so what is exactly wrong with socialism?

[Savannahmann]

99. Agreed without reservation.

Today alone there have been half a dozen threads of injustice. People sentenced to life for a minor crime, or receiving a virtual slap on the wrist for a heinous crime. That is just today. We could easily go into the history books and create a thread that would crash the server listing the long litany of human rights abuses and racism, sexism, and intolerance that have long plagued our country.

Until recently things here have not been like other nations, and I have some hope that we will continue to strive to be better. Jailing reporters has been an extreme event that happens once or twice a year here. It's wrong, and I abhor it, and even happening once is too many.

But my thinking is political opponents. We've been on the outside, outraged and furious at the President. We've been on the side that won, cheering and proud. What frightens me is the idea that we could well end up on the outside as the power was consolidated to a more dictatorial government. That by the way, is one of the many reasons I dislike unilateral Presidential actions. Not because of the action, which I may tacitly approve of on a case by case basis, but because it inevitably becomes a precedent for the next to take even greater action.

We don't have a Dictator, not because the President is limited to two terms. But because of the checks and balances. Congress can stop a rogue action from some RW loon. The Courts can stop the Congress from similarly insane actions. They may not always go our way, and we may denounce the decisions like Citizens United. However, we have that system, and it works as often as it fails.

Socialist Governments tend not to have such limitations. The Parliament merely rubberstamps the President, or as just happened in Venezuela they are tossed from their seat and replaced. The Courts back the President, or they are similarly replaced. Imagine if President Obama announced he didn't like the Supreme Court's decision, and he had decided to replace half the members. It wouldn't be a riot, it would be a civil war. Nobody, including many of us on the left, would stand for it. We may not like the Supreme Court Justices, and we may disagree with them, but we would not tolerate the creation of a rubber stamp court that ignored our Constitution.

The same thing with Congress. I may disagree with Paul Ryan on everything short of the date and time of day. However I would be seriously concerned if the President unilaterally decided that Paul Ryan would be replaced with a favorable Liberal from that district. I'm betting you would too.

Because imagine this, the next election comes and Goddess Forbid Chris Christie, or worse Rand Paul wins the bloody thing. We would be out in the streets daily protesting such actions if they took it.

We have a lot of improvement to make, and we need to reverse the current trend of national security as an excuse to abuse the rights of our people. But we have the mechanism in place to reverse that trend, whereas no socialist country I am aware of has such a mechanism available. We can make our nation better, more of the reality we'd like to see, but we can't do that by sacrificing the rights of the people to the whims of any one man. Douglas Adams said that anyone who wanted to be President (of the Galaxy) is the one person who shouldn't have the job. He has a good point. It is an axiom that Power Corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.