The New Democrat Online

Thursday, November 15, 2012

Public Resource: 'We Work Again 1930s'- The Legacy of The New Deal


The New Deal, a monster that Libertarians and Conservatives would probably describe the New Deal as something they would like to tear down and perhaps start over with more of a free market approach. The American safety net that Liberals such as myself would like to reform and bring competition to it. Instead of the centralize Federal Government approach to how the New Deal was designed. And a gift from God, well actually a Gift from FDR as Progressives would probably describe as.

Something today's Progressives would like to protect and then expand and go back to the centralize big government approach. To solving problems in America by taking people's money and using it to take care of them. And create what they would call the Fair Deal. Something that President Harry Truman tried to create in the 1940s. With things like national health insurance and health care. Wherever your on the political spectrum, from the Far-Left to Far-Right or somewhere in between, where most Americans tend to be, if you're aware of the New Deal, chances are you have strong feelings about it.

The last two years we've basically been debating the New Deal in America and the role of government. Especially the Federal Government and exactly what the Federal Government should be doing. What should we do with Social Security in the future, as well as Unemployment Insurance. And how we should assist unemployed workers. And should everyone who pays into Social Security, be able to collect Social Security. Or should it be a Welfare Insurance program like Unemployment Insurance. Is 65 still the right retirement age, or should we move that up, especially for white-collar workers.

A lot of the New Deal had to do with how the assist the poor in America. And almost eighty years later we are still having that debate, like with Welfare Insurance. The New Deal at least in some form will always be around in the United States. The only question is how it will look but it will never look how it was designed. Because a lot of it is outdated, especially as it relates to Unemployment and Welfare Insurance. Where those programs were never originally designed to put those people to work. But just give them some income to survive and the question is. How will these programs be reformed in the future. But they will be reformed.

Understanding Power: Professor Noam Chomsky on Liberalism & Freedom

Source: Understanding Power- Professor Noam Chomsky-
Source: Understanding Power: Professor Noam Chomsky on Liberalism & Freedom

I have a lot of respect for professor Noam Chomsky's honesty and being able to communicate exactly where he is politically and being able to articulate what he thinks about other political ideologies. Noam Chomsky is an admitted Libertarian Socialist and very honest about that. Which means he's like a Social Democrat or Democratic Socialist on economic and foreign policy. 

But Noam Chomksy is a Liberal-Libertarian on social issues. So we probably agree on most social issues. Myself being a Liberal Democrat, but my issue with professor Chomsky has to do with the fact that he sort of has this "you are either with me, or you are selfish and believe in selfishness and inequality. And that poor people should be kept down and so-forth". He's somewhat exclusive with his politics, you either agree with him and share his politics completely, or you're a bad person, or something. It's not that you disagree with him, but that you are a bad person all together. Which I don't have much respect for.

As far as libertarian socialism vs. liberalism, classical Liberalism even, I believe he's right for the most part. That people who are Liberals today, are not Social Democrats or even Progressives. But people who share my politics or are similar are actual Liberals instead. Where people who are called modern Liberals, are essentially Socialists or Social Democrats. 

Today's so-called Progressives, Social Democrats who believe that the state, especially the Federal Government has a big role to play in taking care of the people. And insuring economic equality and that they are somewhat liberal on social issues, depending on what type of Progressive that they are.

Brookings Institution: Brookings Podcast: Remaking Federalism and Renewing the Economy



If you are someone whose familiar with politics but perhaps not a political junky and you are perhaps. Hearing a term like Federalism, the ultimate inside the beltway term for political junkies, you might think. That the term Federalism is a very Progressive philosophy, Social Democratic even thats puts a lot faith in the Federal Government. To solve the nation's problems and believe in a lot of central control with the Federal Government to solve the problems with. The country something that FDR put together as President in the 1930s and a Federalist is something. That believes in this type of philosophy when actually the opposite is true, a Federalist is actually a Liberal. Or even Conservative term that acknowledges that the country has problems and issues that need to be addressed. And if you are a Conservative you believe these issues are best taken care of by state and local governments. And if you are a Liberal you believe in that as well but that the Federal Government should layout what issues need to be addressed but. Then give the resources and authority to state and local governments to address these issues.

So things like anti poverty programs, the safety net and that sorta thing, if you are a Liberal you. Believe that government even the Federal Government should play a role in addressing these issues, set up programs and even fund them. But then let the states with the money and authority run these programs and if you are a Conservative you believe in giving the power and resources. Of these programs over to the states or eliminating them all together and letting the states and. Locals decide if these programs should be continued or not and Federalism Liberal or Conservative. Would be a great way for the Feds to solve their short and long term deficit and debt issues, because. It would mean they would have less programs to run and be able to cut back on what they do and the states and locals would have more authority and resources to solve these issues.

The Hill Alexander Bolton: Senate Republicans’ Election Lesson is to Work on Fielding Better Candidates

Senate Republicans’ election lesson is to work on fielding better candidates - The Hill

The adults in the GOP especially in the Senate Republican Conference, need to step up and prevent far right candidates. From winning GOP primaries in swing states, thats why they are still in the minority, as well as losing seats in states they normally win.