I’m not American, so I won’t be voting in the U.S. presidential elections. But if I were, this is the guy I’d be voting for.
Not that I agree with all of the solutions that he’s proposing. Much less with Marxist theory.
The reason I’d be voting for this candidate, apart from the numerous bits of his analysis that I do agree with, is that I think politics have gone way out of balance. Mainstream politics has become extreme right-wing in my opinion, especially with respect to militarism and the political influence of large corporations. It is time for the pendulum to swing back.
Considering political realities, I have no illusion that this guy would be elected. Or that he would be very effective if he were. But either way, I would hope he could nudge mainstream politics in a positive direction.
Addendum: subject for debate not just what do you think of this candidate, but also what do you think would happen if he won a significant number of votes? What do you think would happen if he were actually elected?
Isn’t 1 or 2 hundred million murdered people (ie. your fellow humans) following the socialist prescriptions of Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, Mao, Pol Pot, et al, during the recently concluded 20th century enough for you?
I gave up my belief in socialism at the age of 15 when I observed that every socialist country on this planet ranged from deadly boring and impoverished to deadly deadly and impoverished.
I eventually ended up studying economics, including Flat Earth Economics (Marxist Economics) among other things.
I have studied the specimens in your link. They are the usual demented cranks who should be kept as far as possible from wielding political power over us placid gentle people as possible.
Just a brief response to the “x million murdered people” charge. These candidates are not arguing that anybody should be murdered. Quite the opposite, they are much more opposed to killing than any current mainstream politician.
They would also argue that Stalin, Mao, etc. did not represent Marxism at all.
And don’t get me started on how many people are killed in the name of religion. Should I dismiss “religious” politicians for that reason? (Actually that’s indeed what I do, but is that fair?)
Well, I’m no big fan of Socialism, though I don’t see them in quite as harsh a light as Alan Owes Bess…certainly not the US Socialist party at any rate. I see them more like European Socialists (though probably to the right of them…lol). There is a pretty vast difference between Socialists and Stalinist type Communists, to say the least.
That said however, there is no chance in hell that the Socialist Equality Party OR their candidate will even make it on the US radar screen as far as this (or any other) election goes. Its POSSIBLE that ole Ralphy boy MIGHT make it on to the radar screen this time, though doubtful. All the other third parties don’t have a hope in hell of even getting more than single digit percentage points…if that.
Is it fair to lump in Socialists with Communists as far as the killings go? No, its not. Its not really right to say that ‘well, they weren’t REAL Communists’, as thats untrue…Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot certainly WERE Communists. But its also not fair to lump everyone who is a Communist into a single pot. And of course, Socialism doesn’t equal Communism, so its REALLY unfair to lump them in to that pot as well.
Just like its not fair to lump all religious people in with the killers that killed in the name of religion. Now, if we want to debate about economic theory of Socialism vs Capitalism, or something like that…ya, thats a fair debate.
Strictly speaking the Socialist Equality Party represents Trotskyism. Another sect of Marxism.
And damn sure those Marxist sects don’t want to be lumped in with each other. Seems that they fight each other far more vigorously than they fight their common opponents, e.g., Capitalists.
