The Michigan Socialist -- Vol. 1, No. 2

[MSchreader]

I finally got it up on the website. Check it out at www.michigansocialist.net/news . Let me know what you think of the articles. If you get inspired to write a letter to the editor, send it along.

Martin

[MSchreader]

1. Kick

:kick:

[IranianDemocrat]

2. I'm fine with the Democratic Party and Capitalism in general.

Thanks though.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

15. really? that picture of Malcolm X is kind of ironic then isn't it?

Am I missing something? Is that picture of someone else?

[IndianaGreen]

3. Very nice website

I bookmarked the page for future reference. Nice job Martin!

:thumbsup:

As to the post by IranianDemocrat in which he says "I'm fine with the Democratic Party and Capitalism in general," I wonder if he realizes that the the Social Security that President Roosevelt got enacted was a watered-down version of the national pension plan favored by the Reds in his Administration.

All of the great ideas and social advancements that traditional Democrats trumped as "Democratic" ideas, were Red ideas to begin with.

Why some socialism to make capitalism palatable, when full socialism is the only solution to our nation's systemic woes?

These people think they are capitalists by virtue of having a 401k account, but they are not capitalists, they are still members of the working class!

[Iverson]

6. what IndianaGreen said

That.

[MSchreader]

7. I figured it was his business

To be ignorant of the facts and history. He probably didn't know what the facts were behind the FDR and the New Deal. My guess is that he also doesn't know that Malcolm X was moving in the direction of socialism when he died either.

(I'll bet he also doesn't know I have a collection of articles and literature from the HKS of Iran here too. :evilgrin: )

In any event, I'm glad you like the website, and if you're ever so inclined, feel free to send a letter to the editor or just a note saying "hello". (And that goes for all DUers out there!)

Martin

[IranianDemocrat]

10. I like Malcolm X...

Because he fought fire with fire, even though he was labelled and scrutinized by not only white America but by his own race too.

All I meant was that the current system is fine by me, as long as we work for social reforms under this framework. Now if you could be so kind, tell me how I am wrong and cure my ignorance.

[Terwilliger]

4. kick

[shugah]

5. nicely done

looks good Martin! the article about the hip-hop mayor is very informative, tons of info.

the benton harbor article is good--tho i'm not sure the baghdad comparison works so well as a hook. :shrug: just mho.

[JanMichael]

8. Kick.

:kick:

[IranianDemocrat]

9. My question to you is...

why the Socialist Party USA? Do you vote for the Socialist candidate or do you just support the ideals of the party and vote Green or Democrat?

[JanMichael]

11. I can only answer for myself.

I, like Martin, am a member of the SPUSA. I am also a member of the Democratic Party.

I support Dem campaigns (So far), contribute money, as well as work for them.

I voted for Gore and Dems up to this point.

The circumstances for 2004 are such that unless the Dems nominate Hitler, I vote for the Dem candidate.

Ok?

[Redleg]

12. Marx's critique of the capitalist mode of production was accurate

but his solutions to the problems (the crises) of capitalism may not be feasible. Certainly some of the great things Democratic presidents have pushed for had roots in socialism- there was a time when when liberals of all types discussed these issues. My question is how do you socialists and Marxists hope to push through your ideas to the American public? Don't talk to me about the revolution, either.

[Nederland]

13. DU is far Left

For those that don't agree consider this thread. Here we have a number of self identified Socialists expressing their opinions, and here we have The Economist magazine asking the age old question: "Is George Bush a Socialist?"

http://www.economist.com/opinion/displayStory.cfm?Story_id=1893625

<snip>

The real reasons for the profligacy are more depressing. Mr Bush seems to have no real problem with big government; it is just big Democratic government he can't take. One-party rule, which was supposed to make structural reform easier, also looks ever less savoury. Without a Congress that will check their excesses, the Republicans, even under the saintly Dr Frist, have reverted to type: rewarding their business clients, doling out tax cuts and ignoring the fiscal consequences.

This opportunism may win Mr Bush re-election next year, but sooner or later it will catch up with his party at the polls. The Republicans are in danger of destroying their reputation for managing the economy—something that matters enormously to the “Daddy Party” (which sells itself as being strong on defence and money matters). The Democrats can point out that Bill Clinton was not only better at balancing the budget than Mr Bush. He was better at keeping spending under control, increasing total government spending by a mere 3.5 % in his first three years in office and reducing discretionary spending by 8.8%.

<snip>

[JanMichael]

16. I wouldn't say so but the Economist has a right to it's opinion.

Then again Pinochet, and Mussilinni, was a Capitalist and we'd never want to paint all Capitalists in a bad light now, would we?:think:

There are many shades of political/economic theory.

As for me I am a very, very, strong personal Libertarian. However I don't believe that anyone is truly free while money/Capital is the main tool for making political decisions and influence.

There's a big difference.

[sirshack]

14. Not a socialist...

...but I will mark and read it. I always try to hear and understand all sides...