It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Bernie Sanders 30 years of a consistent message

page: 3
30
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 11 2016 @ 01:09 PM
link   
If this country was actually being run with true and fair Captialistic ideology, the population would all laugh at Bernie Sanders. Instead, we live in an Aristocratic Oligarchy and the non-wealthy are suffering. Bernie Sanders is finally striking a chord because of this. We are going to continue fighting over our small morsels while the rich get richer off of our labor. For that reason I'm voting for Sanders. Pipedream or not, I'd rather vote for the interests of the entire country, not the supposed elite.




posted on Jan, 11 2016 @ 02:17 PM
link   
Us Europeans love coming to threads like these and giggling at Americans throwing around the word 'socialist' as if it were a dirty insult.



posted on Jan, 11 2016 @ 04:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: Wookiep

I'm sure all you bernie supporters will think twice once you see what true socialism is. Meh, he wont be elected but if he is, we deserve it. Just like we deserve all the nonsense obama has brought us, you morons asked for it.

They think their brand of socialism will somehow be different if they use their own recipe.

I call it naivete sauteed in egotism, seasoned with denial along with a side of ignorance.

Others may simply call it delusion.



posted on Jan, 11 2016 @ 04:24 PM
link   
a reply to: NthOther

A different recipe means a different cake. Pretty. God-damn. Obvious. Bernie calls himself a "Democratic Socialist" but the truth is that his proposals don't have anything to do with 'real' Socialism, they have to do with better public services and the reversing the redistribution of wealth the government currently makes. (At the moment they drag the money up from the poor and middle-class to the uber-rich, Bernie wants to start pulling it down.)

However, he does not want to TOTALLY ELIMINATE wealth inequality like all the "temporarily-embarrassed millionaires", seem to think. He is not a "dirty Commie" as I've heard an idiot or two call him before. He just wants to make it so that the top 1% of the population doesn't control the vast majority of wealth compared to everyone else.


I call it naivete sauteed in egotism, seasoned with denial along with a side of ignorance.


Yes, this is exactly why Americans have been voting against their own interest for forty years, and I am glad they're finally waking up to it and trying to put someone in power who actually has them at heart, rather than corporate or MIC interests.
If you think this applies to Sanders then you're just being fooled by the Socialism buzzword.
edit on 11/1/2016 by Eilasvaleleyn because: Reasons



posted on Jan, 11 2016 @ 04:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: Eilasvaleleyn

Bernie calls himself a "Democratic Socialist" but the truth is that his proposals don't have anything to do with 'real' Socialism, they have to do with better public services and the reversing the redistribution of wealth the government currently makes.

So when Sanders calls himself a socialist, he doesn't know what he's talking about?

And you're going to vote for him?



posted on Jan, 11 2016 @ 04:37 PM
link   
a reply to: NthOther

He's not calling himself a Socialist, he's calling himself a "Democratic Socialist." Which all the soundbyters tend to leave out because it's not as effective a bogeyman.

The "Socialism" label hasn't been correctly applied to what it actually means since the Cold War.
Where is Sanders advocating that

the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.

since I must be missing something if he is.



posted on Jan, 11 2016 @ 04:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: amicktd

originally posted by: DBCowboy
I think we can all agree that government is corrupt.

Government wastes money, doesn't budget at all, and when it runs out, taxes more.

So how is making government bigger going to eliminate all the corruption and poor budgetary habits?


Why is it that the die-hard republicans always complain about government getting bigger, when the same thing happens everytime a Republican is in office?


They only "care" about budget deficits & "big government" when they're out of power. Reagan, Pops Bush & Dubya all ran deficits and their voters didn't care because Republicans always distract with fearmongering.

Reagan ran deficits but we "had to" do that because of the Cold War! The first Bush ran deficits but we "had to" do that because of Operation Desert Storm! And Dubya replaced Clinton's budget surpluses with budget deficits while drastically increasing both military & intelligence programs, but we "had to" because of the War on Terror!

And if a Republican wins again, they'll do the same thing. They'll keep running budget deficits "because of ISIS" & some new threat, all while decreasing government revenue, increasing their surveillance & defense programs, and quietly selling off public goods to their allies through "privatization". Oh, and they'll keep slashing programs that actually help poor and working Americans in order to pay for their programs. And their constituents will still claim they want "small government", as if they don't realize those new defense, police, and intelligence programs are still government programs.
edit on 11-1-2016 by enlightenedservant because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 11 2016 @ 04:52 PM
link   
The US is a democratic republic, if anyone here wants the U.S. be an extention Europe, move there. Socialism doesnt seem to be working out so hot there regardless of the pipe dreams and delusions.

I'm all for removing corruption of the 'elite' who have found loopholes to screw everyone else. Socialism wont solve that, but a revolution would. We just need to get back to the founding principles, without the fed and the irs etc etc.

The people are responsible for whatever comes next.



posted on Jan, 11 2016 @ 05:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Eilasvaleleyn

If there are substantive differences between socialism and democratic socialism (you'll note that one is simply qualified with an adjective), surely you would have no problem articulating for us what exactly those differences are.

As far as I can tell, the adjective "democratic" implies that the current of the political majority will dictate how resources are distributed, instead of by authoritative decree.

I'm sure you've heard the phrase "tyranny of the majority" before. How do you plan on ensuring that the rights of political minorities are not trampled under such a "democratic" system?

This is what Marx called "the dictatorship of the proletariat".



posted on Jan, 11 2016 @ 05:28 PM
link   
a reply to: Wookiep

Well..here it goes (my humble opinion just touching the tip of the iceberg). Im European and to me Mr.Sanders is the only one making any sense for you guys. Im norwegian and thank god not a part of the whole Euro catastrophy, but still.

Its not all pipe dreams. It's working pretty damn well over here. High income - high tax - everyone contributing to the wellfare of all. Free healthcare, free schools. Im astonished that you're so afraid of some kind of change to the way society is built up. I agree you are a hell of a lot more people over there to be taken into the aquation, but that is ALOT of tax to shorten your countrys insane debt. Also by somewhat eliminating private healthcare you almodt entirely eliminate insurance issues and questions about reliability if the # hits the fan (so to speak). You get help. Period.



posted on Jan, 11 2016 @ 05:34 PM
link   
a reply to: NthOther

It's an issue with all labels. You're better off looking at Bernie's actual policies. I just can't see single-payer healthcare and free public education as "evil Socialism."
The difference is in the execution, not the idealism.

Resource distribution is already decided by the politically powerful (0.1%) rather than the political majority.

Yes, I have. I presume you have heard the word "Oligarchy" before. I plan on ensuring that using this little document you might have heard of called the Constitution.
Well, not that it's something the government really cares about anyway.
What are you expecting to happen, anyway? "Blacks are barred from free public education" or something?

Regardless, Sanders curbstomps all his opponents when it comes to getting corruption out of politics anyway. That MUST happen, or nothing will ever get better. While I agree with pretty much all of his proposals anyway (thankfully), I'd support Trump if he said he was going to get corruption out of politics and I believed him. (Which I wouldn't, by the way.)



posted on Jan, 11 2016 @ 05:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: Wookiep
I'll believe bernie doesnt want to make this country socialist when he stops calling himself a socialist.


Except that he doesn't call himself a socialist. He calls himself a Democratic Socialist --

Yes, Bernie is open about running as a Democratic Socialist. Some believe a socialist is a socialist and there isn't any difference in which form it comes in, but there are clear and stark differences between Democratic Socialism/Social Democrat and National Socialism.

For example, National socialism is Nazism. N.S. is about building a strong centralized state with a unified, non democratic nation behind it, motivated by racial and excessive prejudiced loyalty and not really characterized at all by socialist economic policy. Democratic socialism is about promoting socialist economic policy within a democratic society.

Essentially they have nothing in common other than the term socialist in their names. Democratic Socialism means democracy. It means creating a government that represents all of us, not just the wealthiest people in America. It's about taking us off the path of Oligarchy.

Have you looked over all of Bernie's plans if elected as president? Bernies plans if elected as president

Democratic Socialism‬ does not do away with free markets. There's still money, still personal private property, still have the ability to get rich, still the possibility that you fall flat on your face if you don't work hard or just survive if you choose to do the menial or under valued.

There would still be taxes to care for the incapable or people who for whatever reason are temporarily limited and to pay for government and infrastructure.



posted on Jan, 11 2016 @ 05:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: Eilasvaleleyn

What are you expecting to happen, anyway? "Blacks are barred from free public education" or something?

Actually, it's more likely that they'd cut off white males, but that's beside the point.

Anyway. From the blog you cited:


While having almost the same principles as that of socialism, democratic socialism believes in a socialism through the ballot box.

I stand by my previous post.



posted on Jan, 11 2016 @ 06:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: NthOther

originally posted by: Eilasvaleleyn

What are you expecting to happen, anyway? "Blacks are barred from free public education" or something?

Actually, it's more likely that they'd cut off white males, but that's beside the point.

Anyway. From the blog you cited:


While having almost the same principles as that of socialism, democratic socialism believes in a socialism through the ballot box.

I stand by my previous post.

Huh? Stereotyping much? Or just projecting? I'm an actual black male socialist. I think everyone should have access to higher education, regardless of their background, skin color, or income level. An educated public will theoretically improve every segment of society.

Why do you think we'd cut off white males from free public education?



posted on Jan, 11 2016 @ 06:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: enlightenedservant

Why do you think we'd cut off white males from free public education?

Gee, I don't know...

Maybe a lifetime of being discriminated against in employment and education (scholarships, specifically) due to Affirmative Action?

Being discriminated against in family court because I'm male?

It's off-topic, but I can keep going in PM if you'd like. Though somehow I think you'll just accuse me of whining about lost privileges I never had or something.

But who knows.



posted on Jan, 11 2016 @ 06:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grimpachi

The ones that need to read it won't. Most of the knuckle-draggers can't be bothered to learn the difference between communism and socialism. They seem to be allergic to dictionaries.


The difference is you learnt about socialism/communism from a liberal dictionary meanwhile ignoring the statements from people like Lenin, Stalin and Marx.

Meanwhile other people, such as myself, learnt what socialism and communism is by living under such system/s.

But hey, some people seem to be allergic to facts, and to experience.



posted on Jan, 11 2016 @ 06:13 PM
link   

I am neither 'middle class', nor am I a vet.
So.... just assuming, for a moment, that the words from a politicians mouth have any 'weight' at all, and this is tough, if I were to vote got your boy, what will he do for me?
And what makes you think that anything that he has said, thus far, will still be his feelings and thoughts once he tasted heady (and corrupting) 'Power' (tm)!
No one seems to have achieved this, yet.
We just mindlessly keep feeding our virgins to the volcano...


The very first thing that comes to my mind is overturning citizens united. This should help us all right away by getting big money out of politics and restoring our democracy. Getting big money out of politics other things Bernie would do that could be for you -- Potentially For You



We aren’t going to get there just by electing a president who believes in and is committed to restoring our democracy. We’re going to get there by building a movement – a movement with enough power not only to elect a president but to insist that all of our elected representatives return power to the people, a movement that not only identifies the deep corruption of our politics but rejects cynicism and instead insists on solutions, action and accountability.


On keeping his word and corruption --

Corruption -- The very first thing that comes to mind is his grassroots movement. He's called for a political revolution from We The People of the United States and has refused to take any money from Super PAC's or big money corporate lobbyist. It's all funded by the people.

keeping his word -- His history up to this point is all we can go by. I can point out some examples in particular. As mayor of Burlington, he ran a tight ship on a tight budget, grew the economy, and attracted local business by creating trade associations, giving new entrepreneurs start-up funding, and offering technical assistance.

Yet he also protected low-wage workers, financed training programs for women, implemented neighborhood planning assemblies (NPAs), raised taxes on business, and created organizations to empower the people, including a Youth Office, an Arts Council, and a Women’s Council.

During his time in the House of Representatives, Bernie passed more amendments than any other representative serving with him. His work included reducing the cost of college, expanding free health care, holding the IRS accountable, cracking down on child labor, increasing winter heating funding for our poor, and fighting against corporate welfare.

In the Senate, Bernie has been no less productive than in the House.

He has protected our troops, greened our government, restricted the bail-out to protect U.S. workers, helped veterans’ kids, exposed corruption in the military-industrial complex, and supported treating autism in military health care. He is a ranking member of the Senate Committee on the Budget, and serves on the Committees for Children and Families, Veterans Affairs, and Clean Air and Nuclear Safety, as well as six others.

Also in the Senate, he got “the first-ever audit.. of the Federal Reserve.., a cause that Republican congressman Ron Paul had been pursuing for decades.. Sanders was able to get the votes to do it by forging a compromise.”

With the Affordable Care Act in danger, he leveraged his influence to win free health treatment for 10 million Americans. He even worked with Republican John McCain to overhaul the Veterans Administration.

“McCain praised Sanders’ work on the bill in an interview with National Journal [and] Senator Jack Reed [said]… the bill would never have passed without Sanders’ ability to bring the parties to a deal.”

Bernie is beloved by his constituents more than any other senator in the United States, with the highest approval rating (83%) in the nation.



“I do not say, ‘Elect Bernie Sanders for president, I'm going to solve all of these problems.’ We need millions of people to stand up and fight back, to demand that government represents all of us, not just the one percent. I'm trying to create a movement. That is what my campaign is about – that is not what Hillary Clinton's establishment campaign is about.”


While in college, he marched for civil rights. Sanders, an organizer for the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee, was part of a contingent of students from Chicago who traveled by bus in 1963 to the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom.

Sanders is one of only 2 sitting U.S. Senators who actually attended the 1963 March on Washington, and saw Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., give his “I Have A Dream” speech in person.

Sanders was the first Congressperson to take senior citizens across the border to Canada to obtain cheaper prescription drugs. Bernie also took women suffering from breast cancer, enabling them to purchase medications in Canada at 1/10 their cost in the U.S.

Bernie is the only one running who voted to protect Glass-Steagall from Wall Street, a decade before the financial crisis, way back in November 1999

He is not trying to claim his election will fix everything, but calling for the only thing that will fix everything— the people getting aware, angry, and active.



posted on Jan, 11 2016 @ 06:16 PM
link   
a reply to: Gumerk

No, 'democratic socialism' is about giving all power to the state while claiming it will be for the good of the people... Same old claims, with the same old results.



posted on Jan, 11 2016 @ 06:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
I think we can all agree that government is corrupt.

Government wastes money, doesn't budget at all, and when it runs out, taxes more.

So how is making government bigger going to eliminate all the corruption and poor budgetary habits?





posted on Jan, 11 2016 @ 06:21 PM
link   
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Wait, it's the state now? I thought you hated the Federal government and wanted the States to get more of their power back?



new topics

top topics



 
30
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join