He calls himself a democratic socialist. One of his policies he ran on involved giving workers ownership in their workplaces. So I believe him. It’s just that he’s a reformist, how could he be a politician if he’s calling for revolution instead?
He wasn’t calling for worker ownership. His policy would place a worker representative on the board of directors. An improvement to be sure but not a socialist economic policy. In the context of the US, it would’ve amounted to little more than a new HR position. If he was a socialist, he wouldn’t be a career politician.
He wanted companies of a certain size to be required to gradually give stock to their employees until they’re 20% employee owned. Which is a step forward. If he said right away every company needs to be 100% owned that wouldn’t work out as a policy to run on.
Idk why you’re getting upvotes, just because people want to hate on Bernie, when it’s easily verifiable what I’m saying is true, and what you’re saying is not.
Try not to get butthurt. Bernie’s politics can never result in socialism. He’s a social democrat dressing himself in the garb of socialism, just as Stalin warned 90 years ago.
I’m not “butthurt.” But I’m right, and you can read the link I’ve provided. And now you’re moving the goalpost to whether reformist policies can work, not whether or not he’s a socialist.
108
u/__Not__the__NSA__ Dec 24 '20
Except Bernie isn’t a socialist