New Poll: Socialism is Gaining Popularity in America

The U.S. government has been taking over a majority stake in banks and is dictating the running of the auto industry. Add that in with talks of a nationalized healthcare system, and it's pretty clear that the United States is leaning ever-so-slightly more towards socialism.

A majority of Americans believe that capitalism is a better system than socialism, according to the Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey. When asked if capitalism or socialism is a better system 53% of Americans said capitalism was better, 20% said socialism, and 27% were unsure.

While the poll did not define either capitalism or socialism, the surveys findings do appear to reflect public concern about capitalism during recession.

The poll also found that adults over 40 strongly favored capitalism, with just 13% of this age group believing that socialism is the superior system. Meanwhile, adults under 30 are about evenly divided (37% capitalism, 33% socialism, 30% undecided).

Republicans believed capitalism is better than socialism by an 11 to 1 margin. Democrats were more closely divided- 39% preferred capitalism and 30% choose socialism. Investors favored capitalism by a 5 to 1 margin.

The poll of 1,000 adults nationwide was conducted on Monday and Tuesday of this week. It has a sampling error of +/- three percentage points.

Comments

Popular. I don't think it's a matter of popularity.

I do believe that a growing number of Americans have no idea what real socialism is. I also believe a growing number of Americans have no clue what the consequences of socialism is. Many young people have never experience 17% interest rates and hyperinflation brought on by the Carter years.

So guess what.... They get to learn what the older generation learned a couple from the 70's.... Isn't youth great?

Browsing around - I've seen hundreds people try to define what socialism is, few of them accurate.

"spreading the wealth around" is not socialism. That's simply screwed up taxation.

Socialism is when government takes ownership away from a business owner and then decides what's fair for everyone... You no longer own... you simply receive your "allotment". Boy does that sound lfun..

Unfortunately though, we are well on our way down that path.....

When government officials - like Obama or his underlings - presume to fire a CEO and hire someone in it's place...... an act that has no basis in law..... you are well on your way to socialism.

When banks beg to give bailout money back - but the government tells them they cant.... That is socialism.

When the government begins deciding what executives in a company can make... that's socialism.

All of which have transpired in the past few months.

So the American people are going to have to decide if they are truly ready to become a slave to the state.... To be controlled, owned and rationed by the state.

How is that freedom?

Would you rather fail as a free person..... or just get by as an owned person.

That choice is here.

Danny Vice
http://www.theweeklyvice.com

As a socialist in America, I can say that you have no Idea what it is. I would correct you if I actually thought it would change your mind, but it wouldn't. But I will say TRUE Socialism is not where the government owns everything No socialist would say that, that is authoritarian communism which has been attack more strongly by the socialist then anyone else. Socialism in a simple form is worker ownership of the means of production, private property is still possible just mines and mills will be nationalized and run by the people that work in it. They make the decisions not some guy on wall street. If it effect the workers lives they should have a say in what goes on, so unions are a closer step towards socialism then anything you just said. Socialist look at how the economy effect people, while capitalist look at how the economy effects money. Two sets of goals that are very different. I will say what is the point of an economy if it does not actually help the majority of people? In all "pure" capitalistic society's there has been mass inequalities both in income and opportunity. During the "business cycle" when unemployment goes up people end up actually going hungry and in a lot of cases dying because of the lack of a social safety net. I do not know of any human right that say's it is a basic right of a human to own uncountable amounts of wealth. Add the fact that that wealth is made off the work of others, then you get into even more troubling ethical and logical grounds.

"That choice is here." When people finally realize that "freedom" means a lower life expectancy, higher infant mortality, lower test scores, more pollution etc. than those European "Socialists," the may well choose "socialism." Capitalism has its place but unfettered capitalism, red in fang and claw makes no more sense than insisting that anyone not certified insane has the right to buy as many AK-47's as they can afford because anything less in an infringement on "freedom."

Socialism is as well understood as our Economic condition. We have a nation of citizens who are POLITICALLY STUPID. We have children that advance through our school system, some graduate, the blacks and hispanics bring down the amount learned because their teen age women are pregnant, many of them drop out, then become druggies then criminals. Their teachers preach Socialism and the parents do nothing, the professors do the same. The teachers allow babies to undress in class so they can send their PICs to YouTube. Massachusetts allows 13 year olds in a group of 10 or more to get pregnant – the schools and parents do nothing. For the most part these are Obama’s voter machine.

Now we come to the North American Union and someone's goal to bring us down to European Socialism, a World Banking System and the dollar no longer the world currency. It is all by Design.

ErnieGs

Dude,

You sound like a first rate fascist. You could well have played the role of Colonel Hans Landa (Christoph Waltz) in Inglorious Basterds. Who knows, you, instead of Waltz, might even have won an Oscar for that!

Rohit

"Many young people have never experience 17% interest rates and hyperinflation brought on by the Carter years."
Ignorant fool. Carter was the most rabid anti-Communist president we've ever had. You filthy capitalists want us to live like rats and roaches, but we know better and we outnumber you.

Most Americans are clueless about the meaning and history of "socialism" and things like it.

Most Americans are taught that socialism means the government runs the economy.

But the original self-avowed socialists like Godwin were basically anarchists(which means a society without hierarchy or forced association not a society without rules or order. Though that term was not used until Proudhon). They did not want a government. Socialism meant worker's ownership of the means of production, not state ownership. European monarchs basically owned everything in their countries centuries ago but you couldn't call them socialist. The first socialists wanted a society where working people owned what they produced with other workers democratically and did not have to give any of their labor to idle owners. Some were also communists, meaning they felt that all should be owned by the community. Generally they believed people should just do what jobs they want, and if nobody wanted to do something there would be a lottery and it would be enforced non-violently through social ostracism(shunning, cold shoulder, shouting at you until you leave the community or do your share)

Eventually people like Marx said we should have socialism but not anarchism. Marx wanted anarchism eventually and called it the "communist" stage, but thought there needed to be a transition first. But even then these people wanted worker's ownership, they just wanted the workers in the factories, the stores, farms, etc. to be the lowest level of government electing higher levels, essentially making the economy part of the state. When Marx split with the anarchist Bakunin people started using "socialism" and "communism" more to refer to Marx's theories. Eventually people who wanted state control without worker control started using the word "socialism" to refer to their ideologies. An example is Francis Bellamy, the author of our pledge who with his brother Edward Bellamy proposed "military socialism", which would've turned our entire society industry, education, etc. into a military organization. Bellamy's ideas would greatly influence Hitler and Mussolini.

In 1917 there was a communist revolution in Russia. The Bolsheviks stated an intent for worker's control, but gradually starting with the Communist Party declaring itself the sole legal party as an emergency measure they created a system where the workers had no power.

Why do we allow our lives to be run by politicians and bureaucrats? Or owners who don't work a day in their lives? We have constructed a social reality where people are considered to have ownership or to have authority. These realities are formed and maintained by consensus. If the workers all stopped working for the owners and if all the people who enforce the rule of the politicians and bureaucrats, the police and the military stopped enforcing their power all these words "owner", "politician", "administrator", and all their titles and their laws become meaningless words. These people would have to stop exploiting people and find real jobs. If the masses wanted we could have a new society tomorrow. We could be in charge. Workers could run their own work, and deal with other groups of workers how ever they find necessary such as by creating larger voluntary associations. Order could be maintained as people work together to stop violent crime and to set up courts to judge innocence or guilt but without the corruptive influences of capitalism and the state system that enables its existance. This could all be achieved with no violence, just a large-scale general strike in every aspect of the public and private sectors.

Why are we so afraid of "socialism"? Socialism means a society where we exercise our power to run our own lives and don't abdicate to others based on myths about property or social contracts.

It is embarrassing how LITTLE Americans DON"T know what socialism is!
They believe what the media, (controlled by corporations!) tell them!

Of course the media and the ruling class WANTS you to believe socialism is bad! Because socialism endangers the ruling class!

Also USSR was NOT socialist, it was a dictatorship! They just told they were socialist, but again, are you going to believe a murdering dictator for his word??

I come from Europe, lived in Belgium, which is for a big part a socialistic-democratic country...everyone has good healthcare for only 5 euro a month! People are truly free to do whatever they want because education is cheap.
I worked at a company where we had 31 PAID vacation days per year! And if the company made profit, WE (as workers) got part of it!! And of course people owned houses and cars (that was not state owned, like so many gullible people here claim socialism is)

Type-O in the former comment, of course the comment means to say "How little people DO know what socialism is" instead of 'don't'
OR "how MANY don't know what socialism is", either way....
Apologies for that, I was just so stunned about the fact ;-)

Socialism does not mean the government must take over and "decide what's fair for everyone." Let's distinguish two different things: economic philosophy and political philosophy. Capitalism, Socialism, Communism- these are economic philosophies. Totalitarianism, Oligarchy, Democracy- these are political philosophies. The worst things about the Soviet Union was its political philosophy (totalitarianism) not it's economic philosophy. Much of Western Europe is socialist-democratic, the two ideas get along just fine and it's not surprise to me that a lot of people in this country think it might be worth a try.

You say it works just fine in Western Europe? isn't it true most of those countries are in just as bad a shape and worse? Isn't it true that their economic policies have put them in a position to be begger nation? Your correct that Socialism is an economic philosophy but it always lead to complimentary political philosophy. It never turns out well.