American Socialist Voter

It seems to this we can answer our own questions, but first read what was written by this blogger:

"That was before the Communist Party USA and Socialist Party USA formed the Democratic Socialists of America for the sole purpose of hijacking the Democrat Party. Today, the DNC is under the full control of the Democratic Socialists of America via their legislative teams in the Congressional Progressive Caucus and Congressional Black Caucus."

Read the whole piece at: Oil for Immigration

The answer here is "clear," being the operative word. Most, if not all, self-claiming socialist groups seem to lack any clear vision to the public at all and even worse they hide behind anti-public review yet demand to be "social." This public relationship is poor and lets conspiracy persons mislead the ignorant. This might be a great joke piece if it wasn't so truely sad that even one person does think like this.

For many years socialists far and wide have known the benefits of equality. Working together has always left more time to enjoy the human experience.

"I am very turned on when he's doing housework," says the 36-year-old Camden, Delaware resident, a middle school teacher.

"If there's a sink full of dirty dishes, he knows I'm going to take care of that before I want to get intimate. If he wasn't helping with the housework, I would not find that very attractive."

It appears what we have always known CNN is now reporting. We have also now discovered the reason for mean capitalist, the lack of sex.

This is a great breaking story as it pits the Capitalists directly against the will of the people and their overall land development plans.

REFERENDA REQUIRED FOR ADOPTION AND AMENDMENT OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLANS.

Florida Hometown Democracy, Inc. PAC

Their main website is Hometown Democracy

Visit their Youtube video selection

Contact: Lesley G. Blackner, Chairperson

Post Office Box 636

New Smyrna Beach, FL 32170-0000

(386) 424-0860

The single question, from the title, has been a leading dumbfounding that has never worked for any side in a political fight of words. We could ask the same question of every form of politics from history:

• Give me an example of a successful nationalistic government from history?
• Give me an example of a successful communistic government from history?
• Give me an example of a successful republican government from history?
• Give me an example of a successful democratic government from history?
• Give me an example of a successful feudalistic government from history?
• Give me an example of a successful theocratic government from history?
• Give me an example of a successful monarchistic government from history?
• Give me an example of a successful _____________ government from history?
• Give me an example of a successful pure formation thereof government from history?

We all can say there was this or that formation of government, but no one can say one was better than the other as the ebb and flow of politico changes to meet their (peoples') needs, wants, hopes, culture, faith, and so on. This is what, how, when, and why socialism is in every form of life. Socialism is more an idea than and actual ideology that has been co opted by many over several hundred years. This is why so many people are finger pointing to the left and their right these days. One has only to look at the many types listed here on this website to see even so called or self-allied socialists do not agree on what socialism is or is not and name calling in the pejorative of a correct form abound.

A main focus of American Socialist Voter is to address such circular arguments. Those here for the most part don't like all the name calling or endless straw man fights. Believe it or not, we even red bait ourselves from time to time in that communists tend to like calling actual socialists "social democrats" or "neo-liberal" and claim they are not socialist enough due to their lack of "revolutionary" tendency. And the same is true of socialist in the USA that have for years (since 1919) fended off internal attacks from communistic elements that continue to co opt socialism by use of the very word. In other words, they try and tell voters and real socialist where they stand on the Marx-o-meter scale how "socialist" they really are when, in fact, no one can say how socialist another is with any degree.

To echo the record of history, socialism was long thought about and written about long before Karl Marx was born and added materialism and egoism into his works and life. No person can or should stand in judgment of another for their degree of beliefs. This is in fact as un-American as making a personal attack on someone's inalienable right to practice their faith. Even Senator McCarthy learned this after loosing ground over time for his hate against progressive change where a center of human dignity was reached half a century later.

Facts are, when asking the same old tired question, "Give me an example of a successful socialist government from history?" the answer might surprise many. All governments since - or before - Biblical recorded times have had or it can be argued that socialism existed in one form or another and within each to degrees. It is a timeless idea with many concepts that should next be held to a candle against another. They will never match, but each must be respected for where they worked for the betterment of the people and altered as needed where they did not meet the needs, dignity, and respect of the people. However, if need be there have been socialist types of governments that have had great success in Europe and Scandinavia, but for all the good they did there has been equally bad moments in other parts of the world such as autocratic "socialist" (term used loosely) in Africa, where tribalism is just as paramount and problematic. If all else false in the face of understand, know this, socialism is more about everyday lives as Norman Thomas once referred to American socialism as "creeping socialism." Maybe it's in the red tape bureaucracy or like gnaphalium on the ground; either way, it is here to stay and in many ways we are all socialists.

Now reverse the question to ask, what government, party, or such has withstood the test of time, culture, distance, faith, and such to have lived for time immemorial? Only people themselves have and this with their ideas are the basis for socialism as a whole. Expand your minds people and the world will expand with you.

Our newest member, Ricky here as of today cited his reason for joining was to learn why socialism needs social democracy. It has been noted by those of democratic socialism that there is a stagnation in their movement and are questioning why this is too effecting their parts of the movement.The answers don't have to be complicated or extreme in their details. To be Socialist is to realize the simplicity of its real nature without complication or hassle.

The answer has already been known. Balance is the strongest human force and every human strives for this in their lives. Socialism itself strives for this natural balance. What makes it become unbalanced is egoism and the imbalance of power, authority, is twisted out of proportion to its' ability and correctness to public perception. Those who recognize this naturally are repulsed from either side's movement. One is the other part in compliment or many parts in working together, social, sociable, socialize, socialism, socialist, sociality, socialite. Acceptability and respect for and from each shall be a must if wanting to move socialism beyond what we have or have lost.

Several within socialism's root have reported they'd like to see a strong one hundred revolutionaries at its' core. The problem here is that there is not a Golden Ratio within being social itself. It is being "social," firstly, to extent and become reality that will change naturally what and who we are and not force or core isolationism of ego.

Balance is knowing that while we are not all the same fit we can and should work together where we feel comfortable in doing so regardless of what else happens around us at any time or place. Being social is part of being a free human. Those who strive for a lockstep or peer pressure cadre enter into shaky ground that has never withstood any test of time.

Mathematics was one of the early expressions into understanding how our world works :

A positive times (multiplier) a positive is always positive

(+) (+) = +

A positive times (multiplier) a negative is always negative

(+) (-) = -

Civil society and rule of law towards a social justice have great pull in any party's platform. A single negative plank from a platform can void the whole to any reader. Too many planks can also be a negative as many have diverse ideas nationally speaking. One half of being social compliments the other democratically and when this is forced or disrupted the movement become stagnated by pseudo-social behavior or rhetoric such as communism, nationalism, capitalism, or other malformations whereas material or ego get in the way of being social.

Even the logic of Venn diagram sounds and looks good; yet, it cannot encompass the whole true in actual feeling many have in social interactions. Being social in the first place has a massive trust factor that all parties must address to move in any direction, except downward, that is.

A few have used statistics to gather a percentage number. Samuel Clements a.k.a. Mark Twain called this like it was, "there are lies, damn lies, and statics." Other variables and scientific principles come into play as well so don't believe anything except the raw data in real numbers and with a grain of salt. The reason democratic socialism and social democracy have had a long history together is that they are compliments of the individualism for the whole good unlike the commune model later of Marx that held all for all and nothing more in a quote command economy or it's counter of one for one in laissez-faire capitalism. Being social is middle and unique ground saying, "I freely choose action for the whole based on the better good." It does not have to be revolutionary or evolutionary, it just has to be activism in making that little difference in your personal life to the public life for whatever your local cause is... on up to the federal level if need be. Always remember that socialism is a working hypothesis with many failed theories like Marxian, Stalin, Trotsky, Mao, Pol Pot, and their like.

Anyone and everyone can be social because it is and is not liberal, neo-liberal, center, conservative, communitarian, and many other terms depending on who, where, what, when, and how. Socialism does not have an absolute and never worked well under the demands of an absolutist. We might say, "Socialism is absolutely right every time except for those who are not social to begin with and fail to work with others." Any group that isolates itself is anti-social no matter how much it claims otherwise. Always question authority and claims made. Let them know you are social and they cannot take being so from you no matter what happens at any time or place. Without diversity of tendencies in any movement there is a lack of social opinion. "How much tendency does your group have" is a leading indicator of how well your group will be in time.

Over the last month a singular person - Peter Stathis of Spring Hill, Florida - has come to note for the reiteration of the same old arguments withoutdetailed reason, but very patriotic and flag waving. Even when given astandard reply citing historical facts. What is a Socialist to do? ASVbeing an educational and interactive source, we would like to think(and think often) that information and exchange of it betweenSocialists is #1 for and towards unity.

Peter Stathis' first letter to the Hernando Today, Published: Thursday, May 14, 2009, Socialists like Moore living in denial.

I readwith some amusement Brian Moore?s response to my letters in which hesays I am guilty of stereotyping socialist as communists and fascists.Moore and his fellow socialists like to live in denial. In fact,fascism and communism are forms of socialism.

What really got melaughing is that Moore believes you have more freedom under socialism.Does he honestly believe when he says that ?it is not the governmentthat takes care of the populace, but it is his/her fellow citizens andco-workers who create the policies and conditions for its community.?Is that a fact Mr. Moore? Then why is it under socialist governmentssuch as Cuba, Venezuela and China the states runs everything, thepeople have fewer rights?

My amusement soon turned to anger whenMoore made the statement that capitalism causes the death of 12 millionpeople each year, and yet he doesn?t explain the connections. He alsoblames capitalism for 50 million people living in poverty. Of course,he doesn?t mention the welfare system that has kept people living inpoverty, giving them no desire to improve their lot in life. And, ofcourse, personal responsibility has nothing to do with what a persondoes with his or her life.

Capitalism does have its problems,but on the other hand there is no benefit to socialism. To be overlydependent on the state or the community like Moore suggests is not agood thing. There is little or no chance for a person to make somethingof themselves. I have said it once and I will say it again, ifsocialism is so wonderful then why are people fleeing from thosecountries to come to the United States?

Peter Stathis' second letter to the Hernando Today, Published: Saturday, May 23, 2009, Too smart to fall for socialism.

I will continue to be amazed at how Brian Moore can continue to make thestatement that socialism is more democratic than our form ofgovernment, which is a constitutional republic, but then I realizedsomething - Moore wants to live under a "true democratic state."

Now,I wonder if Moore is familiar with "Plato's Republic." In that classicwork, Plato states that a democratic state is "mob rule," the majorityrules over the minority, and he placed it above a dictatorship as oneof the worst forms of government.

Socialism is basically that,a form of mob rule. The majority rules, the minority has no say. Youlook at socialist states such as Cuba and Venezuela, is Moore implyingthat the people in these countries have more rights than we do?

Evenas I write this letter, the president of Venezuela, Hugo Chavez, isdoing away with all opposition, taking control of all of what is leftof private businesses. How is that for freedom? What you see in thesecountries is what Moore wants here, the state or community controlseverything.

Our founding fathers were way smarter than thelikes of Marx and Engel, and all the other so-called enlightened mindsof the 19th and early 20th centuries. James Madison, Thomas Jefferson,John Adams and all the rest understood what freedom meant. Marx, Engeland the others had no clue what freedom is all about. They just wantedto replace the European monarchy system of the day with another form ofoppressive government.

Moore can talk all he wants about how great socialism is, but we, the American people, are too smart to fall for that line.

Our country might not be perfect, but we will choose this form of government over others any time.

American Socialist Voter, reply:

Socialismhas had many malformations and varied ideologies since ancient times,many of us Socialists who are well read in all its types know this. ACatholic monk once said, "that if you have been around long enough youwill be found guilty of everything." Therefore it is automatic that aflag waving American conservative would naturally gravitate to theworst or the worst and ignore the positive, in political science andpublic relations this is known as "negative activism" and is used forthe purposefulness of making people remember hate. Even historyprofessors at universities find themselves undoing this negativeimagery to discern the two and how different each part was and how theycame about. Then looking at the historical, cultural, epoch, and eventhe environment and such things, each socialism is classifieddifferently from the next. The conservative would have voters believesocialism as a disease, it is not. It is a powerful means toself-awareness - reference Maslow's argument- for all its' better or worse ways and means. Like a tool it can beused for an ethical - good or evil - purpose based on the latter moralacts of the person as an individual with inalienable rights. 

The guiltiness of one is not rooted in the sins of their fathers. That isof course what the new settlers to this now great country have formed.It hasn't always been easy. Even the G.O.P., started in 1854 - GrandOld Party - is a misnomer or sorts and has a spotted past bothpolitically and historically. To start this off let us watch a shortvideo that should prove entertaining to say the least:

Many on this side of the equation have asked "that if the G.O.P. weresuccessful in its attempt to rename the Democrat Party the DemocratSocialist Party could the varied Socialists within the U.S.A. alsorename or in this case revert the G.O.P. back to its 1828 name,Democrat-Republican Party?" See, all Socialists view the two currentand major parties as one in the same whereas nothing has changed inover a century.

This might come as a surprise to aconservative or a liberal, but many Socialists do believe in "freedom."In fact, the State of Florida where Brian Moore lives has laws on thebooks that protect and defend those freedoms against totalitarianparties that Peter Stathis brings to light. The first thing thatStathis might want to do is not be blinded by the flag he is waving andopen his clinched fist to shake that of Moore's and have a realconversation instead of drawing lines of demarcation. Sure socialismhas had many malformations such as nationalism or materialism, but thatis not what actual socialism was from the start or is today. Socialismcannot be or stand in a quota system - communist - or in a state system- fascism - because of the demands it makes against freedom. For thoseof us who know our history, political science, and economics we quicklyrealize the problems more so than the general public or voter might.This is also why a Socialist is neither liberal or conservative andwill never meet a stereotype due to our ability to evolve over time. Anidea can never taken from the table if it is good enough to placepressure on the bad ideas in return.

Even today Socialists fight the good fight against the above mentioned problems ofinfiltration within socialism by the far left communist of variedgroups or Nazis from the extreme right of the socialist's spectrum. Weare very much standing for freedom, just not status quo limited freedom from the same two party system that has fooled many Americans.

PeterStatis ask, "Is that a fact Mr. Moore? Then why is it under socialistgovernments such as Cuba, Venezuela and China the states runseverything, the people have fewer rights?" This is a reiteration toemphasize the above about what many like yourself do not know orunderstand. Within the communist far left they use the common root word"socialism," however, do not be confused or fooled. What they aretaking about is democratic centralism or state capitalism. Neither is socialism which has a different range from social democratic, democratic socialism, Christian socialism.What they are talking about is communism which is not socialism exceptas a common ancestor, so as this letter began, "are we guilty for thesins of our fathers?"

Without writing out a wholebook here ASV recommends that Peter Stathis and those who agree withhis question about the deaths at the hand of capitalism take a closelook at social psychology, childhood educational methodology, and ineconomics Keynesian, quota, command, and our latest troubles ofglobalism. "No," this does not mean we've ignored all those deaths atthe hands of communist dictatorships. Socialists hold Stalin as one ofthe largest contributors to mass murder of our political kind. We holda simple fact that has proven to be true all around the world, "Abullet kills fast, but just as equally (although slower) with adollar." Every child looks for guidance and example of how to led agood life and to promote what is good in society. If that child lacksability the problem becomes generational in solving. No matter how manywant and fight for a piece of the top peak there will always be thosewho loose out, it is a historical and economic fact. Socialist hope to,at the least, have a better base standard and means for those at thebottom. The difference here is between a degenerating society or acivil society, which might we all choose between? Since the first twosteps call for safety and structure we as a civil society must addressthis or pay the cost in an ever growing prison system. By the way, wehave the fastest growing prison population and it is our largestdomestic industry today. What does that say about America to the world?

Co-optionis a confusing dilemma for Republicans in the U.S. They either do notknow or want to understand it. This is in large part the problem withseparation of actions and ideologies. Socialists have for years wroteand acted to do many betterment for the whole of mankind. In the U.S.,the Democrats since the Great Depression (1929) have used much of theplatform of various movements within socialism. This does not make aDemocrat a Socialist just as a Democrat is not a Republican (since1854). The ideology of the Democrat Party is capitalistic without adoubt to us here. Socialism is both anti-capitalist andanti-totalitarian and has several complex schools of thought i.e.Marxian use materialism to explain labor value and cost while thealtruistic Christian socialist is non-materialistic therefore believesMarx was wrong. Socialists have even argued metaphorically over squarepizza verses round pizza and selected toppings. The problem ofco-option where one party uses the others elements has been a standingproblem and one we see will not vanish in the near future. That is nomatter how much the ghost of McCarthy comes up to red-bait.

Stathisgoes on to write, "there is no benefit to socialism." To which Moorereplied to with a list of items promoted in planks of socialism:

40-hour work weekchild labor lawsworkers compensationunemployment insurancesocial security Medicare collective bargainingwoman?s suffragecivil rightsThequestion here should be, "What are we willing to give up?" If theanswer is to be not a one than there is a hint of socialism in your background. Keep in mind that this list compiled by Brian Moore isshort and limited without defining each or giving historical purpose.ASV invites each reader to look into the why, how, when, and otherdetails thereof to know personally how socialism has become a benefitthat has changed the world. We know that there is no perfect system,but as Socialists we in fight over the many details always seeking thebest. What we know is that the current system like the fail communistand fascist that capitalist too will fail as it transcended feudalismand monarchy among other ancient forms. The remaining question will beas to how this will happen. Not even the author Karl Marx detailedthis, it is only through hyphenated works i.e. Marxist-Leninism thatother persons have tried to impress their unique view on what is or isnot the truth. Marx with the largest known ego did not have the answersand to date neither did the others. Socialism is in part a naturalcourse and will remain so for the foreseeable future that no person canforce or perverse as history's failure have foretold. 

Now that we've beaten to death ideology and the liberal or conservative, let usend this with a thought to ponder. Time, socialism has changed over andover again, from Sir Thomas More's book Utopia from 1492 to MartinLuther's fight with the Catholic Church in 1517 for specific man made(early civil) rights. All firstly rooted in religion which was themedium of the day. During the 1700's it became to most Europeans akinto the "American experiment" where laissez-faire and religiousfreedom made a middle class standard for the first time in recordedhistory. To the 1850's with European watching as the buildup towardsthe American Civil War over the rights and equality of men (later women- 1919). What is uniquely American is not and never will be uniquelyEuropean as the backgrounds and cultures are to this day verydifferent. Even in Russia it is not European nor American and theirSlavic culture and many epoch episodes are just as different. We arenot all in the same "Red" boat. Socialism develops from within at anatural pace as a society understands its importance to self-awareness.Our Founding Fathers knew all too well what could happen as to theevents in France during 1789-1791 and the imperialism to follow. It didhappen in the U.S. but was less obvious over time, mostly after theSpanish-American War and the building of the U.S. Navy. Today socialismis growing in the U.S. but shrinking in Europe depending on the trendsthis could change. One leading factor is the size of our bureaucracy ofnearly four million governmental employees that soften the exchangebetween the three other branches of government. It might not seem likean outright revolution, yet the red tape is winning on both sides.

A working thought under construction. If you would like to be one of the many "Socialists" behind the scenes creating the new vision for tomorrow and would like to start by writing for the ASV Blog than feel free to submit your written piece.

Socialism is very real; however, it is utopic wrong-think in perpetual lacking, for the last 150 years, a real world planning stage with fully open to the public democratic debates. The totality of additional time real time flexablity under constant public watch. "Socialists" sould never except substutionalism of any type or from any level of governence.

"Socialists" who specialize in an industry and having an educated view will be entrusted in the real world socialism with gaining proper controls of the operational complexity for the nationalized business economy. Socialism is not to nationalize in a forceful takeover, but to truly understand its workings, placement within societial needs, and to have the Workers' and Taxpayers' (one in the same respectfully) trust in such events fully with those actions of fellow "Socialists" becoming of a free democratically running of said nationalized businesses to their proper measures, not quotas, or over production. Businesses that help retrain Workers to advance from an industrail society to the future techological society. The older wording of socialism's textural meanings might not meet that of the 21st century "Socialist."

Notes

Substutionalism: the party is substituted for the proletariat, the party organization for the party itself, and the central committee for the party organization while lastly the leader for the Central Committee. The word was first coined by Leon Trotsky in part of his critique of Joseph Stalin's authoritive collectivism. Rose Luxemburg earlier had a similar critique of Lenin's tactics, "For the proletarian dictatorship that schooling and education is the lifegiving element, the air without which it cannot live." Much of the early failures lacked freedoms known and well planned stages.

A working thought under construction. If you would like to be one of the many "Socialists" behind the

scenes creating the new vision for tomorrow and would like to start by writing for the ASV Blog than feel

free to submit your written piece.

Socialism is very real; however, it is utopic wrong-think in perpetual lacking, for the last 150 years, a real world planning stage with fully open to the public democratic debates. The totality of additional time real time flexablity under constant public watch. "Socialists" sould never except substutionalism of any type or from any level of governence.

"Socialists" who specialize in an industry and having an educated view will be entrusted in the real world socialism with gaining proper controls of the operational complexity for the nationalized business economy. Socialism is not to nationalize in a forceful takeover, but to truly understand its workings, placement within societial needs, and to have the Workers' and Taxpayers' (one in the same respectfully) trust in such events fully with those actions of fellow "Socialists" becoming of a free democratically running of said nationalized businesses to their proper measures, not quotas, or over production. Businesses that help retrain Workers to advance from an industrail society to the future techological society. The older wording of socialism's textural meanings might not meet that of the 21st century "Socialist."

Social Democrats have been in the United States of America called many things over the years i.e. ethereal, social fascist, neoconservative, and a few we dare not repeat out of good taste.

One of the questions that seem to confuse readers here is the singular word and its belonging, "Party."  To answer this goes back into many heated topics of details beyond belief and directions following the many American Socialists who have come before what is today's modern formation, that behind the scenes Social Democrats within the USA have fought over in areas of opinion.

The first term: No Party, was what some of the right-wing Democrats wanted to do to call the Social Democrats USA strictly an "Organization" and not a "Party." In that limiting concept they should become part of the many caucuses under the Democrat Party, their party. Our business end still today is the Social Democrats USA and has rejected the no party school of thought as we look towards holding people to their word and promises.

The second term: A Party, is noted as being a singular formation and one of unity. This is not the case with any political group. While in the USA there are two prime examples -democrat and republican- listed or called "Party" in this idea neither are such.

The third term: Parties, is more directly the correct formation of all political groupings.  Further exampling, while there is the Democrat Party or Republican Party both these wordings are false directly because each state has its own ballot line and election laws. There is only one level beyond this for national elections, fec.gov. The FEC does not have its own ballot line; therefore, each state and its laws create several "Parties" which is the correct wording. To date most if not all politico use "Party" if to say, "... they are searching for a ballot line to give the connotation of unity and control."

This website was a part of the Social Democrats USA (business end) - Socialist Party of America (Party end) network of several websites with specialized purpose. Here we offer "Votership," a place for voters who are more inclined to vote or work with us in some sense of unity without wanting full membership to a Party (Parties if you prefer the correct term).

Social Democrats within the USA have long held - since 1901 - the terminology "Socialist Party" under its many name changes from differences throughout historical change. The purpose of retaining Socialist Party is to reinforce the ideology of Socialists unity to not fracture and become in part what the Socialist International is today. America Socialists might view the USA as a mirror to our European cousins who too cannot always agree, but somehow do unite when socialism needs a fire lit under its causes for end results. Those who tend to fracture off follow the Communist or Anarchist doctrines of the many failures as they are too small to affect violent militarist change and noting all states have laws against such criminal actions. While the USA allows Freedom of Speech it is not the same as a license to invoke hatred acts. Communist and Anarchist groups can often self-identify with using the term "Revolutionary" in their literature, usage of the old Bolshevik red star and large amounts of red coloring on their respective web-pages, flying red/black flags, talking about dead Russians and using a suffixal  -ism or -ist. Social Democrats are anti-communist and use the structure of commonwealth.

The purpose of this website is to promote socialism's Left and Right wings, both democratic socialism and social democracy to those Socialist voters who would rather avoid the whole party Statement of Principles being pushed on them, some false oath/demands, or those Socialists wanting a different environment that avoids chatter of dead Russians and has an America Socialist focus. Here at Social Democratic Party of America we offer votership for the Socialist leaning, not membership. We do not equate socialism as being communism, communism-socialism, revolutionary socialism, or national socialism which by our standards' is viewed as malformations on a theory into cults and dictatorships that have caused great harm to worldwide humanity.