Watch Out for Commies! Er, Canadians

Watching Michael Moore's chat on Twitter last night, I was amazed at the number of idiots who kept calling him a Commie. Um, the US government is a partially communist government. He was told , "Move to Canada ya f-in Commie." Well, yes, Canada has social programs, too. We could be classified as such. The US has Social Security. What is it that people think that is, if not a social program? It even has the word "SOCIAL" in it. The USSR stood for, what? The United Soviet SOCIALIST Republic. Social services, otherwise known as welfare programs, are...yes, socialist. Healthcare, which Americans seem to want, is a...yes, socialist program.

I'm constantly amazed at the ways people do not think through what they say, and realize how stupid it is. Like in The Big Bang Theory when Raj makes remarks that seem blatantly homosexual, and they're all asking, "Does he not hear himself when he says these things?" Same deal here, except this is real life. Yet again a very clear illustration why education is so much better than ignorance, but the ignorant seem to have no idea they're ignorant, so how can they be convinced that they need to get their backsides back to school?

I reiterate a statement I've made multiple times in the past. Communism shares the same root meaning as community and commune. They comes from the same word. They mean basically the same thing. Communism is simply the political structure of community. Community programs are social program, social programs are...welfare, healthcare and social security. There are others, but those are the most common and considered basic necessities of a civilized society. When people complain and ask for healthcare, they consider it to be a step forward for their society, not a step backward. Obviously communism isn't as bad they seem to think it is.

I've read multiple articles by another writer on wrytestuff.com where he has discussed the economy and communism. We discuss it back and forth, and we're both still amazed at the complete lack of understanding of a large number of American people. What this amounts to is a serious lack of dictionaries in schools, apparently. Communism needs to be explained to children properly. The FSU, otherwise known as The Former Soviet Union, was not practicing communism the way communism is meant to be practiced. There is no comparison.

It seems to me that what the gun-toting crazies still wanting to protect their right to bear assault weapons are actually looking for in a 'govmint' is fascism. I think Robin Williams had the right idea, though. The right to bear arms, or the right to arm bears. Either way you're looking at a lot of collateral damage. Guns don't kill people...blah, blah, blah. Ever have a gun go off accidentally?  Ever hear of a small child who plays with one, thinking it's cool, and shoots off half of his brother head? That kid wasn't killing anyone. Okay, lay the blame at the feet of the parents for not locking up their guns, but then where are we with Adam Lanza? He was taught proper use of the weapon by his mother, who then decided to kill her first.

Why, oh why, oh why does any person need a weapon that fires 800 to 900 rounds per minute? (Lanza's gun did not - it was only a semi-auto - just clarifying.) There is no satisfactory answer for that. Sure, war, and then instead of assault weapons we have nuclear weapons. Why, oh why, oh why does any country need enough of a nuclear 'deterrent' to wipe every living soul off the face of the earth. You reach a certain point where it's simple idiocy. The math just does not add up. Of course, this is assuming the people who are so pro-assault-weapon can actually add, which is debatable. Again, statistics bear out the fact that tighter gun controls mean fewer firearm homicides. Other types of homicide do not increase to compensate. The full homicide rate is much, much lower.

You know, it really does come down to the definition of communism and community, doesn't it? If we live as a community, care for one another as a community, work as a community, does it not follow that we are in fact a community? If we are a community we are practicing communism at its purest and most basic level. The whole point behind true communism was to make certain everyone in the community was looked after. There was no one that did not have their basic needs met. A little capitalism to reward the industrious, sure. I can get behind that. If everyone gets everything for free what reason do they have to work? However, if a society is practicing true communism this isn't even an issue. Everyone has a job and a place in the community. Everyone has obligations and responsibilities, as well as rewards.

Just imagine a world in which there are no homeless people, and the people that would have been homeless have been treated for mental health issue, such as addictions or depression. Every person has a warm bed, and nutritious meals. There's no stress about wondering where you're going to get the rent money on Friday, or how you're going to pay for the kids' lunches.

Of course, as a person who is a self-admitted control freak who doesn't let anyone tell her what to do, I'd be pretty leery of a society such as that myself. As in the case of the FSU, it is rife with opportunities for abuse within the system. Government control of every citizen, down to the smallest detail. I had a figure skating coach when I was a kid who had defected. This was long before I knew him, of course. When his government finally tracked him down at a skating competition they crushed his pelvis with a barbell. He never skated competitively again. They took back their property, so to speak. All those Rubles they'd invested in him made his talent and skills their property as far as they were concerned.

As I stated earlier, though, that's not communism. That's a perversion of it. There is nothing about community in a government of that structure. That's a dictatorship and totalitarianism. Big difference.

The problem is, how do we put a government in place that will remain true to the people it is supposed to serve. The Canadian government sure doesn't. Neither does the US government. I like Obama quite a bit, but the guy has his hands tied six ways from Sunday. He can't get anything done because of the strangling red tape. He can invoke veto power, but only to prevent something if I understand it correctly (it's been a long time since I learned about that in school, though, so I could be way off base there).

I remember watching Michael Moore's Sicko, where he interviewed people in various governments. The guy from France made a simple point. The French government was afraid of its people. That's as it should be, since they're getting paid by the people. In Canada and the US the people are afraid of their governments. They don't do any of the things for us that they should be doing.

It's too bad the people in my country tend to content themselves with letter-writing, because a hue and cry of "Off with their heads" might be just what's needed around these parts.