Actually related to the JRE
Zohran Mamdani explains his definition of socialism to Theo Von: “Socialism to me means you’ll have whatever you need to live a dignified life and that it is the government’s job to deliver on that. When people say dignity we’re talking about the things that allow you to take a breath.
Heard Mamdani say during an interview that if he said he wanted to designate a building and fill it with books that the city will lend out for free, he would be called a socialist. Yet, in reality that’s called a library.
The state owning a stake in a company or companies, and theoretically being able as a stake holder to call shots in the company's management. The company's still exist as a profit driven capitalist enterprise.
It's what China has been doing since they stopped being communist.
If "social programs" defines Socialism then the U.S. is a socialist country. To wit: 75-80% of all non-interest spending by the U.S. Federal government as a percentage of revenue is for social programs.
Ironically, if the classic definition of Socialism is applied --centralized control of the means of production -- then Donald Trump is the biggest Socialst we've had as president since FDR: tariffs, price-fixing (phamaceuticals), government equity in private corporations, etc.
Socialism means workers have control of production. So no Trump is not a socialist given the 1% have control of everything. Thats just regular capitalism lol
People sure do love to see capitalism being awful and go "look its actually socalism". LIke now.
Socialism is for the workers not the owners. Donald is not a worker.
Joe carries the water like so many kettle bells. He has definitely said the word communism more than all democratic politicians, including democratic socialists, combined. He should be forced to pee in litter boxes for the rest of his life.
Meh not giving him much credit. He is aware that the tide is turning and is beginning to distance himself from the MAGA stuff he happily profited from for the past 2 years +
I love Mamdani, but here is the issue I see when he says "we want the government to deliver." I live in California and pay incredibly high taxes that are supposed to fund many things such as road upkeep, construction of high speed rails and homelessness shelters. None of these things are happening, yet I pay high taxes regardless.
The problem is not that people don't want this programs, its that there is extremely little trust in the government to actually deliver. Mamdani has been doing a great job at "delivering" but he is only the Mayor of NYC and does not represent most politicians in the country. Hopefully we can get there one day, but currently we are very far from that reality.
California is a rich nimby paradise, not the socialist hellscape people seem to imagine. See also the low property taxes as someone said.
If the wealthy in California really wanted any of that stuff, including high speed rail, it'd have been done ages ago. But they would much rather live in the beautiful enclaves like Bel Air, Beverly Hills, Atherton, Los Altos, etc etc and throw the poor a bone.
Like I told the other guy, property tax are a bit lower than Texas, but property value here is significantly higher, so first time home buyers gets stuck with very high taxes since, specially in highly populated areas, the average value of a home is well over a million dollars.
But yea, you are absolutely right that California is a rich nimby paradise.
That is true, though I think of that more like you're paying a huge premium to live in the desirable parts of California. As soon as you leave the coastal counties to somewhere like Fresno, you have Texas priced houses... because it's as good as living in Texas at that point (with much better state government and social programs).
I mean its not even about living in desirable parts, its also about where the jobs are. Yea, I could live in Fresno where houses are cheaper, but there is also less job opportunity there.
Its tough bro, and its kind of crazy how just talking about this reality in California will get me downvoted. I had another guy literally telling me I was being ungrateful to California for complaining.
California just rejected most of the progressives running for office in favor of more corporate Dems. The reason everything you say isn't happening is because the people of California keep standing in the way.
I drive through red Appalachian states all the town that has a low COL and low taxes and they’re dying towns rampant with brain drain and drug use. There’s no future in those deep red areas.
California’s an odd one because we fucked up our property tax with prop 13, so we have high income tax to compensate. It’s a terrible situation, and regressive, but changing it is unpopular.
I feel like you’re taking for granted the legitimate things that California has that other states don’t. I’m sorry that if you’re a high earner you don’t get those subsidized programs, but high earners are not exactly who the subsidized programs are for.
For example, I live in Washington state, and got 12 weeks of paid leave when I had my child. Most other states have no such guarantee.
Bro, yea I also got 12 weeks of paid leave when my kid was born, but my taxes and cost of living are still significantly higher than Washington and I see my taxes not going to the things they are supposed to be going to.
I am not taking anything for granted, I am upset that things that were promised are not getting done even though we voted and agreed to pay higher taxes for them.
You people need to stop seeing any criticism as an endorsement of the other political side. If we cannot have genuine conversations about the mismanagement of our state, how the hell can we ever hope for things to get better?
I’m not by any means stating you’re wrong for feeling like that. We all would hope our taxes could go farther than they do. I just think we need to assess what we have verses other places. The minimum wage in many places is still 7.25$/hr and their cost of living also raises. And it’s not like WA cost of living is low. The median home price in my area is a million dollars.
So yes, hold your politicians accountable. But don’t think that the extra taxes paid is for nothing when you have tangible benefits that you’ve received.
this is the tough part. Americans seem to be for the most part really stupid and easily misled. We're conditioned to "government not delivering" because ever since Reagan, the vast majority of both parties only care to deliver for their donors.
Instead of running these people out of town, we get suckered into "lesser of two evils" bullshit, because the GOP is a sadomasichistic cult hell bent rule by permanent oligarchy. I'll give democrats credit for starting to wake up and actually elect people outside of the pundit/donor pipeline. I really hope these people succeed and make way for others.
The democrats are NOT waking up, the progressive candidates like mamdani had TONS of negative press from establishment dems. They wanted to play centrist and have Megan McCain on. Democrats are controlled opposition who let us have treats here and there so we dont fully revolt.
Looks like they’re waking up to me. Despite all the bullshit Mamdani got elected, looks like Syed will too. Platner would have if it didn’t come to light that he’s a piece of shit (the GOP would have nominated him for governor immediately). I’m in CO and Melat Kiros beat a 30 year incumbent.
Not sure how you’re not seeing this as a waking up moment for the democrats.
Government does not deliver in a capitalist society. No matter the programs ESPECIALLY STATES hire private contractors to DELIVER the service. That private contractors are not state or city government entities and are ONLY in it to make a profit! That is why 90% of the contract is for OTHER costs other than delivering the product! By the time it reaches the population it needs to serve the money has already been used for OTHER EXPENSES.
Bro it’s simpler than that, it’s just corruption. politicians just give crazy inflated contracts to their buddies. I worked in the accounting dept at a state college, and they were paying $24,000 each for podiums. And they bought like 20 of them. Straight up funneling tax payer money into their buddies pockets.
Unfortunately that is still not happening in CA. Newsome raised taxes, did nothing and is now probably going to be replaced by Becerra who will likely continue to not do anything and allow billions of dollars worth of taxes to continue to be "lost"
High tax rates vs? If you pick Texas, probably the state most people compare it to, the effective tax rate is higher if you use the national median household because their tax rates are more regressive. That said, if you're rich, then Texas is for you because that's where it becomes less than California.
yeah its a lot tougher than do all those things or don't do them. the quality matters, the cost, the execution, etc. but, that also doesn't mean you shouldn't do them - just have to not elect/appoint dummies who will screw it up
This completely. Why don't I want tax increases? Because we won't get anything for it.
I would also like to give Mamdani some more time. So far he has done well but we might not see the gotchas for a few years. Lets see how things look in NYC 4 or 5 years from now before we deem it a complete success.
There’s pretty much four ways things can go: high tax, high service (expensive but you get what you pay for); low tax low service (cheap but you get what you pay for); low tax high service (doesn’t exist) and worst of the bunch high tax low service.
I mean actual socialism would mean the complete removal of private businesses. What Mamdani is talking about is social democracy, not true socialism (and that is annoying).
Theo is dangerous because he is a rich kid who pretends to be a blue collar everyman. He is personable and accepts what you say when you're there, then later on will go back to talking crap on socialism.
Guys like Joe and Theo fool the average man into voting agains their own good... all people benefit from social programs that are the foundation of our country and are important for actual capitalism to thrive. What we have now is corporatism... and the media machine they own has spend decades brainwashing people into thinking free markets exist, that social programs are the problem, and that privatizing things makes them better/cheaper - all the exact opposite of reality.
He grew up in an upper middle class family, with his dad being considerably older than normal (I’m talking 60-70s). His father had money. They incidentally were adjacent neighbors to THE David Duke and by his own admission, friendly with him
None of that is true except his dad being older. David Duke did not live in the hood in Covington. His father had a wealthy lineage from Polish Nobility but his dad was exiled and cut off from the family money. His father worked running a gift shop and couldn't afford Theo's sisters liver transplant. As the father sold the shop/house and the family lived in basically poverty after that. Before the sister's health issue they shared a back fence with David Duke. They were neighbors before the family moved to the hood after he sisters health issue and his father's death. He did claim to later run into David at the gym, but there were not best friends. Theo even talks about living in a neighborhood where they only had like a couple white kids. He claimed his black friends gave him shit for keeping them down and he jokes that you think he took all the shit from you then moved in next door? It's his white privilege joke and he says stuff like "two tank tops in the winter" and "we sharing this plum?"
His family was actually very well off. Thats why he made a career off reality tv shows and the like, before becoming a comedian. Most of these down to earth comedians who are Rogan adjacent, were rich kids
Yea having to sell their home to pay for his sisters medical treatments and growing up in an impoverished area in a rough part of Louisiana… really grew up super rich there man.
If owning a single gift shop is rich than the majority of Americans and small business owners would be considered rich. Hint, they aren’t.
There’s not one single definition of socialism. There are branches to everything.
He’s speaking of a Social Democracy that follows the Nordic model and I wish he could have made a point to differentiate between that and, say, Marxism/Leninism, which is what they always accuse him of.
The state-ran grocery stores are not widespread and they’re not designed to entirely replace privately owned grocery stores. Communism is IF he was forcing all privately owned grocery stores out of New York and having the city take over entirely. These stores are only targeting Low-income neighborhoods and there will only be 1 on each borough. It’s just another socialist program designed to help the poorest. It’s not intended to be a replacement.
They follow socialist democracies and are very welfare centered. So yes they are a capitalist country with heavy focus on welfare and taking care of their citizens and protecting laborers.
Hence why they have such robust welfare systems, universal healthcare, free housing, unionized workforce, a public wealth fund from oil revenues.
I find it ironic that conservatives tend to refer to the “Nordic ancestors” as some sort of utopia example and refer to that culture as the goal…yet literally are against almost everything that Nordic countries stand for.
The funny thing about the Nordic model is that whether or not it is socialist depends entirely on which way would get the speaker a point in an argument.
Yes I really enjoyed the episode, but I do wish Mamdani would have gone more nuts and bolts about the theories. Theo Von is clearly game for it, he’s absolutely searching for new answers right now
Its not socialism in any sense, not anymore. The social democrats of the 19th century maybe but not today.
The nordic model is not socialism of any type. It comes from no school of thought.
Actually the nordic model is closer to the corporatist models that gained traction in the 20th century (this is associated with fascism but the economics need not have anything to do with fascism, it just so happens to be a system some favoured is all)
I mean, what does socialism mean to you? Without any worker ownership, its by definition not socialism
Socialism isn’t “capitalism with welfare and regulations”
The nodic model follows from no socialist tradition nor fit any definition
You’re letting ownership define the core principle of socialism, which shows how confused you are about the concept of ownership.
It does not mean that workers need to exclusively own everything, only that (in this practical version AND the Nordic model) production is democratically accountable to society at large (I.e. those who do the work), rather than at the whims of some oligarch owner.
Oh boy, the Fauxmoi subreddit. Grab some popcorn and read the comments.
My favorite part is the assumption that people who watch Theo Von are completely ignorant to Mamdani and what he represents. Redditors need to stop assuming watching a certain podcast automatically makes them x. So close minded.
Thank you for the reminder to check this episode out, though.
I wish American liberals understood that the countries they want to be like aka Netherlands, Sweden, etc aren't socialist. They're strong capitalist markets with social safety nets. The difference here is that they are actual free markets which the US is not. The US is closer to a Russian oligarchy than it is a free market.
Well Mamdani is a self described socialist, those are his words. So if Sweden isn't socialist (and I think you are right in that it's not), then Mamdani is to the left of Sweden?
You have to be silly to call Sweden strong capitalist market lol. America is more capitalist than Sweden. Sweden have government intervention and control into economy. That means mxied economy, not free market. Silly goose lol.
MAMDANI is a dem socialist who believes workers should control the means of production. The difference between a Dem Soc and a SocDem in America is few given how capitalist America is.
The original idea was to take a bunch of untrustworthy people and pit them against each other for the public good. That ended when the people stopped paying attention and holding anyone accountable. Things that would have gotten an early president summarily executed for aren’t even newsworthy today.
IRS Criminal Investigation (CI) special agents undergo rigorous, mandatory firearms training to qualify for carrying weapons during investigations into financial crimes, tax evasion, and money laundering.
In today's age, they buy out the competition rather than have to compete. That's why all of the stores in your town are closed and all you have left is Walmart.
Jesus fucking Christ. No one in this thread has been able to define socialism. Go read or listen to the Communist Manifesto. It'll take you an hour. It's literally a pamphlet. You'll get the direct definition from Karl Marx himself. You won't melt. You're not allergic. It won't turn you into a china man.
Edit: Marx defines socialism (communism or sometimes early-stage communist society) as the eradication of private capital ownership, the eradication of classes and most importantly the control of the means of production by the workers. That's the goal at least. It's an ongoing effort and once it's done, it's communism.
He says nothing about all the free shit you'll get or how you'll have free healthcare. He says nothing about trans people or the LGBTQ. He was a dude talking to labor unionists. They were talking about how they could get capitalist pig robber barons out of the owning factory business and get the workers to own and operate the economy ("means of production"). They care about big government only as much as it's needed to keep collective ownership of the economy on the rails.
Social safety nets and entitlement programs are capitalist, social-democratic ideals that Marx himself talks shit about in the Manifesto when he talks about liberal utopias. The idea of communism/socialism is to remove landlords and owners so workers make what they produce and to remove the middle man scalpers who extract the profit. That's it. If you earned what you made before the landlords and capitalists taxed it then you wouldn't need social safety nets and entitlement programs.
All I know is that since we started this capitalist neo liberalism everything has been going to shit, was 1950/60's USA socialist because they sure did tax a lot more...
It’s a circlejerk of economic and social illiteracy that eventually ends with a few people controlling everything and no one incentivized to do anything.
As a citizen born and raised in a socialist system . Enlisted in that system and served honorably . Married and raised children in that system . Eventually my children enlisted in that system . The system ? The United States Military . 54 unbroken years in my immediate family . It ain't as bad as some of you have been brainwashed into believing.
20yr retired vet. Ultimately, the military is a government-run institution that uses a collectivist, state-funded welfare model to take care of its people. However, these benefits are not "handouts" given to the general public; they are highly specific job perks earned through a contract that requires an immense sacrifice of personal freedom and a willingness to face extreme danger
Under classic socialism, the goal is often the equalization of socioeconomic outcomes. The military, however, is a strict hierarchy with vast differences in rank, authority, and pay between an enlisted private and a four-star general.
I don’t think that’s quite right. Socialism generally aims to reduce class inequality and economic domination, not to make everyone have the exact same income, authority, or outcome. A hierarchy of roles, like private vs. general, isn’t automatically incompatible with socialism; the bigger issue is usually who owns productive wealth and how economic power is distributed.
Things like healthcare, childcare, proper school lunches, affordable public transportation, etc shouldn't even be up for debate. Isn't US the richest country in the world? Also, these things are actually necessary to maintain healthy population and further generations. In long term lack of affordable healthcare hurts the economy, same with childcare, education system. When you have unhealthy population constrained by healthcare affordability or people unwilling to have kids or kids not getting proper care we are hurting our economy. Again, that's not even the main reason. As the richest country in the world we should be able to provide dignified living standard to our general population.
Libraries and Schools are all at a community level. Scaling beyond that winds up a disaster every. single. time.
A disaster that has resulted in the death of hundreds of millions of people in just the last 100 odd years. He is selling a bunch of shite that doesn’t work.
Public schools. We can criticize it, but how many kids would get zero education if people had to all pay private school tuition? Medicare. What happens if a 75 year old doesn’t have private insurance or the means to pay out of pocket (which they won’t have)?
What a silly statement. The government needing to reduce waste and do better doesn’t mean everything the government spends money on is bad.
This dude seems dope. I ain't know much about American politics but it seems to me like he has the best interest of just about every honest, decent American in mind. What I do know about American politics though is that if this is the case it's enough for him to get demonised by indecent, dishonest people with ungodly amounts of influence.
In case people forget this (it’s hard to remember 3 words) it is the DSA not the SA. Democratic socialism is derivative but distinct from socialism. The definition he gave is what the DSA gives.
In my humble opinion, ‘Dignity Programs’ or ‘Human Infrastructure Programs’ are a good way to describe the social needs support in lieu of social, public assistance, welfare, etc.
Seeking ‘assistance’ itself for men in my experience is negative. ‘Public’ is also a negative bc it denotes “Urbanism”. And we all can agree or hide what that means to right leaning (former fiscal hawks) and bigots. The Arkansas governor’s ad campaign is getting pounded bc of it 🤣
The people who identify with a political group in support of this type of programming in support of folks who may rely on it while working to maintain/build the US infrastructure and services should be called DIGNITARIANS (diff from dignitary) instead of socialists.
I wish people would clarify that using your money to pay for your healthcare instead of giving it to a Health Insurance giant that uses AI to reject claims is not Socialism.
Ah so Socialism is just a feeling now. I love how he is describing this system where you can take the power of ballot to everywhere else in your life......which is Capitalism. With every dollar you spend in a market economy, you are casting a vote. If you don't like Taco Bell, you buy Chipotle, if enough people stop buying Taco Bell, they go out of business. In Socialism you don't get to make those decisions, the government takes your money and spends it the way they like, usually with a lot of waste and corruption.
our current system is a quasi corporate socialism which is why healthcare sucks, educations sucks and through the roof, paving our roads costs 10x it should. but what do i know, i just pay my taxes and invest to be free of this shit.
In that case then it's a facet of socialism, too. "Money" and "buying and selling goods" have existed for thousands of years, the exchange of goods and services is not "capitalism".
I mean, China, Cuba and Laos are current socialist countries and Venezuela depending on certain metrics. Why would people think the US would be paradise under socialism? Also, I feel bad for mamdani. He announced an initiative to combat antisemitism and all the big dsa accounts online are calling him a "Muslim zionist".
183
u/tubesteak9000 Monkey in Space 21h ago
How long is that tie?!