

    It is hard to read through this opinion letter without restrainin a gag reflex.

    Again, more projection from the right of their true intents for the country....an authoritarian regime.

  • Onion Daze Payson, UT
    May 23, 2019 7:39 a.m.

    "True socialists tend to believe the rights of their constituents are granted by the government,..."

    American history provides some extreme examples of true capitalists who's right to hold other humans in bondage was granted by governments.

    Here is a glaring example of totalitarian free enterprise right here in the USA. A slave plantation in the South Carolina in 1855. No holds barred free enterprise. Private property (slaves) unhindered by government. In fact the governments of many states vigorously support this economic system. One of the major responsibilities of local control sheriffs is to catch runaway slaves. A Stalin slave labor camp in Siberia in 1938 and a slave plantation South Carolina in 1855 have much in common.

    Free enterprise and private property does not automatically deliver just societies.

    "Socialism" does not automatically deliver just societies either..

    All systems need just laws, capable and uncorrupted police forces, an independent judiciary, a free and honest "press", public education at least through high school, etc. Without these things, all economic and political systems produce bad results.

  • The Real Maverick Spanish Fork, UT
    May 23, 2019 7:37 a.m.

    How many of these fact free letters regurgitating the same Fox News nonsense is the dnews going to publish this week?

  • Happy Valley Heretic Orem, UT
    May 23, 2019 7:20 a.m.

    Got love the weekly letters where people espouse a belief about what they think socialism is, and with their straw man firmly in place, make up their own definitions.

    They fantasize about an America that hasn't existed since the Robber Barron age, which for some reason conservatives want to return to.

  • Impartial7 DRAPER, UT
    May 23, 2019 7:19 a.m.

    Does the D-News have a deal with the GOP, where, every 3 days they promised to publish a letter with the latest Republican fear tactic? Again, no one is advocating Socialism. The GOP wants to steer the focus away from Trump, and Socialism is the topic they chose to distract the American public.