Lawrence O'Donnell: 'We Are All Socialists In This Country'
Last November, MSNBC's Lawrence O'Donnell admitted on air to being a socialist.
In a segment on "The Last Word" Tuesday addressing how Cuba - a country nearing economic ruin - is moving towards capitalism, O'Donnell said, "We are all socialists in this country who support public education, state funded universities, government-run hospitals, Medicare, Social Security, classic socialistic programs that have sensibly found their way into the American economy" (video follows with transcript and commentary):
LAWRENCE O'DONNELL: The Communist Party of Cuba continues its relentless march toward capitalism, of course. But the Castro brothers can never admit that their revolutionary ideal of a pure socialistic economy is impossible to maintain, and the more Cuba clings to it, the more Cuba suffers.
Fidel actually hinted at this as far back as the first party congress when, after the first 15 years of strict Cuban socialism, he said, on December 17th, 1975, "there is no doubt that in the organization of our economy we have erred on the side of idealism and sometimes even ignored the reality of the objective economic laws we should comply with."
Interesting that an avowed socialist understands that over 35 years ago even Fidel Castro realized his country's economic structure couldn't survive:
Yesterday, the Cuban government issued hundreds of new guidelines intended to open the Cuban economy to more capitalism. Of course, the word capitalism never appears in the guidelines and never appears in current Cuban President Raul Castro’s official explanation of what the guidelines are intended to do.
In a speech about the new guidelines a few weeks ago, Raul Castro said, "I can assure you that the guidelines are an expression of our people’s will contained in the policy of the party, the government and the state to update the economic and social model in order to secure the continuity and irreversibility of socialism, as well as the economic development of the country and the improvement of the living standard of our people."
O'Donnell chose to hide from his viewers the reason for these changes: the economy in Cuba continues to stagnate, and the government can't afford all the services it's providing. But I digress:
So when the Castro brothers are forced to accept the irreversibility of more capitalism in the Cuban economy, it must be described as in Raul’s words, "securing the continuity and irreversibility of socialism."
Cuba is as hung up on refusing to admit that its economy includes some capitalism as the United States is hung up on the refusal to admit that our economy includes some socialism. No other countries in the world are so fixated on the refusal to acknowledge the inevitable mix of socialism and capitalism in their economies.
Under the new Cuban guidelines, Cubans will be allowed to legally buy and sell homes for the first time, as well as automobiles. Some private farming will be allowed. There will be an expansion of legally allowed self employment.
The new guidelines will, as if following Paul Ryan’s lead, shrink the social safety net. The ration book which all Cubans get and provides them with government subsidized food and other items will be trimmed. Raul Castro sounded downright Republican in criticizing the ration system.
He said, "since the ration book is designed to provide equal coverage to 11 million Cubans, there are more than a few examples of absurdities, such as allocating a quota of coffee to the newborn."
You don’t have to read between the lines to know that the ration book is on its way to becoming Cuba’s version of our food stamp program. Instead of providing government subsidized food for everyone, Cuba will eventually be providing it for those only who need it, just like we do.
That's debatable. How many able-bodied people in our nation receive food stamps because they choose to and just know how to manipulate the system?
Raul Castro said, quote, "the social welfare system is being reorganized to ensure a rational and deferential support to those who really need it. Instead of massively subsidizing products as we do now, we shall gradually provide for those people lacking other support."
In other words, we have started the process of scaling back Cuban socialism to something much closer to American socialism.
Fascinating. So, an avowed American socialist recognizes that our socialist neighbor to the south is scaling back its own socialism in order to improve its economy and therefore standard of living for its people. Isn't this an indictment against socialism? Not to O'Donnell:
I have explained in this space before how "Newsweek" reached the logical conclusion, expressed on its February 16th, 2009 cover "We Are All Socialists Now." We are all socialists in this country who support public education, state funded universities, government-run hospitals, Medicare, Social Security, classic socialistic programs that have sensibly found their way into the American economy.
The truth is in this country, we’re all socialists to varying degrees and we’re all capitalists. If the Castro Brothers allowed "Newsweek" to publish a Cuban edition, which they never will, its cover this week would surely be "We’re All Capitalists Now."
Indeed, but if socialism is failing so badly in Cuba that a brother of Fidel Castro's is beginning to dismantle it, why would an American be pushing for more socialism here?
The Soviet Union crumbled under the weight of socialism, European nations like Greece are beginning to do so, and the brother of Fidel Castro's is moving away from it to save his nation.
Yet, here in America, Lawrence O'Donnell along with vast numbers of other prominent media members go on television or write articles every day telling citizens that additional socialism will solve all our economic problems.
This is akin to a man with herpes surrounded by dying AIDS victims thinking he needs a little HIV to remove the painful blisters from his genitals.
The reality is for most Americans and all Cubans, socialism wasn't a choice. If you were born after 1965, virtually all of the social programs you've been forced to pay into were already in existence.
As the cost of such programs is what is indeed exploding our debt while causing massive deficits as far as the eye can see, the solution can't possibly be creating more social programs and/or expanding the ones that currently exist.
As amazing as it might seem, Fidel Castro's brother - whether he wants to admit it or not - gets this.
Even more amazing, people like O'Donnell - with all their schooling and accessibility to information - don't.
(H/T RCP)
- Noel Sheppard's blog
- Login to post comments
















Comments
There is no rational nor
Submitted by Beukeboom on Wed, 05/11/2011 - 10:23am.
There is no rational nor legitimate reason whatsoever to believe anything O'Donnell says.
So
Submitted by GW on Wed, 05/11/2011 - 10:36am.
LO: "We are all socialists in this country who support public education, state funded universities, government-run hospitals,"
So if you go to a Catholic hospital and pay a co-pay, does that make you a Papist? (Disclosure: I am a Papist. I use the term with that same fervor as Thomas Peters, the "American Papist".)
"This is akin to a man with herpes surrounded by dying AIDS victims thinking he needs a little HIV to remove the painful blisters from his genitals."
- Wow. Didn't need the visual...
Let us vote on it, Larry...
Submitted by Meredith1966 on Wed, 05/11/2011 - 10:39am.
Larry says, "We are all socialists in this country who support public education, state funded universities, government-run hospitals, Medicare, Social Security...". Okay, let's debate the word 'support' in that quote. If by support you mean we bear the fiscal burden of funding them, then yes, I suppose that is a true statement. But, if by support you mean that all Americans are wholly in favor of such programs, I'd say the statement is an over-generalization that is open to debate. I'm guessing here, but I'd say that some of those programs were voted on by the public, mostly the state-funded universities, but certainly the other things (Medicare, Social Security, and government-run hospitals) were imposed upon us by an over-reaching federal government. I would support such programs more enthusiastically if I thought A) they were in any way constitutional, and B) if I had a choice in my participation in them. Government removes the money to fund them from my paycheck every two weeks and I have absolutely no say in it; call me kooky, but that kind of bothers me. I'd like to see some enterprising young Congressdude or Congresschick propose Constitutional Amendments authorizing the 'Social Safety Net' and then send them to us in the States to vote on. I'm sure they'd pass, but at least then they would be on the up and up Constitutionally and people would perhaps realize that sometimes Congress needs our approval before they spend our money on ponzi schemes like Social Security.
"I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them." - Thomas Jefferson
No, O'Donnell We Are Not All Socialists
Submitted by Comrade Jim on Wed, 05/11/2011 - 10:49am.
It is the wishful thinking of socialists like you.
Your Laundry list of socialist programs, public education, state funded universities, government-run hospitals, Medicare, Social Security, are exactly the ones in trouble and damaging the country.
Public education has become a propaganda machine for big government socialism
government-run hospitals(especially county hospitals) are bottom of the barrel
Medicare rations health care, pays fraudulent claims, is going broke
Social Security is nearly broke
It would not surprise me in
Submitted by Beukeboom on Wed, 05/11/2011 - 10:51am.
It would not surprise me in the least if O'Donnell secretly wishes people would be forced (perhaps even by gunpoint) into socialism but hasn't gotten the nerve to actually say so publicly.
Yet.
I Agree
Submitted by Comrade Jim on Wed, 05/11/2011 - 12:06pm.
Many on the left like O'Donnell have that strong totalitarian temptation. They secretly admire the power and authority of foreign dictators to impose social and economic structure on their citizens. Thomas Friedman of the NYT has point blank said so on occasion about the Chinese dictators. Obama has also let slip a few comments to that effect.
Actually, every Ameriocan under the age of 75 was born . . .
Submitted by Galvanic on Thu, 05/12/2011 - 10:02am.
. . . in or immigrated to a nation with existing social programs. To say that we are all therefore socialists would be like saying that all Chinese are Communists.
The government takes wealth from us to fund programs, and many of the programs are certainly beneficial to citizens.
The issue now is that many citizens have gotten far more value out of social programs than they ever put into them, to the detriment of those of us who the actuaries warn will get far less out of the programs than we put into them. Bernie Maddoff rightfully went to jail for running this kind of game; liberals not only promote the game, they hold it up as one of our government's crowning accomplishments.
If O'Donnell wants to argue that any adult who opposes Big Government is free to leave, I would agree. But this is my country, I was privileged to have served in its armed forces for 24 years, and it's not in my nature to abandon it, especially as the waters of corruption and authoritarianism rise. Rather than leaving, I want to change the government through the means provided by our Constitution -- the document I took an oath to defend against enemies foreign and domestic for almost all of my adult life.
And to those like O'Donnell who offer that those of us who distrust Social Security or Medicare are free not to partake of its benefits, I say 'Fine. Let me opt out, and return all the money I've put into those ponzi schemes for the past 42 years.'
LOL Noel!
Submitted by Djinn1975 on Wed, 05/11/2011 - 10:59am.
Best analogy ever!
Yet, here in America, Lawrence O'Donnell along with vast numbers of other prominent media members go on television or write articles every day telling citizens that additional socialism will solve all our economic problems.
This is akin to a man with herpes surrounded by dying AIDS victims thinking he needs a little HIV to remove the painful blisters from his genitals.
No chalk board or big, fat crayons needed for that one. So clear a picture a 12 year old would get it.
Djinn
Submitted by Noel Sheppard on Wed, 05/11/2011 - 12:16pm.
Djinn,
Thank you. Thank you very much.
Well, you have to give Larry credit for one thing
Submitted by Dave. on Wed, 05/11/2011 - 11:03am.
At least he is willing to admit he is a freedom-hating commie, unlike most of his MSM peers who pretend otherwise.
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
We don't do socialism here, Larry.
Submitted by Red Jeep on Wed, 05/11/2011 - 11:15am.
If you want socialism pick out another country to live in.
We need to stop kidding ourselves. America is socialist
Submitted by Dave. on Wed, 05/11/2011 - 11:28am.
Which is why our total accumulated debt is now hovering around $113 trillion, and why we are on the very brink of tipping over financially as well as economically.
My fear is that socialism has become so ingrained into the American psyche that there will be no way to get it out other than watching the whole thing collapse under its own weight.
But if that is what it ultimately takes to rid ourselves of all this stupid freedom-destroying nonsense then so be it, because come to an end it soon will, one way or the other.
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
He's right. All four viewers
Submitted by jessieH on Wed, 05/11/2011 - 1:03pm.
He's right. All four viewers of his B.S. believe everything his little traitorous mouth spews out.
Yep, you are right
Submitted by Patriot II on Wed, 05/11/2011 - 2:20pm.
One car wreck and his whole viewing audience would be gone!!!
"Short Bus" Schultz IS a
Submitted by Beukeboom on Wed, 05/11/2011 - 2:59pm.
"Short Bus" Schultz IS a walking, talking car wreck.
Not all of us Larry
Submitted by vyger on Wed, 05/11/2011 - 1:09pm.
Just ask me
You know this segment could
Submitted by VBaxter on Wed, 05/11/2011 - 1:15pm.
You know this segment could have been done in 2 minutes. But Lawrence o'Donnell speaks slower than Eeyore on mushrooms.
Ron Paul 2012
You sir!
Submitted by Patriot II on Wed, 05/11/2011 - 2:18pm.
Are a lying, ignorant, freaking moron! You have your head so far up your a s s, you can't see daylight...don't speak for others you pathetic embecile...you aren't even smart enough to speak for yourself...don't call me a socialist you pitIful A.H.!!!!!
Who would have ever thought...
Submitted by OxyCon on Wed, 05/11/2011 - 2:34pm.
Who would have ever thought...that in the United States of America, an entity which bills itself as a "news organization" would be actively promoting Socialism with their marquee prime time show!
What a disgrace! It's unreal that we have sunk so low to the point where that is considered acceptable in this country.
Do the corporations which sponsor MessNBC realize that they are paying for attacks against capitalism when they sponsor MessNBC, and basically cutting their own throats (that is unless they are in the business of receiving tax dollars for services)?
Does it even register in Krazy Larry's ginormous head that America is at a catastrophic financial breaking point due to all the social programs he espouses?
Maybe instead of reading about and quoting Karl Marx and Fidel Castro, Krazy Larry should start learning about and quoting America's Founding Fathers for a change.
mixed economy
Submitted by Agnostic on Wed, 05/11/2011 - 2:58pm.
America's economy, like most economies, is a mixed one with aspects of socialism and capitalism. America made a big jump in the era encapsulating parts of the 1920-1940's toward socialism and then we went into a slow slide as repetitive Democrat Congresses with Republicans voting present (if they even bothered to show up) took us to the six years Republicans actually held Congress and the WH and still nothing but spending occurred. Now we have to sit back and find out if the Democrat Super Majority of the past two years puts us over the edge as we have taken another great leap toward socialism since 2008.
Still we are mixed economy just further towards the Draconian demands of socialism than ever. Larry, that doesn't mean we are socialist and it definitely doesn't mean we all support socialist programs in full. Econ101
Sorry Larry but you can shove
Submitted by LAM SON 719 on Wed, 05/11/2011 - 3:35pm.
Sorry Larry but you can shove your socialism up your syphillis infected, well worn rectum.
Larry says we're Socialist, Don't Ya Know...
Submitted by bigdaddy on Wed, 05/11/2011 - 4:21pm.
...The Bible tells him so...
There is hope*
Submitted by cajun2 on Wed, 05/11/2011 - 5:57pm.
Even among our young people, they are true patriots and respect their country. They respect the freedom and liberty that is represented by our FLAG
Please take the time to watch this video. There are a number of them that has already hit the interwaves but this one is interesting. If the media dare cover this story they will say that a couple of hundred students showed up to counter protest. My contacts at LSU tell me that the crowd numbered around 2000. And for chuckles, make a note how the kids got real quiet when walking past the mounted campus police so as not to disturb the horses.
If you watch the video closly, you will see a very diverse crowd, all carrying flags. They were never unruly, violent and for college students, actually pretty well behaved. For some reason, these kids today gave me a bit of hope.
Uh, you sure you want to use these examples?
Submitted by Chris Norman on Wed, 05/11/2011 - 11:08pm.
"We are all socialists in this country who support public education, state funded universities, government-run hospitals, Medicare, Social Security, classic socialistic programs that have sensibly found their way into the American economy"
Notice that every government-run institution and program he cites are disasters or heading for disaster.