Is it wrong of me to hope that he does come back?

I bet that’s just another post from the N. Raja guy.

That was hilarious! I can’t believe how emboldened these people have become! God help us!

I’m afraid it is you, Les, who is ignorant on this issue. Iran most certainly does have a “socialist economy”—banks, insurance companies and nearly all its major industries have been nationalized, most “private” industry is in the hands of Islamic “foundations” under the grip of the state, the economy is subject to central planning, the private ownership of land is prohibited, and Iran’s citizens are not free to allocate their personal capital as they see fit. That’s classic socialism.

The Heritage Foundation (yeah, I know, a “propaganda arm of the right-wing conspiracy") ranks Iran right near the very bottom of 161 countries in respect of economic freedom.

Still doesn’t mean you ought to move there.

Brendon, your explanation is much too rational and evades the spirit of the hate mail.  The average rabid ‘love it or leave it’ wingnut couldn’t have told you that much information about their *own* country, let alone one on the other side of the planet.  Communism and socialism have, outside of academia, become labels that have little to do with their original meaning.

And (feel free to tramp on my own ignorance here) isn’t Iran’s socialist economy a side-effect of their politics and religion, i.e. not driven by an explicit socialist ideology?  They’re not all quoting Marx over there.

Oh sure, Joseph Consolo’s a dumbass without question. But sneering at him for saying Iran is socialist is misguided—Iran is socialist.

Honestly, I don’t know that much about iranian politics. They try to be democratic though (albeit with rigged elections), so the label “socialist” may partially fit, but “communist” definitely doesn’t.

Other than that, I find it funny that you get so dedicated hatemail. I never get that. But then, I’m not american, I guess those people just disregard my opinion as “european bastard”

I’ll see you Les’ ignorance on Iranian socialism, and raise you Consolo’s ignorance on the US constitution.  What always gets me, though, is the “love it or leave it” meme.  It’s a false dichotomy, positing only two options in a field where there are many. 

Somehow it never occurs to people who make that statement that there could be many possibilities, including deep love for America coupled with a desire for it to be a good country as well as a great one.  Not only is that position not contradictory, it is totally consistent.  Failure to address America’s faults is NOT consistent with loving America.

Although wingnuts do provide a vast amount of humor, I am getting to the point I wish they’d all just eat shit and drop dead.  I can just picture people like this hunched up and frothing over their circa-1980 computer in a dark room, going back and forth from trolling “liberal” websites to midget porn, blasting and condemning both while whacking off.

When did it become a good thing in this good to be an ignorant lock-stepper.

Sorry.  Just had to vent.

oops.  “...get to be a good thing in this ”country....”

so very tired.

Somah, this email is pretty typical and fairly mild compared to some I’ve gotten in the past. The America-love-it-or-leave-it meme is pretty popular with folks who aren’t happy with dissenting views.

Brendon, according to what I’ve read about Iran it’s classified as a constitutional Islamic Republic. You’ll also note that the original email author didn’t claim that Iran had a “socialist economy,” as you put it, he claimed it was a “socialist/communist” country and that’s simply not true. Certainly there are socialist aspects to the Iranian economy, but that’s also true of the United States and Canada which are also not “socialist/communist” countries. The last two administrations governing Iran have also been pursuing market reforms in hopes of diversifying from it’s current oil-dominated economy, which can only be seen as a good thing even if the pace is slower than what many of us would like.

Had Mr. Consolo used Cuba as an example I wouldn’t have had a problem with that statement, but Iran doesn’t fit very well in my opinion.

Guido, hate mail doesn’t arrive as often as it used to. I think most folks think I’m too entrenched for the hate mail to have much of an effect. Ironically, my sister gets it on a much more regular basis than I do.

Cindi, I’m sure the mental image you have of these guys is one they sometimes have about me as well.

foobario: Communism and socialism have, outside of academia, become labels that have little to do with their original meaning.

The meaning of “socialism” hasn’t changed.  It means the same thing whether or not you’re in academia.

Socialism is a political system under which individual property rights are weak or non-existant.  Instead of private individuals controlling the wealth they produce, government has the authority to redistribute that wealth as it sees fit.

For some reason, socialists believe that government will use this authority to benefit those who are less well-off.  That’s a strange thing to believe, because thousands of years of experience tells us that governments will use their authority to benefit themselves and those who are most well-off.

foobario: And.. isn’t Iran’s socialist economy a side-effect of their politics and religion, i.e. not driven by an explicit socialist ideology?  They’re not all quoting Marx over there.

Doesn’t matter in the slightest.  You don’t have to quote Marx or FDR to be a socialist, any more than you have to follow Osama bin Laden to be a terrorist.

If you use violence against unarmed civilians to advance your political goals, you’re a terrorist.  If you believe government should have the authority to redistribute private property, you’re a socialist.

A prime example would be the Phillipine government under Ferdinand Marcos.  He certainly didn’t quote Marx, but he was a socialist nonetheless.  During his rule, all important industries were nationalized and granted legal monopoly status.  He also instituted an aggressive land reform* program.  He didn’t collectivize farms outright, but by forcing them to sell their bananas, coconuts, and rubber to government monopolies at prices set by central planners, the results were much the same.  In other words, Marcos and his regime were socialists, whatever they might choose to call themselves.

And yes, Iran is a socialist country.  Essentially their entire economy was nationalized when the Shah was overthrown.  They sometimes trot out “market reforms” as a possibility, but talk is worthless.  Anyway, it is not possible to build a free-market economic system without democratic government and the rule of law—any more than it’s possible to have democracy and the rule of law in the absence of strong property rights.  Each depends on the other.

*Land reform: This is a favorite of socialist governments everywhere.  The idea is that big, bad capitalists own too much land, and this land should be taken (stolen) from them and given to peasants.  In reality, land reform always results in land being taken from the political opponents of those in power, and given to the political allies of those in power.  Yet liberals are always eager to believe that if we give government the authority to redistribute property, they will use that authority for the common good instead of using it to further their own interests.

I’m sick of the “love-it-or-leave” crap. I’ve finally started turning it around on them pointing out that the constitution guarantees rights to everyone including Gays and that if they don’t like it, they should leave. I also point out that this is not a Christian nation and if they really want a government that will put religion over everything, they should head over to Iraq, because America’s not it.

I think it’s worth pointing out that the “love it or leave it” crowd are some of the most virulent anti-American voices in the country. Probably most of them lived their entire lives in the USA, but they never understood the least little bit of it.

Next time you have to talk to a LIOLI or a Christian rightist, immediately point out that they actually HATE America, and every freedom it stands for. (Or just bluntly ASK them why they hate America so much.)

And then prove it to them by showing that the heart of America isn’t a geographic location, but a body of ideas and concepts about freedoms and the rights of individuals. Everything these America-haters say and do runs counter to these concepts.

They really and truly want our freedoms ended. They want stupid, frightened, lockstep obedience, the silencing of all dissent or honest questions, and the expulsion of those who stand up for rights delineated in the Constitution.

They hate American freedoms. They hate people who speak up for the best of America, the principles that make our nation great when observed, and less-than-great when ignored. They hate the Constitution. They hate America itself.

And, my gosh, there sure are a lot of them these days.

Gee, you’d think fucktard would spell correctly so people might consider that he has some brain function.
There is a scary number of people who need an immersion U.S. history lesson or two.  Independent thought is the cornerstone of this country. Granted, it’s dying out faster than an endangered species....

If John Adams hadn’t been an “upstart” and a “radical”, the United States wouldn’t exist.  If he was alive now, he’d probably be called a radical, again, and would be trying to get the stupid and inept out of the federal government--probably by force.

Our founding fathers weren’t a bunch of really “normal” guys.  They were a big bunch of weirdos with big ideas, radical ideas and vision.  Their impetus was not cash, it was freedom.  (Yes, they were interested in money, but that wasn’t why they formed the country.) They wanted to create a country where people could express their thoughts without fear of persection, especially religious persecution.  They created separation of church and state for a specific reason: to keep religious fanatics from making their beliefs into laws.

I don’t know about you guys, but I plan to fight(verbally and intellectually) for my country and not let these clueless fucktards run the show....

I love hate mail!

Is it wrong of me to hope that he does come back?

I love hate mail!

Me too!

If you use violence against unarmed civilians to advance your political goals, you’re a terrorist.  If you believe government should have the authority to redistribute private property, you’re a socialist.

Or possibly, in both cases, an American.

Instead of private individuals controlling the wealth they produce, government has the authority to redistribute that wealth as it sees fit.

Wow, Daryl, that’s the most sweeping definition of socialism I’ve ever heard.  You mean that any government that collects taxes and spends them is “socialist”?  That would include every government I’ve ever heard of.  Makes the term kind of meaningless if you ask me.

Are public schools, public transportation, and national defense “socialist”?  If they are, then the only non-socialists I know about are the survivalists hunkered down in their caves in Idaho, and all the rest of us are socialists. 

Since you seem to think “socialism” is bad, does that mean you’re an “anarchist”?  To each his own, but I somehow doubt that anarchy is a workable system (or non-system) for anyone who wants more from human society than living in caves and mumbling “I’ve got mine”.

Brendon Carr, you should read about what socialism is and what communism is.  There was only one “socialist” “nation” on earth, between 1917 and 1924 , the USSR after the revolution.