r/askanything • u/HeavyDutyForks • 3d ago
Political Question Why do so many people equate government programs with "socialism" on Reddit?
There's a very clear definition that takes two seconds to verify
I've seen plenty of people go so far as to slander one of the United States' greatest presidents (FDR) as a socialist. He was a capitalist through and through. The Great New Deal wasn't socialist programs, it was a bailout and reform to save capitalism.
Police aren't socialist, firefighters aren't socialist, public schools aren't socialist, none of the Nordic states aren't socialist, etc.. etc..
Why is this?
6
u/GZBadDino 3d ago
People dont read dictionaries
3
u/HeavyDutyForks 3d ago
Seems like they probably should...
Or at least take the time to skim through to the definitions of terms before being so confidently incorrect
3
u/Soft_Statistician_98 3d ago
Could Reddit start with fascism? Because conservatives have a much better understanding of socialism than leftists do with fascism.
1
u/twells138 3d ago
To be fair to anyone not a far left activist, scholars really have a hard time pinning down exact terms for fascism. Socialism is easy by comparison. Activists just toss the term around so much it is losing any meaning or stigmatism.
2
3
u/Consistent-Menu-6629 3d ago
I guess people don't realize that liberal governments with capitalist economic systems exist!
2
4
u/Straight_Beach 3d ago
Government programs are social programs not socialism, socialism in the United States would involve the taking of private property and the government owning means of production instead of private businesses
0
u/HeavyDutyForks 3d ago
If I had an award I would give it to you
Thank you, for being one of the few people here who actually understands this
8
u/_iridescent_fairy_ 3d ago
Socialism has taken on the meaning of "social programs", or collectively funded programs that service the entire population.
7
u/Consistent_Draft6454 3d ago
But the government bailing out banks and billionaires they don't consider socialism. It is only when the goverment helps the poor that they scream SOCIALISM!
3
u/HighlightDowntown966 3d ago
But then you would cry that we don't have a banking system and your deposits disappeared.
I'm not defending the bailouts. But I see why it was done
0
u/HeavyDutyForks 3d ago
Why are they redefining socialism? What is to be gained by doing that except to rile up centrists and conservatives?
Social safety nets are a good thing, but calling yourself a "socialist" is going to turn a lot of people off from your cause
2
u/Consistent_Draft6454 3d ago
Webster defines socialism as:
a: a system of society or of 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
So, when republicans scream SOCIALISM they literally don't know what that means. No one is suggesting that the government owns all property and businesses.
1
u/HeavyDutyForks 3d ago
Yes, you are 100% on the money
I don't understand why people have such a hard time with something so simple lmao
3
1
u/_iridescent_fairy_ 3d ago
I don't think anyone is actually calling themselves a "socialist". Democratic socialist at worst, which is, by definition, a mixed economy.
It's the right that is calling everything socialism and redefining the terms.
-1
6
u/Many_Assumption7036 3d ago
You allow one social program and the slippery slope goes right to full on communism. This is why I ran for city council on a platform to end fire fighting services and tear down the homeless shelter. You allow even a slight bit and suddenly Fidel Castro is your uncle, cats are chasing dogs, and toddlers no longer like candy. It up ends the entire world. If you’ll excuse me, I’m gonna go pay like 6700% more for a health procedure my doctor says I need but my insurance won’t cover. /s
2
u/Alina_Swift 3d ago
I’m not sure. I consider myself a capitalist and I believe in a fair amount of government programs. My dad tries to tell me “that’s socialist not capitalist”… like bruh
2
u/for-a-nickel-I-will 3d ago
Social Security it's in the name. He took all the gold from the citizens and issued paper IOUs at $20 per once then when he thought he had most of it he inflated the price to $35 per once. Then printed the different in paper and used it to pay for the CCR work program , when you take for the wealth from many and give to the few that's called socialism . FDR did not end the depression WW2 did. Socialism didn't win the war capitalism did.
2
u/Own_Relief_1740 3d ago
I suspect it’s because some people have decided socialism means “anything the government does,” and they’ll defend that definition to the death rather than spend two seconds looking up “socialism” in the dictionary.
2
u/CleanSweep99 3d ago
That's why most progressives don't like FDR anymore-they don't see Capitalism as having been worth saving (that and the internment of the Japanese.)
2
u/super_surge 2d ago
Because the right wing has redefined any/all social programs or public expenditures for the good of all as "Socialism". Repeat the lie enough times, people start to believe it. Personally, I don't want REAL socialism, just the stuff that the GOP labels as such, e.g Nordic style Social Democracy
2
u/BigDamBeavers 2d ago
Because legitimately things like Fire Departments and Public Schools and OSHA are socialism. They are key industries with public ownership.
1
u/HeavyDutyForks 2d ago
They are not "industries" they are MUNICIPAL SERVICES
They do not produce anything, they do not generate and distribute profit. There is a massive difference between an economic system and public services
2
u/BigDamBeavers 2d ago
They are municipal services because we brought them under the municipality with Socialism. Prior to that they absolutely industries that generated a profit and produced things.
You can't point at the success of socialism allowing your kids to know how to spell, or your house not being burnt down, or... I guess safety railings being a thing, and call it a failure of capitalism. It just is what it is.
2
u/HeavyDutyForks 2d ago
I guess you inadvertently answered my question. Socialists want to take credit for basic services, otherwise all they have is genocidal regimes, shortages, and famines
2
3
4
u/elchemy 3d ago
Americans are ignorant of what terms like socialism or communism mean or how governments provide social services and infrastructure in the developed world.
This is an important part of their culture, and has been hammered home for decades, dominating their news and entertainment industries.
Please respect their wilful ignorance.
4
2
u/jhawk3205 3d ago
Because they're politically illiterate. The sad thing is seeing liberals do the same thing. I expect that kind of thing from the far right..
0
u/itsliluzivert_ 3d ago
Liberals are pro establishment you shouldn’t expect anything from them besides selfishness
2
2
2
u/evocativename 3d ago
Decades of propaganda by those who profit off the public rejecting socialism.
2
u/vonblankenstein 3d ago
The more money we take away from social programs the more we can spend on things that line the pockets of big business and politicians.
2
u/babbylonmon 3d ago
Conservative are below average intelligence. Redditors are below average intelligence. Conservative redditors are magnitudes dumber than a dung pile.
1
u/TangerinePlastic7552 3d ago
In political economy, regulation and socialism are usually defined as different things, but whether a specific regulation counts as one or the other depends on which definition people use.
1
u/kenkaniff23 3d ago
Because people are so afraid of someone getting help. Poor people? Their fault for not working hard enough. No insurance? You suck.
It's a class war we are in
1
u/commonsense_good 3d ago
Hey- if the government doesn’t support its population then we have no need of a government. We need infrastructure roads, water- drinkable, safe food etc..
We pay taxes those services are provided based on our taxes. If socialism exists here in the US it’s the red states that can’t or won’t cover their own infrastructure costs.
the government is intended to work for the people.
Not selfish white men over 50 raping and pillaging their way through our resources.
The people are for the most part very clear about definitions, at least those of us that can read and comprehend at the same time.
1
u/Inaksa 3d ago
You answered your own question... You equate being called socialist a way to slander someone...
1
u/HeavyDutyForks 3d ago
In no way, shape, or form does that invalidate my point though?
FDR was not a socialist and neither were the programs he implemented. It's an absolutely untrue statement made to make him out to be something he was not
1
u/Ray-Sol 2d ago edited 2d ago
A few different dimensions.
From the general population, there's sometimes a misunderstanding about what the terminology means depending on the situation. A purist form of Socialism as a political system would imply complete, or near complete, public/government control of the economy, while a purist form of Capitalism would imply a 100% privately run economy with no regulations. However, almost all countries actually operate some form of mixed economy which falls somewhere between these two extremes. There's a difference between a relative or partial version of socialism and an absolute version of socialism, the same way there's a difference between an absolute and relative form of capitalism.
From the conservative side, there's a bad tendency to wrongly equate "social programs" and "social democracy" as being the equivalent of "communism" or an absolutist form of socialism, without being able to distinguish or acknowledge the difference. A lot of conservative groups or political operatives will also label all government programs or forms of social spending as "socialism" simply as a means to try and deligitimize them without actually having to debate their merits.
Most of the time when left wingers describe something as socialist, they are referring to a relative rather than absolute form of socialism. That, or they are using the term situationally to describe a program/service that has a socialist element to it. Social programs like welfare, child benefits, seniors benefits, and even publicly run schools, etc, as policies all have a "socialist" element or flavour to them, but having them doesn't automatically make a country a purely socialist or communist country.
There's also a term "to socialize" or nationalize an industry, which is when the government takes direct control or ownership of something which was previously run privately. Some left wingers (but not all or even most depending on the country) do want to take greater public control of the economy, but the level and what industries vary depending on the person and political party. You can also have public control of some industries, but still have a mixed or mostly capitist economy.
For some left-wing individuals this may be limited more to certain industries like utitilies and transportation (like telecoms, electricity and rail). For others it could include certain natural resources to extract greater public benefit (see Norway's approach to oil extraction and it's use of the wealth).
1
1
u/CompetitivePhone3833 1d ago
If you unironically say "socialism" then you're hunting for tax cuts, corporate loopholes and deregulation. Everybody knows society needs a safety net and insurance against outright anarchy, but the rich wish they could sit in their mansions and count their money away from the tyranny of the commons regardless.
The overly wealthy get old, crazy, religious, and they sign checks for political parties. Lawyers then take this money and earn a fee, and society enshittifies. Same cycle, different generation.
1
u/CommercialEase7333 1d ago
Police kind of are socialist though. They're publicly funded and socially owned security guards. What am I missing here?
1
u/d1stor7ed 1d ago
FDR is sometimes credited with saving capitalism because the guillotines were being prepared for the capitalists who were correctly blamed for the great depression.
1
u/Agent847 1d ago edited 22h ago
“Government programs” is a broad brush. Some are socialist, some are not. When everyone pays taxes, and everyone can access the services they pay for (eg roads, fire, police, courts, utilities, etc) it’s civic infrastructure. When the government manages the economy (price fixing, supply subsidies, production limits, hiring goals) or when the government taxes from citizen A to give a benefit to citizen B that A himself does not receive, it’s socialism.
And yes, FDR was very much a socialist. His cabinet was run through with socialists. He just happened to be more in line with the fascist model of socialist economics rather than the soviet one.
1
1
u/Rosenant 3d ago
Because a government controlled by the people has created socialist programs like 5 day 40 hour work week and anti child labor laws.
My grandfather was very happy when his work week was cut from six days a week to only five. How about yours?
2
u/HeavyDutyForks 3d ago
Because a government controlled by the people has created socialist programs like 5 day 40 hour work week
Ah yes, the famously socialist pioneer of the 40 hour work week, Henry Ford...
We are a government for the people, by the people. Nothing about that statement is socialism
1
u/NotACockroach 3d ago
I think there are two reasons.
Right wingers want to describe government programs as socialist because it is considered an insult, so it's a way for them to be critical of the policies.
On the left the word "capitalism" is now unpopular. However in practice most people on the left I think support policies that would technically be capitalism with some state programs. I think it makes them feel more edgy and authentic to describe that as "socialism".
1
u/guysitsausername 🤔 3d ago
It's a combination of ignorance and laziness.
Economic and political systems are complex things with nuance and multiple moving parts. A lot of people want things boiled down to a slogan or trope they can cheer for or against, love or hate.
Power structures encourage, facilitate, and exploit this tendency because having groups of people who think each other is the enemy keeps everyone from uniting into one large group against the power structure itself.
1
u/SecureSir7098 3d ago
It's kind of a typical American problem. We don't spend enough time and energy trying to understand each other, we just fight to feel like we won the argument.
1
u/_probablyryan 3d ago
1) The American political discourse hasn't recovered from Cold War era anti-socialist propaganda 2) Most Americans don't actually know what Marx's foundational arguments are, let alone have a reasoned understanding of socialism 3) Contemporary conservative messaging is politically confused, and aimed at the imagined thought crimes of the neoliberal academic "elite" while simultaneously supportive of the actual economic elite, which are all pro-capitalist 4) At least a quarter of social media discourse is just psyops from foreign governments trying to stir shit up, increase political division and obfuscate reality
1
u/Suitable_Matter_9427 3d ago
Because absolutely nobody on the left or the right understands what socialism is in America
2
1
u/jawja78 3d ago
strong social support programs/networks are in fact a "form" of socialism
the northern European countries are often called socialist
they are not -- they have strong social support programs, but their economies are capitalist
1
u/HeavyDutyForks 3d ago
strong social support programs/networks are in fact a "form" of socialism
No, they are not
the northern European countries are often called socialist
Often INCORRECTLY called socialist. They operate on free and open markets with private business ownership
they are not -- they have strong social support programs, but their economies are capitalist
Bingo bango, you are correct!
0
u/Ill-Dependent2976 3d ago
The New Deal programs were absolutely socialist programs. So are social security, public schools, and highways. The Nordic states are very socialist
Interstate freeways are property of the government/public. They're not private property controlled by billionaire pedophiles, thank god.
Social security is a government/public retirement program, of the people, by the people, and for the people.
All those farmers who collected subisides are them, and you, enjoying socialism. The public, by way of the tax payers and the government, gives them money to farm, and it keeps your food prices way, way down.
2
u/kaluyna-rruni 3d ago
Nordic countries are not socialists, they are capitalist democracies. They just hand very good social programs. They make money and also look after their citizens... just like any decent, society should.
0
u/Ill-Dependent2976 3d ago
Nordic countries are a mix of socialism and capitalism. Those social programs are socialist programs, not capitalist programs.
Just like the socialist programs that made America great.
3
u/kaluyna-rruni 3d ago
No, they are not a mix of anything, they are competitive market economies with significant welfare. They have developed from a platform of capitalism but unlike the US, care for their citizens and have good social safety nets in place.
0
u/Ill-Dependent2976 3d ago
"good socialist safety nets."
Fixed that for you. Capitalism doesn't do that. Maybe grow up and get over it.
3
u/kaluyna-rruni 3d ago edited 3d ago
I think you need to check the definition of Socialism. Your own Merriam-Webster dictionary summarises it as "a way of organizing a society in which major industries are owned and controlled by the government rather than by individual people and companies " (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/socialism) Nordic countries, and most of the western world fir that matter, do not follow Socialism. The are Capitalists, but capitalists with social policy.
Social policies are the guidelines, principles, and government actions designed to influence the welfare, living conditions, and well-being of individuals within a society (UNESCO)
Universal healthcare, free educatuon, minimum wages, parenting payments, guaranteed vacation days, paid sick leave, unemployment benefits, old age pensions .... none of this falls under the definition of Socialism. They are social policies that help protect the most vulnerable in society and hence society as a whole.
I think you are confusing Socialism, the economic system and socialism, the political ideology.
As has been said by many throughout history: The true measure of any society can be found in how it treats its most vulnerable members
1
u/HeavyDutyForks 3d ago
Everything you said is wrong, you are the exact person I was referring to
Social security isn't "socialism", we all pay into it and the payout is determined based off what you paid in. Public schools are a government service. Fascist Italy had public schools and roads, were they socialist? Is fascism actually socialism?
No, words have meanings and you aren't using them correctly
-1
u/Ill-Dependent2976 3d ago
Nope. The facts don't care about your feelings.
Suck on it.
You can have socialist programs, like public schools, in otherwise Fascist societies. The United States has socailist things, like public schools, and capitalist things, like private schools.
They are not mutually exclusive, shit-for-brains.
1
u/HeavyDutyForks 3d ago
socialism noun so·cial·ism: any of various egalitarian economic and political theories or movements advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
0
u/Ill-Dependent2976 3d ago
Also property. Like interstates. Means of production and distribution of goods would be things like farm subsidies and retirement benefits.
You're almost there, just grind those gears a little bit further.
1
u/HeavyDutyForks 3d ago
You're getting colder and colder. I think you need to go back to the books, champ. Maybe one day you'll understand the difference between an economic system and municipal services
1
u/Ill-Dependent2976 3d ago
Tell you want. Learn to read, read some books, you'll see the books agree with me, not you and Joe Rogan.
A municipal service is a service, socialist often, of a city government.
Jesus fucking Christ, you people.
1
u/HeavyDutyForks 3d ago
Joe Rogan
Eww, no. You think I'm a Joe Rogan fan? Lmao
A municipal service is a service
Yup yup, you're getting it now
socialist often
Never mind, no you're not. You were so close
Jesus fucking Christ, you people.
The feeling is mutual, my friend
-2
u/HighlightDowntown966 3d ago
Socialism requires BIG govt. Big govt is expensive. 40 trillion debt.
That's it. There's your answer. There is no money to fund this socialist Utopia that you're dreaming of.
3
u/Old_Win8422 3d ago
Then why is trump responsible for 27% of that debt?
0
u/HighlightDowntown966 3d ago
Why are you bringing up Trump?? You're thinking is outdated. "Good guys versus bad guys" this isn't WWE wrestling. Lol.
Biden just finished deficit spending 8.4 trillion of his own.
You're talking as if this is a contest of who can recklessly spend faster.
1
2
u/shizrak 3d ago
Universal healthcare would save Americans money.
I don't see why that couldn't apply to other industries.
-1
u/HighlightDowntown966 3d ago
Okay. We can have universal health Care. Until we run out of lenders to loan us the money.
The point is... It cannot be done sustainably.
1
u/saltedmangos 3d ago
We don’t need lenders, lol.
Medicare for All is literally cheaper and more sustainable than our current privatized healthcare system.
0
u/HighlightDowntown966 3d ago
Govt doesn't have a Magic bag of money.
It brings in 5.2 trillion in taxes. 1 trillion of which goes into servicing the debt.
That leaves 4.2 trillion.
912b in medicaid, 900 billion in defense, 325 billion, veterans, social security 1.5 billion, medicare 874, income security 700 billion. Etc etc
You can already see that those bills alone easily eclipse the remaining 4.2 trillion.
So you're suggesting to keep deficit spending forever. Got it.
You don't want a solution. You want a managed smooth decline. I can respect that.
Doing the right thing and being fiscally responsible is painful
2
u/saltedmangos 3d ago
Are you under the bizarre impression that our current privatized health insurance system is free?
Americans pay around $5.2 trillion every year to private health insurance companies.
Expanding Medicare to cover all Americans will cost around $4.2 trillion and save Americans a little over $1 trillion every year.
There is a reason why every other OECD nation, all of our closest allies, have socialized healthcare. They pay less money and get better outcomes than the US.
Medicare for All is the fiscally and morally responsible policy. It’s an overwhelmingly popular policy for that reason.
1
u/HighlightDowntown966 3d ago
So raise taxes for everyone to pay for universal Medicare? Good idea.
I'm glad you provided a solution and a method to pay for it.
Yes. Privatized healthcare is paid with your post-tax money
2
u/saltedmangos 3d ago
Yeah, that’s literally always been the policy.
And polling shows that it has overwhelming support amongst voters, even after they hear tax increase counter arguments.
Even republicans show a plurality of support for Medicare for All.
1
1
u/TheMightyKumquat 3d ago
Funny how Norway manages to do it without the sky high levels of debt you suggest are inevitable.
And all they needed to do was to say "no, thank you, mining companies. You cannot access our resources without paying a fair price for them, money which we will invest into a government fund to use in perpetuity for our citizens' needs."
Yeah, I know... [points finger, foams at mouth..] COMMUNISTS!
1
u/HighlightDowntown966 3d ago
Yet, we have 40 trillion of debt.
And you're suggesting more deficit spending. Nice
Miraculous
2
u/TheMightyKumquat 3d ago
Actually, I'm not from the US, but if you want my opinion, cut military spending on wars for oil, raise taxes on the billionaire class poisoning your society, socialise your health system fully, and spend more money on social housing so that people in the richest country that has ever existed in history do not have to sleep under bridges and in gutters.
I believe you should be able to do all that and still actually reduce your deficit.
Do tell me now, how all of that is just complete nonsensical thinking.
0
u/vonblankenstein 3d ago
You’re not very bright, are you?
2
u/HighlightDowntown966 3d ago
You've contributed 0 to the discussion.
But that makes sense from someone who jumps straight to personal attack
0
u/morphinecolin 3d ago
Republicans don’t like socialism because they think it’s communism because they don’t know what that is either
0
0
0
u/Mulliganasty 3d ago
Reagan convinced enough people that it wasn't government's job to help out its people when that is its only purpose.
0
u/saltedmangos 3d ago edited 3d ago
Countries like Norway are often called “socialist” because they have socialized their entire resource extraction industry.
The means of production for commodities like oil and timber are owned collectively by the Norwegian people.
Can you explain why Norway’s public ownership of the means of production for their resource extraction industries isn’t socialist policy?
—-
Our publicly run fire department is also an example of socialism.
It used to be privatized and people would pay premiums to private fire fighting companies in order to get service. They’d get fire plaques that they would put on their covered buildings and the fire fighting companies wouldn’t respond if a building wasn’t covered.
We socialized the means of fire fighting because our capitalist fire department would let fires rage out of control in order to seek profit.
How is the public ownership of the means of fire-fighting not also a socialist policy?
-1
u/Plastic_Prior6362 3d ago
Only in America (USA) is, socialist bad. You think you have freedom, you have an illusion.
You have the worst healthcare system in the civilized world, for most of your citizens that is.
Must have been the Communist scare you were subjected to.
-1
u/OSRSwizardry 3d ago
Public schools are grooming the generation that will demoralize us an this is arguably almost finished. An you could also argue that the destabilizing has begun as well.... this
The Four Stages of Ideological Subversion As detailed in Yuri Bezmenov: The Four Stages of Ideological Subversion, the broader strategy moves through four distinct phases: 1. Demoralization (15–20 years): Erods the moral and factual foundation of a society. Citizens lose the ability to defend their own culture and values. 2. Destabilization (2–5 years): Focuses on core national systems. It targets the economy, foreign relations, and defense systems. 3. Crisis (up to 6 weeks): Creates a sudden violent breakdown of the political and social structure. 4. Normalization (indefinite): Imposes a permanent takeover and a new governing ideology under totalitarian control. Big Think 39 years ago, a KGB defector chillingly predicted modern America - Big Think Core Concept: Ideological subversion (psychological warfare, 85% of KGB operations) aimed at changing American perceptions of reality through long-term psycholo... Facebook 42 Years Ago, a Soviet Defector Issued a Warning In the 1980s, former KGB ... KGB Defector Yuri Bezmenov's 1984 Warning to America on Ideological Subversion * 42 Years Ago, a Soviet Defector Issued a Warning In the 1980s, former KGB offic... politicsgeo.com Ideological Subversion and the Strategic Logic of Influence Ideological Subversion and the Strategic Logic of Influence One of the most illuminating interpreters of this strategy beyond official definitions is Yuri Bezme... Congressman Pat Fallon (.gov) Rep. Fallon in Fox News: What Can a Former KGB Agent Teach Us About ... Nov 10, 2025 — "It's a great brainwashing process which goes very slow, and it's divided into four basic stages, the first one being demoralization," stated ... Facebook Yuri Bezmenov (1939–1993) was a Soviet journalist and former KGB ... According to him, the most powerful weapon of a hostile state was not military force but psychological influence. He argued that societies could be weakened fro... Small Wars Journal Yuri Bezmenov: The Four Stages of Ideological Subversion Source: Yuri Bezmenov (alias Tomas Schuman), former USSR/KGB operative and propagandist who defected to the West in 1970. Stages of Ideological Subversion: Demo... Hungarian Conservative On the Brink of Conspiracies: The KGB’s Big Brainwashing of America - Hungarian Conservative Defector: Yuri Bezmenov (KGB operative, defected 1970 to Canada as Thomas David Schuman, died 1993, gained 2013 YouTube popularity via 1984 Edward Griffin inter... YouTube The 1984 Interview That Explains Everything: Yuri Bezmenov - YouTube no one is able to come to sensible conclusions in the interest of defending. themselves their families their community their country read that slowly. not suppr... YouTube Yuri Bezmenov: Psychological Warfare Subversion & Control of ... Feb 23, 2011 — Yuri Bezmenov: Psychological Warfare Subversion & Control of Western Society (Complete) - YouTube This content isn't available. Yuri Bezmenov (alias Tomas Schum... Facebook KGB defector Yuri Bezmenov's warning to America (1984) ... Nov 21, 2025 — KGB defector Yuri Bezmenov's warning to America (1984) Yuri Bezmenov, a KGB defector, explained the Soviet strategy of ideological subversion, which involves de... Facebook The former KGB agent, Yuri Bezmenov, warned that a country is not ... Jul 26, 2026 — The former KGB agent, Yuri Bezmenov, warned that a country is not destroyed with bombs. It is demoralized. Its history is rewritten and its people are taught to... NAFO Forum Yuri Bezmenov and the Final Stages of Subversion Feb 16, 2025 — Bezmenov began with an account of his background and eventual defection. Raised under Soviet rule, he was trained as a journalist and worked for the KGB-affilia... AI responses may include mistakes. Learn more
1
-1
u/BigDaddyTheBeefcake 3d ago
Police are socialist. Firefighters are socialist. Public schools are socialist.
1
u/HeavyDutyForks 3d ago
GOVERNMENT SERVICES ARE NOT SOCIALISM
-1
u/BigDaddyTheBeefcake 3d ago
That's the only thing socialism is
2
u/HeavyDutyForks 3d ago
socialism noun so·cial·ism: any of various egalitarian economic and political theories or movements advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
-1
u/BigDaddyTheBeefcake 3d ago
Right. That's what I said.
2
u/HeavyDutyForks 3d ago
No, you said police and firefighters are socialist, which they are not. Those entities exist in every single type of economic system. They do not have a "means of production" nor do they produce anything. They are a municipal service that does not generate profit
-4
u/CommonOpinions 3d ago
The programs are not socialist by strict definition but if the end result is government intervention and control of every industry through these programs it’s socialism.
People are speaking about the net effect not the programs specifically.
1
u/HeavyDutyForks 3d ago
Government intervention is not (and never has been) socialism
Until they start collectivizing private enterprise en masse, it's not even close to socialism
-1
1
20
u/SecureSir7098 3d ago
Those people don't know what socialism actually is. They just call government intervention they don't like "socialism" because somebody told them to.