Just when I was really starting to like her, AOC had to come out and say,

[pnwmom]

"Capitalism is irredeemable."

She didn't just say it is broken -- which is true. She didn't just say it's in need of strong reforms, along the lines of the capitalism practiced in the Nordic countries.

She said it is "irredeemable."

That is, beyond redemption. Beyond repair. Hopeless.




https://thehill.com/homenews/house/433394-ocasio-cortez-capitalism-is-irredeemable

"Capitalism is an ideology of capital — the most important thing is the concentration of capital and to seek and maximize profit," she said during an interview at the South by Southwest conference in Austin, Texas, according to Bloomberg News.


"To me, capitalism is irredeemable," she added, arguing that capitalism's goals come at a cost to people and the environment, Bloomberg reported.

The congresswoman, who has described herself as a democratic socialist, added during her interview that "we should be scared."

"Just as there’s all this fearmongering that government is going to take over every corporation and government is going to take over every business or every form of production, we should be scared right now because corporations have taken over our government," she said.

[ADX]

1. She really needs to slow her roll...

...She's saying way too much, too soon...

[Historic NY]

31. Problem is she craves the attention.....

and that what gets her in trouble. She needs to accept she is only one of 435.

[LiberalLovinLug]

53. With all due respect, that is a dumb argument

and it is dumb when applied to politicians I like and don't like as well.

People run for office to GET ATTENTION to causes they felt strongly about, hence the passion and desire to run for office. For which that effort and participation in the democracy should be applauded for that alone.

Because you could randomly apply the only "craves attention" to anyone that has a job in the public eye. Including actors and musicians and writers. Now that might be the reason for some, although politics is a pretty harsh choice to sign up for, if you only want attention for the sake of it. Starting a YouTube channel would be much less stressful.

Also, where is the line drawn between genuinely believing in what you are saying, running for office because you think that that message is not being put out there enough.........and just spouting hot button things just to raise your profile. Are you the judge of that?

Others, deplorables for instance, might say MLK was just an uppity n. who just did it for the attention. Or Ghandi. Or Obama. Or Hillary. That it wasn't that they stood up and became leaders because they actually believed in their platforms, and that they could help the country, but that it was all done just for some general "attention" seeking.

One of the reasons people hopefully run for office in a democracy is to expose issues that they feel are not being exposed enough. (Like the US's blind billions of dollar support to Israel for instance) How can you be some kind of arbitrator on who is actually just passionate about an issue, and who is speaking out, disingenuously, just to get on the news, or to go down in history and have a holiday named after them?

[TheBlackAdder]

169. Reps love to quote Adam Smith's "invisible hand" but Smith wrote capitalism requires a tiered tax.

.

Just a few chapter away from the section where he wrote about the "invisible hand of government" he wrote that government must have a stiffly tiered tax system that heavily taxes the wealthy for it to survive. Conservatives always overlook that second part, I mean conveniently overlook.

.

[Garrett78]

2. If capitalism depends on infinite growth on a finite planet, it's not sustainable.

But does it? I don't know.

[calimary]

3. There is that.

[workinclasszero]

6. "If capitalism depends on infinite growth on a finite planet...."

I do believe you have identified at least one problem with unrestricted, unrestrained "pure" capitalism.

Our health care system in America is totally based on profit driven capitalism.

It's not working for the 99% either.

The 1% masters of the universe like it just fine no doubt.

[Miguel M]

17. That is the whole basis of Marx's Capital.

Its partially an environmental preservation ideology.

[allgood33]

21. if only she said "capitalism IN ITS PRESENT FORM is irredeemable"

We are now much more a corporatocracy.

[JudyM]

199. +1. Plus the environmental and social externalities are borne by society rather than the businesses.

I believe injecting steroids into the slowly growing corporate social responsibility movement could pretty much fix it all.

[uponit7771]

100. No it does not everything has boundaries

[Mr Tibbs]

163. She's young

The capitalism we have now is the only capitalism she's ever experienced.

I love her enthusiasm. She's awesome.

[riverine]

4. She immediately followed up her statement on capitalism with

comments about how her first two pressing action items would be to fix

1- Flint's water system (government)
2- Puerto Rico's power system (government)

It's like she doesn't actually think about what she is saying.

[dixiegrrrrl]

23. Governments using tax dollars to provide water and power to people is not a bad thing.

Scandinavian countries come to mind. I don't see that is a reflection of capitalism.

Giving the taxpayer money, directly or indirectly to corporations so they can make obscene profits IS a problem.

The other problem is that "capitalism" and "socialism" and "socialist democracy" are all terms that are loosely defined by those who use them versus those who hear them.
Greed and power at the expense of those who have little wealth has been the economic model for eons, as history shows.

[MarcA]

33. Yes. Greed and Power by any Name is still what it is.

Labels probably have to be used but they are like a double edged sword.

[George II]

29. Bazinga!

[Evolve Dammit]

89. She's young, engaged and wants to make a much-needed difference. Give her a break; she clarified

Seriously, you give her a hard time for that? Look at the frothing bullshit that spews from the GOP daily.

[dpibel]

112. What am I missing?

It appears to me you are saying that government is capitalism.

That is the only sense I can make of the contrast you seem to be making between AOC's comment about capitalism being broken followed by two problems you identify as being (government).

Are you, in fact, saying that the U.S. government is capitalism?

Or am I just having reading comprehension issues?

[riverine]

120. No. She complained about capitalism then immediately talked about

government (socialist) failures like Flint.

Most of us want the production of goods/services to be in private hands (capitalism).

[dpibel]

126. Oh, that is terribly droll

The deindustrialization of Flint, which is, after all, the base cause of the problems there, is a government problem? I'm thinking that the auto plant closures that led to the impoverishment of Flint are pretty much entirely the product of pure capitalism.

And I'm not sure you can support the proposition that most of us want basic services like water to be in private hands. I believe the history's pretty clear that public utilities are almost always cheaper and better than private ones.

For both Flint and Puerto Rico, there's an argument that, were it not for the destruction of progressive taxation (the result, again of capitalism) the government might not be so starved of funds as to be unable to look after its states and territories.

[FBaggins]

158. Your belief is incorrect

There is no clear consensus re: public vs. private ownership of utilities. Public can be cheaper because government can choose to divert public dollars to lower prices, but then the public is still paying the price (just through taxes rather than their utility bill).

Here’s a World Bank paper on the subject

https://blogs.worldbank.org/developmenttalk/private-versus-public-electricity-distribution-utilities-are-outcomes-different-end-users

Then an interesting take on water utilities in particular - that makes an interesting point that they can be cheaper... but not better... because public utilities are more likely to charge less but fail to deliver on drinking water standards. Which makes the Flint example relevant again.

https://www.citylab.com/life/2015/07/the-privatization-of-public-utilities-has-one-major-upside/398828/

[dpibel]

183. "Can be" covers a multitude of sins

The World Bank paper that says, "Overall, we find no major differences between the efficiency and quality of services which commercial end-users receive from private or public utility companies."

The citylab.com (whatever that is) article says:

"But according to a forthcoming paper in the American Journal of Political Science, the public utility model has some drawbacks, too. Its reliance on public support can compromise its ability to make crucial infrastructure upgrades. As a result of poor funding, public utilities can also fail to meet federal public regulations."

And then again, it may not. After all: Private industry can fail in many ways, and often does.

I'm not finding this an entirely devastating rebuttal.

It wasn't the gubmint, after all, that gave us the Deepwater Horizon oil spill.

You've cited two articles. One says that public utilities may not be cheaper than private ones. Which is...well...wishy-washy. The other one says that public utilities might not be perfect. That does not exactly prove that private ones are.

[Cuthbert Allgood]

166. She's not an anarchist.

And as to your "these are socialist failures"...um, no. The decisions were made because of money and not the best interest of the people. It is our current system that created these problems she listed.

Do you disagree that we need to solve these problems as quickly as possible?

[riversedge]

5. How do one stop the GREED which feeds capitalim??

Until, and unless the GREED is stopped, capitalism MAY be irredeemable. Worse case scenario I know

[pnwmom]

9. How do you protect the needs of minorities under a system where

workers sit around and decide everything by a simple majority vote? What happens if you live in an area where the majority couldn't care less about the needs of people with "differences," whatever they are?

In my opinion, socialism isn't the perfect system and capitalism isn't irredeemably broken. There is always the need of repair and reform in every human system.

[riverine]

13. Tax it. But don't stop it.

Capitalism creates wealth.

Government is supposed to fairly distribute it.

Therefore government has failed us - not capitalism.

[Adrahil]

174. Umm.... Regulations and laws.

We have a system of laws and regulations to counteract the baser instincts among people.

We have harness the power of the market and profit motive and STILL protect the people and the planet. It just takes political will.

[gopiscrap]

7. I agree with her

[FreeState]

39. +1 n/t

[lilactime]

52. So do I.

[Drunken Irishman]

98. So what's the successful alternative?

Because if it's not capitalism, then what? Even the Nordic countries so many on the left point to as shining examples of liberalism are capitalist countries...

[Joe941]

171. Me too.

[Adrahil]

176. And then what?

The problem with her pr statement is that she doesn’t relay have a “then what.” This is coffee house revolution talk.

[wellst0nev0ter]

8. Area Dem Socialist is against Capitalism

News at 11

[pnwmom]

11. The apologists kept arguing that Democratic socialism is REALLY Nordic country capitalism,

But she's saying now it isn't. Okie dokie.

We can forget about winning 2020, if socialism becomes our brand.

[TwilightZone]

28. I don't think the apologists have any idea what democratic socialism really is.

At least the version espoused by the Democratic Socialists of America. In fact, I know they don't. The DSA wants to overthrow capitalism; they're quite open about it. I linked a discussion below that quite clearly indicates that.

The people who claim that democratic socialists really want some hybrid form of capitalism are - at least where the DSA is concerned - completely wrong.

[Tiggeroshii]

44. There's a reason Nordic style "socialism" helped break the world economy

That reason is capitalism.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

10. Pretttttty sure this is why people voted for her...

[pnwmom]

12. Pretty sure it isn't. Up till now I have heard her and Bernie, over and over,

point to the Nordic countries as what they had in mind. But they are social democracies, not Democratic socialism. They practice regulated free trade and capitalism, with a safety net. That's not socialism.

[George II]

18. No it isn't.

[Horizens]

184. 11%

Don't get carried away. There was a mere 11% turnout in the primary. The incumbent wasn't just asleep at the wheel, he was comatose.

[safeinOhio]

14. What kind of Capitalism or Socialism?

Adam Smith, the father of Capitalism with his books on Wealth of Nations, stated that we must be protected from greed in the markets with REGULATIONS. Then along came Radical Free Market Capitalism with Ayn Rand. It proclaimed greed as a positive force. It isn't.

Also various types and levels of Socialism.

[pnwmom]

15. That's the problem -- she didn't say we needed to reform capitalism, with stronger regulations.

She said it was irredeemable. In other words, that nothing can be done to improve it. It's hopeless.

[safeinOhio]

16. My guess is, she is talking about Radical Free Market Capitalism.

If so, she is correct.

[George II]

19. When did she mention "radical free market capitalism"?

[safeinOhio]

27. She didn't, just like the Right doesn't mention

the different types of Socialism.

Wikipedia...

There are many varieties of socialism and there is no single definition encapsulating all of them,[13] though social ownership is the common element shared by its various forms.[5][14][15] Socialist economic systems can be further divided into non-market and market forms.[16] The word socialism thus refers to a broad range of theoretical and historical socioeconomic systems and has also been used by many political movements throughout history to describe themselves and their goals, generating numerous types of socialism.

I don't see any repub breaking down the type of Socialism they are against. They just lump it together, like she is doing with Capitalism.

[empedocles]

61. Nuances aside, the political reality if 'socialism' is a major problem for many dems in elections.

[pnwmom]

47. That's not what she said. That's what you want to hope she meant. I was, too,

when she was just calling herself a Democratic Socialist.

But now she has flat out said that capitalism is irredeemable. No ifs, ands, or buts.

[melman]

83. "But now she has flat out said that capitalism is irredeemable. No ifs, ands, or buts."

So what? You act as if she issued a decree.

[roamer65]

20. Well...it does have the human race on the brink of extinction.

Unfettered Capitalism and it’s engendered materialism is a big contributor to global climate change.

We need a managed, mixed system.

[irresistable]

32. It also has a stranglehold on the way that more than one branch of our government operates.

It always leads to this. It has to be beaten back down.

[Lurker Deluxe]

97. weird definition

If "on the brink of extinction" means more than at any other time in the history of the planet, then yes ... the human race is "on the brink of extinction".

The population of the earth is directly dependent on the activities of the human race. We continue to obliterate disease and other causes of mass death around the world which leads to massive population growth which would be impossible otherwise.

The earth is due a mass death event, has been for a half a century ... we have been able to stop it though, lately.

Smallpox, Malaria, and Measles being basically wiped out has lead to huge increases in the world population over the last 100 years. The decrease in deaths since WWII from despotic shitheads has also been greatly reduced.

We are nowhere near extinction ... but certainly due a "correction".

[X_Digger]

105. Wait, what?

We're on the brink of extinction? Says who?

Less poverty world-wide than ever before, less war than in recorded history, literacy rates are up, teen pregnancy rates are down, communicable disease is on the decline..

What species is this human race you're taking about?

[dpibel]

115. There's that climate thing

It could actually be more of a factor than war, literacy, and such.

[X_Digger]

119. Species on the brink of extinction are declining. We're not.

Yes, climate change is an important issue. To claim that the human race is on the verge of extinction is absolutely useless hyperbole.

[femmedem]

131. Would you prefer the planet is on the brink of becoming uninhabitable if we don't change our ways?

Depends on how you define brink, of course. We are on the precipice of locking in enough CO2 to make the planet uninhabitable.

[X_Digger]

150. "if we don't change our ways" contradicts the 'on the brink of', no? n/t

[femmedem]

154. I don't see us changing our ways dramatically or quickly enough.

It would certainly take a change of course the like of which we've never seen. So no, I don't see any contradiction.

[roamer65]

202. I think we can take 5 deg C to the bank.

This planet will be dramatically different climate wise in 100 years, unless there is a dramatic reduction in the human population.

[femmedem]

205. 5c is terrifying.

I wish I could say I thought you were wrong. I guess I'm a little more optimistic that we will reduce our CO2 emissions enough to limit it to less than that, but that's probably because I haven't studied tipping points enough.

[TwilightZone]

24. The DSA wants to overthrow capitalism, so I guess it's in line.

This is a rather enlightening conversation between two of its members, arguing about whether or not they should endorse Sanders:

An excerpt, though there's much more where this came from.

"Yes, if we throw ourselves into the Bernie 2020 campaign, we may be able to recruit more members, perhaps thousands. We have to ask ourselves, however, what sort of an organization will we be recruiting them to? The Bernie 2020 campaign will have a profound influence on DSA, emphasizing political work over building the social movements. We will find that we have created an organizational culture dominated by illusions of influencing or capturing the Democratic Party, rather than developing strategies for the destruction of the two-party system and the overthrow of capitalism. We will find that we have not only mobilized the organization for a campaign but have also transformed it for the future into a social democratic organization. "

https://www.dsausa.org/weekly/a-dialogue-should-dsa-endorse-bernie-sanders-before-the-convention/

[George II]

25. ir·re·deem·a·ble

adjective

1. not able to be saved, improved, or corrected.

[lunatica]

26. I give her a pass

I have my doubts about capitalism too as practiced by the 1%. As a matter of fact I think in this context is has nothing much to offer. Capitalism without regulation is bad for the country. Capitalism is a poverty creator right now. And Trump is giving it even more power so greed can rule.

Ocasio-Cortez is a diamond in the rough.

[elfin]

35. No more passes from me

I thought she had learned something from Pelosi about the importance of unity and how it leads to success. Apparently not.

It is UNREGULATED capitalism that is the problem. It is a basic engine of growth but unchecked it is ruinous to real people.

The careful combination of restraints and easings is the most stable and encourages healthy growth. It is extremely complex amongst so many policies, but we are definitely out of whack now.

If AOC doesn't smarten up to reality soon and modify her attitude and statements about capitalism, she with her charismatic charm and quick wit will create a Tea Party-like schism with their insistence on absolutism for their favorite stances.

I hope she changes to the term "mixed and balanced economy" or something similar.

Or divided we fall and Trump and his ilk win.

[lunatica]

40. Too bad you can't allow for mistakes from the young.

But it’s your right to turn your back.

[elfin]

51. Time will tell. Hope she learns quickly to beware inflammatory speech.

Right now she almost seems to relish dividing us along with cleverly sniping at Repubs while enjoying the limelight on herself and her House entourage.

[lunatica]

60. That's exactly my point.

Give it time. Let her make mistakes. If she’s as smart as we think she’ll learn from them.

It’s possible she’ll be around for decades. I give her a pass, though the criticism she gets is pretty much deserved. The reason I give her a pass is because I think she’s smart enough to learn from her own mistakes.

Criticize her sure, but don’t throw her out.

[Butterflylady]

84. That's what they said about tRump.

Give him time, he'll grow into the job. How'd that work out?

[lunatica]

91. So you come up with the one example that doesn't

prove a thing except that a percentage of our population are stupid. Way to go!

[OilemFirchen]

134. "If she's as smart as we think she'll learn from them."

Who is "we"?

[lunatica]

136. We are the people who think before reacting.

There are a lot of us.

[OilemFirchen]

142. That non-answer seems pretty reactionary.

It's like ray-ah-ain on your wedding day, then?

[lunatica]

151. LOL!

Am I supposedto get offended or something because someone doesn’t agree with me? Nope.

[OilemFirchen]

152. No more so than me failing to maintain a sense of humor...

when you fail to answer a simple question.

[lunatica]

153. Well good for you!

[Duppers]

48. I'd like to think it's her wording, not her attitude

That's the problem. One little adjective would have fixed that statement: *unregulated*

That's what the wingers, like Bannon, are bent on doing: destroying government by not regulating it.

[SleeplessinSoCal]

80. absolutely. and the media will help him win a 2nd term and ...

...no green new deal will be implemented. She hopefully knows her history.

How FDR Saved Capitalism https://www.hoover.org/research/how-fdr-saved-capitalism

[ismnotwasm]

30. She's still on a learning curve

She has a lot of political coinage. I don’t like her spending it unwisely on statements like that, but she clearly doesn’t mind being a lightning rod for the right wing.

[moondust]

41. Yes, she's still young.

And will no doubt make some mistakes along the way. Maybe she should talk to Bernie about his past references to being more like Denmark. It's not "socialist" but a mix of government services and private sector--like all systems. It's all about finding the right balance.

[melman]

45. It's really pretty patronizing

to say "well she's young" and she's "on a learning curve" as if it's an undeniable truth that she's making mistakes.

Some people here might not like the things she says but many many others do. Just watch the SXSW videos. People are cheering.

[moondust]

56. Oh yeah.

Naive applause lines are what really count.

[melman]

57. Naive

according to...who exactly?

[moondust]

59. Ask the Danes

and the Norweigians and the Swedes and the Finns--for starters.

[melman]

64. Ask them what?

[moondust]

66. Ask them

what "capitalism" and "socialism" and "communism" and "Marxism" are and which of the above they are...because they understand those things while you clearly prefer simplistic, naive applause lines.

Welcome to ignore.

[melman]

72. What?

I really don't know what you're on about here. None of that came up anywhere in this thread or in AOC's comments.

[ismnotwasm]

164. Definitions definitely are terms of convenience to some

Rather than, well, actual definitions. It’s funny and frustrating at the same time.

[CousinIT]

34. I agree with her

I said exactly what she said. I got reamed about it but I don't care. https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1287&pid=18164

UNTIL and UNLESS big business/capitalists can be REMOVED completely from our government and all that serve in it, and their proper regulatory role is restored to FORCE capitalism and big business to work for the common good rather than just for itself, it is irredeemable. And just think how likely THAT is to happen?

Well, it isn't going to.

Thus, Capitalism will remain predatory, parasitic, and rapacious eating and destroying everything and everyone else to save itself. There no cost too great for a sociopathic legal entity to save itself. Corporations are not people and if they were, they'd be sociopaths (no conscience). One objective: make money. At any cost. Period.

That can't work. That doesn't work.

It's irredeemable.

And corporations HAVE taken over our government. This is why regulations are being gutted and now none of them have to pay taxes any longer. It's why NOTHING has been done about climate change - why? Capitalists, lobbyists, corporate CxOs who literally now work in regulatory agencies of our government. Fox guarding the henhouse. Look at what happened to the EPA. Who's running it now?

Well...

I'm sorry everybody is suddenly SO UNCOMFORTABLE with this shit. They SHOULD be. But they should have been 50 years ago when something could have been done about it - maybe.

She's right. We SHOULD be scared. It's about time.

[G_j]

36. Quite simple

Capitalism is not sustainable.

[marylandblue]

37. We don't have a good definition of capitalism, either

Most people think it means something like Democratic Free Market Society. The right wing adds "unregulated." But there were free markets in prior societies that weren't capitalist.

In reality, "capitalism" is a set of tools invented to concentrate capital to facilitate investment and commerce. Hence we have banks, corporations, enforceable contracts etc. It's really quite mundane put that way.

Democrats should embrace the term progressive capitalism to distinguish ourselves from socialism. That would be capitalism with regulated markets, a social safety net, and a more even distribution of wealth between workers and owners.

[Duppers]

49. Well said.

[still_one]

38. She doesn't speak for the Democratic Party. She for herself and those that subscribe to those views

[PatSeg]

42. Poor choice of words

It is refreshing to see people being outspoken, but she and some other newbies need to slow down a bit and think before they open their mouths. There is a lot for them to learn, it wouldn't hurt to step back occasionally to look and listen.

Also one can be overexposed very quickly in politics. What is new and interesting at first, can get old and annoying if one isn't careful, especially if there are too many unintended gaffes. Pretty soon the media will be looking for the unforced errors and focus on them, instead of any worthy accomplishments. Sadly, the public will get tired of it all and a bright flame could burn out.

[Demit]

77. Yes, she really needs to be more bland, and focus-group her thoughts before voicing them.

Because we don't have enough careful politicians who live in fear of what will be said about them! The important thing in political life is to avoid controversy at all costs.

[PatSeg]

162. No, of course not

She and the others don't need to speak in scripted political talking points, but they are in positions where they should choose their words carefully, as those words can have a big impact.

I certainly prefer politicians who are authentic and speak from the heart, not from some scripted talking points. There will be some poorly chosen words or gaffes, but when you are the new kid on the block, it would be best to try and keep those gaffes to a minimum, at least if you want to stay in congress and really accomplish something.

The thing is when you are new at your job, you probably don't know as much as you think you do. New people generally try to get the feel of their environment and seek out advice and guidance from those who came before them. The enthusiasm and energy is great, but a little less time in front of the camera might be a good way to start. And focus on your constituents first, knowing that is the reason you are there.

[Demit]

172. I think being in a new job b/c a lot of people voted you into it is substantively different

from being in a job you interviewed with Human Resources for.

I think AOC is completely cognizant of who her "bosses" are, they are the people who voted for her. She's been smart enough in her new job to be fully & vocally supportive of Speaker Pelosi. But she's doing what she campaigned on, not what the wise oldheads of the status quo tell her she should be doing. Times are changing; consider that maybe it's the old guard political advisors who don't know as much as they think they do.

[PatSeg]

177. We'll see

Everyone was a newbie in congress at one time and not all of them lasted. Obviously there are those among the old guard who don't know as much as they believe they do, but there are many who have a great deal of experience to share from many hard fought battles. If you combine that wisdom and experience with the energy and optimism of the younger members, it could be a dynamic combination.

It is still early. Down the road, I will be paying more attention to what they eventually DO and less on what they say. Meanwhile, a little less time in front of the camera might be advisable. All that attention can go to one's head.

[VOX]

43. I agree with her on this in general, but her messaging is faulty...

She needs some seasoning to play a more winning game, and to think more like an experienced, ethical sales associate who clarifies the right/wrong way to use a particular product. Most Americans honestly don’t even know what socialism actually is, or that it has numerous variants and degrees. Or that there are elements of socialism already implanted into our government, which people actually appreciate.

It’s the same with capitalism. Yes, it’s an engine of greed, and CEOs & execs are sucking wealth upward, away from the poor and middle class.

But she’s condemning a system that works well for most people *when it’s regulated*, pays its fair share of taxes, and allows for collective bargaining.

[melman]

46. Wow that sounds super scary

Very very concerning indeed.

[Humanist_Activist]

138. Why? n/t

[melman]

140. It actually doesn't

was my point. The OP would have us believe it does but it doesn't.

[Humanist_Activist]

143. Sorry, sarcasm is hard to convey through text, also, a lot of people...

OP included, seem to treat Capitalism as sacrosanct, as a religion, not an economic system to critically examine, and, if need be, abandon.

[TalenaGor]

54. we are the Ferengui

[DeminPennswoods]

79. Wow, good one!

nt

[gtar100]

55. As far as I'm concerned, it is irredeemable.

It's not sustainable, not for much longer anyway. And there are *so many* people who just don't give a shit. That's what is making it irredeemable.

[Humanist_Activist]

58. Capitalism distorts Democracy, abuses workers and redistributes scarce resources...

to those who are already wealthy. Is what she said wrong?

[dem4decades]

62. She's a gift to the Republicans. That keeps on giving. 9

[malachi]

82. 1 million %.

[Cuthbert Allgood]

168. So you agree that our current economic system needs to continue as is?

That we can continue making the rich richer?

If that's what the Republicans think, then fuck them. They are wrong.

[dem4decades]

186. So you agree it's best to tell Rhee American people we should now ho the system?

Why do people want Democrats in ther minority again?

I

[Cuthbert Allgood]

198. About whom are you speaking?

Trump supporters? They will never not support Republican douchebags.

Average Americans? I think socializing our system is way more popular with average Americans than you are giving credit.

[ehrnst]

191. ....

A false dilemma is a type of informal fallacy in which something is falsely claimed to be an "either/or" situation, when in fact there is at least one additional option. A false dilemma can arise intentionally, when a fallacy is used in an attempt to force a choice or outcome.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma



See also:

[yaesu]

63. I don't believe any Democracy can survive under a capitalistic system, it is always a struggle

against big money interests, banksters & their puppet politicians. Democracy cannot ever truly spread its wings while that struggle goes on. The only way the two can coexist is to build a strong firewall between government & capitalism. In the last few decades that firewall has been completely dismantled and replaced by a 4 lane highway between the two. I don't see any way this is going to be reversed under our current system of government.

[pnwmom]

67. It seems to be surviving quite nicely in Norway and Sweden, both countries

that have capitalism, with private property, a strong safety net, and well-regulated trade.

[Kurt V.]

65. That's probably true.

[pnwmom]

68. Norway and Sweden are capitalist countries with strong safety nets. Are they irredeemable, too?

[DirtEdonE]

69. Norway and Sweden are looked at here as teh dreaded socialists! nt

[pnwmom]

75. That's how some socialists want to promote them. But they have private property

and a capitalist system, along with a strong safety net. They could be the model for our REFORM of capitalism, but it sounds like AOC wants to throw out the baby with the bathwater.

[Humanist_Activist]

104. Private property isn't the same as who owns the means of production.

Private property can and does exist in socialist systems.

[hack89]

125. Sweden and Norway have embraced free market capitalism

Last edited Sun Mar 10, 2019, 08:05 PM - Edit history (1)

With privately own companies, huge corporations and a bunch of millionaires. They have merely regulated it and have given workers a seat at the table.

[Humanist_Activist]

135. Define "Free Market" Capitalism please...

Also, I mentioned none of those countries, stay on topic.

[hack89]

160. This sub-thread is about Sweden and Norway

And free market capitalism is capitalism that promotes global trade with minimal national impediments to trade.

[Humanist_Activist]

188. Ah yes, one of the main symptoms of Capitalism, the need for a large underclass of exploited labor..

Making it international is relatively new in the 150+ years Capitalism has been around. Also, just a note, that's Neo-Liberalism, not "Free Market Capitalism" at least in the traditional sense. Here's a question, can we sustain our "Free Market" economy without a large underclass of people in places such as SE Asia, Africa and South America creating our products at unlivable wages, under horrendous working conditions?

[hack89]

194. As the knowledge economy grows and the industrial economy changes due to automation

and new technology, I honestly don't know the answer to your question. An equal danger to those developing countries is that developed western economies will simply learn do do without them (or in significantly reduced numbers). We might reach a point where all those countries contribute to the global economy is minerals and other natural products.

At that point I am not sure what economic system will ensure global economic fairness. Because Socialism is not intrinsically altruistic. It does not automatically follow that, once adopting socialism, any given country is willing to sacrifice their present standard of living to help their fellow man.

[Kurt V.]

73. Eventually yes. Predatory capitalist can't be held back much longer. and those countries are already

starting to lose that fight.

[pnwmom]

76. We've already seen the end result of the socialist experiment, and it wasn't pretty. n/t

[Kurt V.]

85. agree and disagree. china is still around for instance. I'm no socialist without redefining the

term but ppl much smarter than me see a hybrid economic model in our future or else a big chunk of the planet's population is screwed

[pnwmom]

107. She's not calling for a hybrid model. She just said capitalism was "irredeemable." n/t

[Kurt V.]

113. i don't have the answer. but i pretty much agree with her and you don't. fine. i can see by your

other replies, you're mostly ignoring push back and that's fine too.

[femmedem]

129. She actually is calling for a hybrid model if you read more of what she said.

Not your fault: the article gave a slanted, incomplete accounting.
I think the two of you are pretty close in your beliefs about capitalism.
See my reply #94.

[pnwmom]

132. I will look for your post. But if true, I hope she learns to be more careful

about saying things that can turn into soundbites that distort what she actually thinks.

[femmedem]

133. Here you go:

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=11907364

Yes, the soundbite was an unfortunate gift.

[pnwmom]

141. Thank you. Yes, the full context makes it very different. But I hope she learns

to be more cautious in how she phrases things. She really wasn't saying it was "irredeemable" even though that's how she began her statement; she was really being much more thoughtful.

[femmedem]

159. You know what they say about a lie traveling halfway across the world

before the truth puts its shoes on.

Unfortunately, your OP will be read by more people than this reply--just as all over the internet, the soundbite is being quoted everywhere. Would you consider limiting the damage here on DU by editing your OP?

[Mariana]

203. That would defeat the purpose of the OP. nt.

[melman]

204. Exactly

[femmedem]

206. I figured if I made the suggestion, the OP would either correct or reveal itself.

Was hoping for a better outcome.

[OilemFirchen]

145. The U.S. is a mixed-market economy.

As is China.

[Humanist_Activist]

106. Using that argument also holds true for Capitalism, does it not? n/t

[pnwmom]

108. I think capitalism as practiced in our country needs strong reforms. I wouldn't say capitalism is

irredeemable, as if even Sweden and Norway, which are capitalist countries, are unacceptable.

[DirtEdonE]

81. capitalism always devolves into oligarchy nt

[OilemFirchen]

147. That's a theory, of course.

However, socialism always devolves into authoritarianism. That's an historical fact.

[DirtEdonE]

173. Capitalism is only a theory as well

The capitalist heaven here in the USA didn't devolve into authoritarianism?

Take a look at donald j trump if you want to see a true authoritarian.

Oligarchs are capitalist authoritarians. pootin is a communist authoritarian. They come in all theories. None are any better than the others. They all have one thing in common - good old fashioned basic human greed. That's what ruins every economic theory.

Social Security and Medicare are socialist programs that work better than capitalist 401ks and our so-called private for profit capitalist health care system. Unless you're a rich capitalist.

[OilemFirchen]

178. Balderdash.

The U.S. is not an Authoritarian country. It is tending toward Oligarchism, but we continue to have planned elections, our military is forbidden by the Constitution to wage war on the populace and our President is term-limited.

That's not to say that Capitalist Democracies cannot devolve into Authoritarian states, which was never my assertion.

BTW, Russia is no longer a Communist nation. Yes, it is an Authoritarian state (though not a Democracy) but it devolved from a Communist state.

[DirtEdonE]

189. Looks to me like russia evolved

From a loser to a winner.

I guess all that credit reagan took for overthrowing the ussr was all a little too early. Capitalists were defeated using the one tool they have no defense against, the capitalist kryptonite, basic human greed. The driving force of capitalism. U.S. capitalism today is kind of like giving society a heart transplant without replacing the heart.

But hey, I hear it's working out very well for a very few.

[DirtEdonE]

175. Capitalist case in point:

What a great economic system. Boom and bust and for most people it's bust.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100211905869

I like this quote:
"Fucking hate late stage capitalist bullshit..."

Capitalists are convinced their system is the best. A few of them anyway. Are the homeless capitalists?

[ronnie624]

70. The nerve!

To think that humans might be motivated by something other than primal emotions like greed and fear!

[DeminPennswoods]

71. Her assessment is not really wrong

Maybe calling capitalism "irredeemable" is a little overboard, but just look around at what's been happening. Corporate lobbyists throwing around money to ensure there is as little government regulation of them as possible so they can pollute the enviroment to their hearts' content. Companies filing for bankruptcy, then shucking off pensions and health care obligations, leaving employees and retirees to fend for themselves. Resisting raises to the minimum wage at every turn. Hedge funds buying profitable companies, then loading them with debt to enrich themselves (see Sears, Toys R Us). Demanding tax breaks and other concessions from state and local governments for just the chance that a few hundred jobs might come to town (see Amazon).

The pendulum has swung far too much toward the capitalist pole. There is a palpable hunger from Americans to swing it back toward labor and government. It's why AOC drew the largest, reportedly and overflow, crowd to her SXSW appearance.

[bitterross]

74. She's correct though.

Capitalism, as we practice it here in the USA, is most certainly irredeemable.

[rocktivity]

78. It's UNCHECKED capitalism that's irredeemable

Capitalism is redeemed by regulating it.

Unchecked capitalism morphs into fascism, which is unchecked by default.


rocktivity

[Eric J in MN]

86. You knew AOC is a 'democratic socialist' before, right?

That means wanting to replace capitalism with socialism.

There are lots of definitions of socialism. It doesn't have to be defined as ending all private businesses. Bernie Sanders uses Denmark as an example of socialism, though it has private businesses.

[comradebillyboy]

117. Denmark isn't a socialist country. BS is wrong about that.

[Devil Child]

87. Capitalism is irredeemable

Capitalism is a predatory, oppressive, and highly destructive force on humanity and environment. No need to sugar coat it.

Rep. Ocasio-Cortez is correct in her description.

[liberalnarb]

88. Oh, God bless her.

Never afraid to speak the truth.

[Yavin4]

90. The definition of capitalism

An economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state.

Is there anything in that definition about a middle class? protecting the environment? ending racism and gender discrimination? social justice?

We're in an age where the owners of capital will need fewer and fewer human laborers. Then what?

Yes, what AOC said is indeed shocking, but it needs to be said. We need to prepare for a post-capitalism world.

[Bettie]

92. Another day, another "Sit down and shut up" post

aimed at a new congresswoman.

Funny, no one ever tells the male congresscritters to sit down and shut up.

Just the women who rock the boat.

[Politicub]

93. She is the future

It’s comfortable to keep the status quo and nibble around the edges in politics.

Capitalism creates massive inequality in our society. With that, I agree. I am proud of AOC speaking her mind. She represents the voice of millennials - the largest generational demographic in American history.

[femmedem]

94. She did not call for the abolition of capitalism.

She went on to say this: "But when we talk about ideas like democratic socialism, it means putting democracy and society first, instead of capital first; it doesn’t mean that the actual concept of capitalistic society should be abolished."

https://qz.com/1569538/sxsw-watch-the-alexandria-ocasio-cortez-interview/

She also gave a defense of socialism that could work beautifully against any Republican argument against big government:

"She defended herself as a self-defined socialist, slamming the 'fear mongering' of socialism, calling it a fear that 'governments going to take over the private sector.'

She complained it's actually the opposite.

'We should be scared right now because corporations have taken over our government,' Ocasio-Cortez said."

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6791039/Ocasio-Cortez-dominates-SXSW-conference-talk-protests-minorities-treated-like-garbage.html

[Amyishere]

102. but then that would be putting her words in context, and we can't have that.

I don't think work makes one free. I don't think labor defines a human being. I do know that unlimited exponential growth, which is a current model for how capititalism is working today, is completely unsustainable, and will lead to a tipping point.

We have a choice. We can begin to create a government that works more for the people, and doesn't place a monetary value on them based on what they have or what work they perform...

or we will have a revolution or fascism in the end.

[femmedem]

116. Thanks for chiming in. Yes, context matters.

Welcome to Democratic Underground.

[melman]

110. Wow

You mean she didn't just stand up and shout "death to capitalism" or something?


And if you listen to what she's really saying in context it makes sense and isn't wild and scary?


Amazing.

[muriel_volestrangler]

148. I think that shows that it's the ideology that she previously defined she thinks irredeemable

"Capitalism is an ideology of capital — the most important thing is the concentration of capital and to seek and maximize profit" . As an example:

From 2007 to 2015, Mylan CEO Heather Bresch saw her total compensation go from $2,453,456 to $18,931,068, a 671 percent increase. During the same period, the company raised EpiPen prices, with the average wholesale price going from $56.64 to $317.82, a 461 percent increase

The stock price more than tripled, going from $13.29 in 2007 to a high of $47.59 in 2016.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100211907289

[saidsimplesimon]

95. pnwmom, I detest labels as they

lack any nuance. Ms. Cortez has a lot to learn, as does Ms. Omar. I am reminded that it takes a "big ego" to run for public office. imo

[left-of-center2012]

96. I saw that, but ...

I didn't post it 'cause I feared someone would 'alert' on me.

I have trouble figuring out when and how to "constructively" criticize a Democrat.

[DallasNE]

99. Here We Go, Eating Our Own Again

How many times are we going to do the Republicans work for them?

The thing that has given capitalism such a bad reputation over the last 50 years is deregulation. Capitalism must be regulated to stem the excesses. One of the regulations sorely needed is to end Citizens United. Another is to end Gerrymandering and voter suppression - both areas needing regulation. End Taft-Hartley. Some may ask, what do those excesses have to do with capitalism. The answer is who stands in the way of the needed reforms if not the capitalists. Keep the eye on the ball. Follow the money.

This is where the focus needs to be and not attacks on AOS. I say, you go girl.

[area51]

124. +1 n/t

[debsy]

101. I completely agree with ACO and...

...therefore disagree with your post. If you listen to her and hear what she is actually saying, she is supportive of workers, worker's rights, and democracy. Capitalism as a standalone (what I guess I would call "free market" capitalism) hasn't really worked well for anyone in the 99%. As the saying goes, it takes money to make money. IMHO, the problem is that many people, rather than actually trying to understand the underlying message being presented, jump on words that may or may not be exactly what the person meant or can be taken out of context and then throw the person and everything they stand for out the window.

[Fullduplexxx]

103. What she said was ..."TO ME.....(the rest)

[Beartracks]

109. Capitalism should be controlled like a nuclear reactor.

Tremendous power and benefit, but it must be tightly focused and regulated in order for that benefit to be sustained without running amok into a meltdown.

=========

[Iggo]

111. I fell for this shit when they pulled it on Hillary Clinton.

I didn't fall for it when they tried it on Nance Pelosi late last year.

And I'm not falling for it now.

[KSNY]

122. Agree with you on this.

Why get worked up over a statement that is true (even if some of us disagree with the word "irredeemable&quot ?
It is a distraction, divide and conquer technique.
Btw, betcha the orange asshole can't spell irredeemable...

[LakeArenal]

114. Youthful exuberance.

Think about your first week at a job everyone voted that you should do.

She may get slapped down. We all do at some point. Maybe she won’t.

But she will learn to temper the rhetoric.
So she missed a diplomatic “as it exists now”.

For me that’s -1 out of 1000 points.

[KSNY]

118. Please don't ...

play the role the the right wing wants democrats and the left to play: squabbling among ourselves over the latest soundbite from an interview by a promising, young congressperson.
Let's not get excited over her choice of "irredeemable" It is absurd--particularly given some of the truly offensive comments from Trump, his minions, and his sycophants.

Capitalism without countervailing forces in government, the media, international regulatory agencies, and society IS irredeemable and does not function to improve society. As Ocasio-Cortez said, capitalism is a system that places the interest of capital (owners/shareholders) above those of humans (the society at large).
We need to strengthen the countervailing forces that have been weakened/bought out over the last 4 decades and build new ones (the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is a good example of the latter).
Our survival as a country and as inhabitants of the earth depends on it.

[femmedem]

128. Well said! And welcome to DU. n/t

[Bengus81]

121. BS...I was self employed for 40 years,guess I'm one of those evilllll "capitalists.

While we can't have run away capitalism she's WRONG to think that working hard at your business and making a buck or 100,000 is irredeemable action.

Jesus....tone it down AOC..... eh?

[Meowmee]

123. I had not heard this but somehow I am not surprised😹

She and others are becoming lightening rods to help dump and gop win 2020. How dumb can u be?

[stopbush]

127. We all complain about Ds wasting their time acting like R-lite centrists

and then we get our panties in a wad when an articulate progressive D stakes out a far-left position.

Ever heard of leaving room for negotiation?

AOC is a lot smarter than she is being given credit for being.

[dlk]

130. AOC May Not Understand that Every Country in the World is a Mixture of Capitalism and Socialism

Every single country. However, capitalism without regulation is a harsh and punitive system. What is needed is common sense regulation to temper it. What appears to be AOC’s all or nothing thinking is a sign of her inexperience and immaturity as a politician, and too often, she lets her passion get out in front of her words. She’s still very new in this arena and I think more experience will help.

[Humanist_Activist]

137. Socialism isn't when governments do stuff, that's a myth. n/t

[radius777]

139. Capitalism is the engine of growth

and technological advancement. It's the reason why we can live in an advanced first world nation with all of the things we take for granted.

Of course any powerful system can have issues, why a properly regulated mixed capitalist system is best, one that exists for the needs of the middle class, with a progressive tax system and safety nets.

The Malthusian argument against capitalism is mostly bunk, because capitalism is at its core a technological system which seeks efficiency, ie to do more w/less... why a car today uses far less gas than just 40 years ago.. why computers are tiny when they used to take up an entire room and use tons of electric... why the internet has replaced entire industries and virtualized our experience so we don't require physical locations (like stores) or items (like paper) all of which save the enviroment enormously.

The existence of rich people per se doesn't bug me, status hierarchies exist in all areas of life.

Bryce Harper or Manny Machado getting obscene amounts of money to hit a baseball is unfair, but it's also "unfair" that they're better looking and more muscular than I'll ever be - that's life.

All people can hope for is a fair shake and to have a decent middle class life.

[Humanist_Activist]

146. That seems not very accurate...

First, the argument that Capitalism is an engine for technological advancement seems rather generous. Imagine if Jonas Salk patented the Polio vaccine, as a capitalist would, or Berners-Lee patented the World Wide Web. Do you think we would be talking as we are right now?

What advancements do take place that benefit the majority of people are usually through public investment, and then we allow private interests to close those off for their profit. Capitalism represents a huge misallocation of resources from the many to the few in the form of profits, with any public benefit being ancillary at best, and delayed as well. Not to mention the costs are then externalized by capitalists to the public at large so they never have to pay for the true costs of their actions, but rather everyone has to instead.

[OilemFirchen]

149. Your argument can be turned right on its head.

Were it not for private industries, much of government innovation would be non-existent. In fact, without a profit incentive, much of technology itself would be stymied.

It's the beauty of a hybrid economy and to argue otherwise ought to be embarrassing.

[Humanist_Activist]

187. Where is your evidence for your assertions?

Most of the significant medical advances weren't motivated by profit, if they were, we would probably still have smallpox outbreaks today. In addition, the most far reaching technological innovations were primarily funded and innovated by people without a profit motive, from email, to the TCP/IP protocol, the Internet itself, and, as I said, the World Wide Web. If any of these were patented or closed off for profit driven reasons, we wouldn't have the technological innovation we have today, the Internet may still exist, but be much smaller or used in different manner.

And the latest in consumer electronics benefit from this largely publicly funded foundation, this includes nearly all the underlying technologies behind the latest smartphones and other tech. What is "innovated" by for-profit corporations is usually the application of said tech.

[OilemFirchen]

195. Too easy.

The transistor.

Shall I go on?

[radius777]

155. Raw capitalism does what you say but mixed capitalism

that is properly regulated mostly solves the problem.

It's a balance of the public investment and private enterprise, with a culture that values both dignity and success, that leads to healthy and advanced societies.

While capitalism does externalize costs, it also externalizes many benefits that we mostly take for granted.

The answer to bad capitalism isn't socialism but good capitalism, imo.

Note that I'm not disregarding the points you and others raise, which are important.

FDR believed in capitalism while also believing in saving capitalism from itself, and that I think is what most Democrats past and present believe, whether they are more centrist or progressive.

[Maxheader]

144. Can't legislate greed...irresponsibility..

[ashling]

156. She also said

“When someone’s talking about our core, it’s like, ‘Oh, this is radical,'" she said. "But this isn’t radical, this is what we’ve always been. It’s just that now, we've strayed so far away from what has really made us powerful, and just, and good, and equitable and productive."

I agree 100%

https://www.cnn.com/business/live-news/sxsw-2019/h_b68c13627cec8c8a6c2b2b66f89edaf8?utm_content=2019-03-10T01%3A43%3A01&utm_term=link&utm_medium=social&utm_source=fbCNNp&fbclid=IwAR1MQgAlHYDer0Bmrlsv5Txdtb-PN_PYkqsEaL_GkRv3tKCYmtqLO5q_1I0&fbclid=IwAR32Y55bnJE7IWVudndWq4Wp6L1UNOt0qDnklUaMI8_5JV5YgQTT_nMBfm4

[Mr Tibbs]

157. As it is now practiced, capitalism is a cancer

Heavily Regulated Capitalism, different story.

[thewhollytoast]

161. Some folks just won't get it until Battery Park is under water.

Easter Island used to have trees on it. Yeah Capitalism!

Toast

[TwilightZone]

181. What did capitalism have to do with the trees on Easter Island?

Do you know why they're gone?

800 years ago, a small group of Polynesians arrived. Enter slash-and-burn agriculture and a multiplying population. Boom, no trees. They were almost entirely gone by the time Captain Cook got there in 1774.

Easter Island is a tale about resource management, not capitalism.

[thewhollytoast]

182. You are so right.

What the fuck was I thinking? I should just take my management degree and shove it up my ass. I was just trying to point out how destructive and shortsighted capitalism is, but I now see that I was wrong. Capitalism unbridled is super tasty, just like unicorn poop. I am so ashamed.

Toast

[Cuthbert Allgood]

165. Your concern is noted.

She is a strong liberal voice. Her constituents seem to love her. She says things others have been afraid to say. I like that in her.

Do you think our capitalism system has been doing a bang up job for anyone but the wealthy? I don't. I agree with her. We need more socialism in this country, not less.

[ehrnst]

192. ....

A false dilemma is a type of informal fallacy in which something is falsely claimed to be an "either/or" situation, when in fact there is at least one additional option.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma

See also:

[HopeAgain]

167. What did she say wrong?

[Puzzledtraveller]

170. AOC is going to be a liability, period.

[harumph]

179. She's wrong about the irredeemable in theory - but it might be

effectively irredeemable if we don't get out the vote. Don't get me wrong I very much would
prefer regulated capitalism over another system. That said, if it's just going to be a race to
the bottom - with the rich taking an ever more increasing share - then we need to fundamentally
rethink the entire system. My grandchildren aren't going to go without medical care so
a goddamn trust fund baby can party. You can take that to the bank.

[walkingman]

180. AOC is simply a Representative of NY's 14 district - there a lot of Congress people that have

different views but the real issue is defeating the worst and nastiest President in America history. Why make such a big deal of everything you hear out of AOC. She kicks the GOP in the gut at every chance and is not running for President.

FOCUS!!!FOCUS!!!FOCUS!!!

[QC]

190. Plus she won't stay off my grass!!!

[KG]

193. !

[progressoid]

197. !!!

[Dyedinthewoolliberal]

196. There is nothing in the Constitution

saying that capitalism is the national way of doing business, preferred economic system or whatever. Please let's not relegate it (capitalism) to the status of sacredness. There are a lot worse things she could say.

[rgbecker]

200. You should take a moment to get up to speed on "Capitalism."

Maybe you're interested in supporting "Free Enterprise"?

If the capitalists control the means of production, who are they and how did they get all that Capital?

Check out this post.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1017534878

Might be the most important 14 minutes you spend tonight.

[gtar100]

201. Blasphemy!

How dare she say that about our beloved capitalism. Burn her! Burn the witch!!



The Hill has *yet again* taken a snippet of a conversation and blown it out of proportion. Way to miss the point of what was being talked about! Journalism my ass.