General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSo, you hate socialism, ya say?
Link to tweet
Sergio Siano
@SergioJSiano
So, you hate socialism, ya say?
If you make $50,000/year, $36 of your taxes goes to food stamps. $4,000 goes to corporate subsidies.
If the $36 upsets you more than the $4,000, then you just hate poor people - not socialism.
4:21 PM · Feb 14, 2020·Twitter for iPhone
TEB
(12,841 posts)YOHABLO
(7,358 posts)mitch96
(13,890 posts)pnwmom
(108,975 posts)is the thought that Trump could win because some of us are determined to brand our party with the word "socialist."
FDR was a wealthy capitalist, not a socialist. And the Nordic countries are well-regulated capitalist countries, not socialist.
OnDoutside
(19,953 posts)enforced regulation.
Kurt V.
(5,624 posts)pnwmom
(108,975 posts)And it hasn't changed in the general population -- just the segment of voters who have swallowed Bernie's new definition.
It also hasn't changed in the party of the Democratic Socialists of America.
And the part of the population most likely to vote (older voters) will always associate "socialist" with the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, and the Nazi Party (National Socialist German Workers Party.) Why alienate millions of older voters for no good reason?
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/socialism
Definition of socialism
1: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
2a: a system of society or group living in which there is no private property
b: a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
3: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done
https://www.dsausa.org/about-us/what-is-democratic-socialism/
Today, corporate executives who answer only to themselves and a few wealthy stockholders make basic economic decisions affecting millions of people. Resources are used to make money for capitalists rather than to meet human needs. We believe that the workers and consumers who are affected by economic institutions should own and control them.
Social ownership could take many forms, such as worker-owned cooperatives or publicly owned enterprises managed by workers and consumer representatives. Democratic socialists favor as much decentralization as possible. While the large concentrations of capital in industries such as energy and steel may necessitate some form of state ownership, many consumer-goods industries might be best run as cooperatives.
Kurt V.
(5,624 posts)Negative or neutral opinion. if you're alienated by it, so be it but its not on purpose. Its simply an attempt to show how absurd some aspects of the word is. and lastly. ..
https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2019/04/behind-2018-united-states-midterm-election-turnout.html
pnwmom
(108,975 posts)that isn't even accurate.
Bernie has made it clear that he admires the well-regulated capitalism practiced in the Nordic countries. They aren't socialists, they're Social Democrats and capitalists.
I'm not sure what point you were getting at with your link to turnout information. Few the new D members of the House identified as socialists.
ck4829
(35,045 posts)These same people who made "socialist" a controversial label have also made or are also trying to make "empathy", "liberal", "feminist", "multicultural", "pro-choice", "anti-fascist", "anti-racist", etc. controversial labels as well.
Should we run away from them too?
If "Doesn't want to throw virgins into volcanoes to appease the Dow and Blessed Job Creators" became controversial five years from now, should we run away from that?
It's time to start standing up and resisting the right-wing, it's time to declare that they are not gods who define our words for us.
pnwmom
(108,975 posts)are those of the Nordic countries, and they're examples of well-regulated capitalism, not socialism. As he has said, he's an FDR Democrat. FDR was a capitalist, not a socialist.
It's dumb for any Democrat to claim the label that was associated with the Soviet Union, the Nazis, Cuba, North Korea, etc., and which carries a great deal of negative baggage for the majority of Americans.
Hav
(5,969 posts)It feels as if the label Democratic socialism was only made up in a poor attempt to cover for the fact that Bernie described himself as a socialist. They know the US will not vote for a socialist so they believed they could soften it by putting Democratic in front of it and falsely attributing the same label to other countries that aren't even close to socialism. It's amazing his base just buys whatever is sold even if it makes no sense.
And I also don't agree with the weak talking point that the Repubs always ran portraying Dems as socialists. Surely wasn't the case with Hillary. But in Bernie's case they wouldn't even need to lie. They have a video of him and they don't have anything close to that for the other candidates.
Kurt V.
(5,624 posts)Forever. why not soften the blow? the link shows young voter turnout has skyrocketed.
pnwmom
(108,975 posts)of the R's slur.
And there are many reasons for the increase in young voter turnout -- for example, concerns about climate change.
Kurt V.
(5,624 posts)ck4829
(35,045 posts)We can be manipulated by those that already do this...
As usual, though, we are supposed to kowtow to the right-wing's definitions of socialism... things like you know, not being a sociopath when it comes to employment, buying things before a blizzard, not wanting to get shot in school, and more.
Apparently, we're supposed to be rolled over and let them do the defining for us.
pnwmom
(108,975 posts)A small fraction of the country might think they have redefined it, but even the party uses the conventional definition.
Social ownership could take many forms, such as worker-owned cooperatives or publicly owned enterprises managed by workers and consumer representatives. Democratic socialists favor as much decentralization as possible. While the large concentrations of capital in industries such as energy and steel may necessitate some form of state ownership, many consumer-goods industries might be best run as cooperatives.
https://www.dsausa.org/about-us/what-is-democratic-socialism/#govt
Progressive dog
(6,900 posts)and the real socialist countries were places like the USSR and China when it was starving. N Korea is still fully socialist and Cuba mostly socialist. Venezuela is giving socialism a try.
We shouldn't imitate those nations.
mitch96
(13,890 posts)They are some of the most "happiest" countries in the world also.. I think Forbes or USA today did a piece on countries that are pleasant to live in. Norway/Sweden/Denmark/Holland were right up there.. Taxed out the ass and "no worries mate"... Health care? check, Maternity leave? check, Higher education? check any more???
m
Warpy
(111,243 posts)Last edited Sat Feb 15, 2020, 02:02 PM - Edit history (1)
and if somebody has a run of bad luck, they can dip into that pot for whatever they need to get them back on their feet.
To the cries "of that's socialism! We hate socialism! We want liberty, not socialism!" I reply that what I just described is the whole insurance industry--car, life, homeowners, health.
Most of them just start mumbling bumper sticker phrases out of context and stomp off. I have to hope at least a few of them start thinking about how the world really works and why they fall a little farther behind every year, no matter how much work they're putting in.
Pointing out who's getting the lion's share of the taxpayer pot is good, too.
DFW
(54,341 posts)I'd start saying how awful I thought it was that some jerk son of a former leader liked playing at being a soldier hero when he was nothing of the sort, and if he had not been the son of a former leader, he would have been sweeping streets or doing some simple clerical work in tune with his minimal abilities.
Oh, how the Texas Republicans would light into me for insulting their great president, George W. Bush!! That is, until I explained that I was referring to communist North Korea and Kim Jong Il--but if they saw that many parallels, maybe there was something to it.
Similar angry mumbling and walking away, needless to say!
Joinfortmill
(14,414 posts)We can't seem to get through to people the amount of corporate socialism in this country. The comeback is "They're job creators." Well, yes, they are. And people fill those jobs, and build products, and sell products, and do the payroll, and sweep the floors. And make their phucking businesses possible. And that doesn't include all the municipal benefits they receive whether they pay taxes or not, like roads, police, fire-fighters, and utilities. I could go on, but you get the picture. It's just a scam not to pay taxes. If "corporations are people" they need to pay taxes like people.
Fresh_Start
(11,330 posts)and the things I don't want to pay taxes for...
you don't want to support birth control and abortion, great...don't
but I don't want to support charter schools, expansion of the military, and trump golf trips just for starters
we all have this intimate discussion with the government every year...
we should be able to give not just input but some level of budgetary control (and yes, I realize that it would only be a symbolic part of the federal budget...but it would be better than nothing)
Progressive dog
(6,900 posts)Socialism
moondust
(19,972 posts)seem to use a simple criterion for differentiating "socialism" from "capitalism":
Is it something the federal/state/local government provides using tax revenues or something a private party provides for a profit?
Thus some people refer to fire and police departments, streets and highways, and other public services as "socialist" even if they don't technically meet that dictionary definition.
Progressive dog
(6,900 posts)then someone running for government office and declaring themself to be a socialist would be pretty stupid. The government uses tax revenues to do everything.
That definition certainly does not meet the dictionary definition, it bears no resemblance to it. Communication requires agreed upon definitions for words, which is why we have dictionaries.
Nature Man
(869 posts)as long white people are the only ones getting them.
Then they gloss over that white people get them in the first place.
moondust
(19,972 posts)"Democratic Socialist"? Did he not know how he and his supporters would be stigmatized by that label alone regardless of what it meant to them or anybody else? Did he adopt it just to be "different" or a "new breed" of politician or something?
brush
(53,764 posts)He regularly appeared on "The Thom Hartman" radio show for years and proudly called himself a "socialist" without the word "democratic" in front of it.
In more recent years he's added the word "democratic" in front of it to soften the negativity of it as he became interested in using the Democratic Party to run for president. But video and ample other evidence is out there of him touting socialism. He should've said years ago he was a "social democrat" if that is really what he meant but he's stuck with the baggage-laden, self-appellation of "democratic socialist" when the social democracies of Europe are actually capitalist countries, not democratic socialist countries.
Labeling himself a democratic socialist was a mistake not just because there actually is a Democratic Socialist Party in the US which actively advocates actual socialism, historically there's never been a sustained, successful deployment of socialism in any country. And as I said, the social democracies of Europe are actually highly regulated and highly taxed capitalist countries with strong, robust safety nets provided for by the high taxessingle payer healthcare, free college, etc..
I didn't know about his past identification as a "socialist." I'm surprised he didn't know how toxic that label alone could prove to be outside the state of Vermont where there are ideologues and professional propagandists with decades of experience in using the term as a scarecrow.
Thanks.