[Congressional Record Volume 155, Number 64 (Wednesday, April 29, 2009)]
[House]
[Pages H4970-H4971]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                       A KINDER, GENTLER MARXISM

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Carter) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. CARTER. Madam Speaker, recently I read an article by Gene Edward 
Veith entitled, ``A Kinder, Gentler Marxism.''
  He begins his comments by saying, ``Barack Obama is not a socialist, 
explained Eric Etheredge of The New York Times, he is a ``social 
democrat.'' The administration's attempt to control private companies 
and the free market should not alarm us, according to Etheredge and 
other pundits. European nations do this all the time. It is simply an 
application of the European political and economic theory known as 
``social democracy.''
  We were promised several things by our President during his campaign. 
He promised us government reform, a renewed and repaired economy, and 
more ethical business practices. And he did all this as we watched our 
economy crash.
  After these 100 days in office, we need to illuminate the path that 
this administration is actually taking us down. It could be the path 
that leads us from limited government, that stimulates our economy 
naturally, to a government mostly aligned with social democracy like 
the social economies of Western Europe, with massive taxes and chronic 
high unemployment.
  An objective definition of social democracy from Merriam-Webster's 
online dictionary is as follows: ``A political movement advocating a 
gradual and peaceful transition from capitalism to socialism by 
democratic means.'' Or a second definition, ``A democratic welfare 
state that incorporates both capitalist and socialist practices.''
  So this political and economic system either moves from capitalism to 
socialism or combines both capitalism and socialism to form a welfare 
state. We need to know more.
  Here is the first paragraph from the Encyclopedia Britannica about 
social

[[Page H4971]]

democracy. ``A political ideology that advocates a peaceful, 
evolutionary transition of society from capitalism to socialism using 
established political processes.
  ``Based on 19th century socialism and the tenets of Karl Marx and 
Friedrich Engels, social democracy shares common ideological roots with 
communism, but eschews its militancy and totalitarianism. Social 
democracy was originally known as revisionism because it represented a 
change in basic Marxist doctrine, primarily in the former's repudiation 
of the use of revolution to establish a capitalist society.''
  These definitions, paired with some of the actions we've seen so far 
in the administration, cause us concern that they may be indicative of 
gradual movement towards social democracy. We've got the stimulus bill, 
we've got the bank bailouts, now we've got the proposal that they will 
own 50 percent of General Motors, along with a 39 percent share for the 
unions, a 10 percent share for the bondholders, and a 1 percent share 
for the stockholders. As a result of these actions, the Federal 
Government's outrageous spending now equals almost 90 percent of gross 
domestic product. The GDP for last year was 14.2, and now 12.8.
  So the question is, did we elect a President because we wanted to 
have a social democracy system? When Americans cast their vote for 
Barack Obama and they cast it for the Democratic Congress, did they 
also intend that this country should adopt social democracy, that 
lesser form of Marxism?
  These are issues we need to talk about. And if this is the place our 
country is going, then maybe we need to amend or adopt new founding 
documents that more fit this form of government.
  These are thoughts we ought to all think about. I know I'm thinking 
about them. I hope you are, too.

                          ____________________