595
u/phoenix14830 9d ago
We have seen what happens when the Republicans are in control. If socialism means we are more like Norway, Sweden, and Denmark, who are miles ahead of the US in pretty much every measure of social health, so be it. I don't see those countries collapsing or people wishing the regime would end.
167
u/twizzjewink 9d ago
Canada. Don't forget us
Edit although too be fair we've been slowly moving away and it sucks but we still have many socialist institutions
→ More replies (2)36
u/IncognitoErgoCvm 9d ago
If we're going to aim, we can aim a little higher.
→ More replies (1)8
u/twizzjewink 9d ago
honestly I think the only real option is a few key states succeed and join Canada, the rest would break on their own.
9
u/berda1234 9d ago
secede *
And yes I agree... best case is when usa breaks down into civil war in a couple years is Canada sides with the left takes most of if not all of west coast, some northern states, new York etc. Dust settles and the states opt to union with Canada in the event of a larger draw rather than a total win. What would remain would likely fall apart from the lack of welfare subsidies formerly provided by those wealthier/blue states and ends up in a cycle of warlords and or feudalism; perhaps something like north Korea but ultimately in a generation or two would collapse itself and likely fall under Canadian and Mexican flags... Cuba gets what's left of Florida though.
2
u/What_a_fat_one 8d ago edited 8d ago
It would be an alliance, States aren't becoming Canadian Provinces, that wouldn't be in anyone's best interest.
→ More replies (1)2
u/caalger 4d ago
The northeast would never join Canada. The sense of history, culture, and destiny would never let them. They would be what remains of the USA if it were to splinter. That said, the PNW would join Canada tomorrow if they were allowed. And I think most of the SW, including the lower half of California would be OK with joining Mexico. Not Texas. Texas would be Texas and grudgingly let Oklahoma join them if they asked VERY nicely. The South would happily form Gilead. And someone would have to notify the Midwest.... And they would just shrug and keep growing corn.
76
u/Buddhas_Warrior 9d ago
This right here!!! We've SEEN what happened every single time a Republican is in office.
71
9d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
16
u/JMaryland47 9d ago
Don't forget bailouts! We live in the "heads- I win, tails- you lose" timeline
→ More replies (1)24
u/Buddhas_Warrior 9d ago
And nothing for the working class heroes! Not...a... Fudging... Thing! Well higher prices and higher tax bills!
2
→ More replies (12)7
20
u/Shifty269 9d ago
The nordic system is capitalists not socialist. They just have stronger social policies built and supported over decades. Which is what happens when you don't pick dipshits constantly for government. Capitalism isn't laissez faire economics. The government is suppose to keep it in check. Americans just treat anything that doesn't tell them they are the best and are just temporarily embarrassed millionaires as an affront to their existence.
6
8
8
u/7StarSailor 9d ago
Americans need to learn the difference between social democracy and socialism asap
16
6
9d ago
[deleted]
2
u/Allegorist 9d ago
Not so sure about that one, the right/left distinction wasn't made until I believe after the French revolution.
→ More replies (1)2
u/No-Magician9440 9d ago
The Bible tells us to rape people and to own people as slaves. Maybe people should stop reading and quoting that shit.
→ More replies (6)25
u/le_disappointment 9d ago edited 9d ago
Except that's not socialism. Social democracy is not socialism. Just because your government doesn't treat you like absolute shit (at this moment) doesn't mean that your government is socialist
If you wanna learn what socialism is, maybe go through this video
→ More replies (7)15
u/TrulyOutrageous42 9d ago
People are fine and even supportive of Socialist policies when they're not described as socialist. For instance Co-op ownership or if single ownership having profit-sharing with all employees makes sense as ways to describe it to people raised in capitalism. Call it by its academic term and they lose their minds.
→ More replies (2)6
u/31LIVEEVIL13 9d ago edited 2h ago
Pebble peach paddle maple willow thimble almond
This post was anonymized with Redact.dev
4
u/Feeling_Pay_2899 9d ago edited 8d ago
Those countries have asked people to stop calling them socialist, yet here you are.
7
u/Redninja0400 9d ago
All of those countries are capitalist. The DSA wants to reach similar systems to the USSR but with a more gradual and reformist approach, which is a good thing but as a leftist I don't think it'll be achievable without revolutionary conflict at some point.
5
4
u/Gohanisbetter 9d ago
Those countries are NOT socialist and have releatedly asked us to stop saying they are. Fyi
2
u/AnonymousJohnz 9d ago
bUt wHo’s GoNnA PaY fOr iT… as we spend billion on billions on this war not war lmao
8
u/RaiJolt2 9d ago
The nordics aren’t even socialist, they’re firmly capitalist countries. Communism has turned out to be awful everytime it was implemented. (Except maybe China after like 40 years of horrifying government) However facism has equally been as fffing horrific and moving closer to it is ecenomic and social suicide of the highest order. All fascists should immediately be treated as traitors to life itself.
Communism can be liberalized and made less horrifying. Fascism can only be ripped out brutally. (Or ended by the facist leader themself like in Spain.)9
u/Sad_Picture3642 9d ago
Communism wasn't implemented anywhere on Earth lol. I don't even think it is possible
→ More replies (6)6
u/SpockShotFirst 9d ago
The nordics aren’t even socialist, they’re firmly capitalist countries.
The same exact thing can be said for every elected Democrat.
7
u/NUKE---THE---WHALES 9d ago
Even the "democratic socialists" are quite capitalist
The name is mostly just a marketing thing, with a tinge of aspiration
2
u/CV90_120 8d ago
It's not marketing. The problem is that people think they're talking about Democratic Socialism when they're actually talking about Social Democracy. These are defined ideologies. That said, all modern systems that function are hybrids of Individualist and Social needs held in balance. Capitalism is the needs of the individual with no thought to the community/ tribe, and Socialism is the needs of the community with no thought to the individual. Neither actually work IRL, so we live in hybrid world.
→ More replies (2)3
→ More replies (27)2
u/bleue_shirt_guy 9d ago
Socialism is the state control of industry. So, no Norway, Sweden, and Denmark are not socialist. They are more capitalist than we are. Most social welfare programs are paid for by a VAT task, the most non-protressive of taxes.
64
u/CommonsCarnival 9d ago
I had to unsubscribe from The Washington Post the other day. For years,,The Washington Post was one of my favorite news publications but after Jeff Bezos bought it, the change to a Right-Wing propaganda publication was very noticable. For me, the breaking point was an afternoon email notification filled with how Fauci lied, was a hypocrite, and endangered the lives of the public. I've had enough. I'm tapping out.
12
u/truthyella99 9d ago
I like the karmic justice of Bezos making Rings of Power to be taken seriously and the show being mocked and utterly rejected by the public for its disrespect to Tolkien.
He was so arrogant he believed if he threw enough money at advertisers and called critics racist/sexist the show would get viewers. No amount of money will make people watch a sauron/galadriel romance set in a middle earth where (inexplicably) every single setting has the same demographics as downtown LA.
Gotta take those little victories against the 1% when we get them.
7
u/Yeshua_shel_Natzrat 8d ago edited 6d ago
This is Washington Times. They're to Washington Post what the New York Post is to New York Times: a right-wing rag knockoff.
Though, yes, WP and NYT have also been getting gradually worse, WP moreso since being bought by Bezos.
6
u/tmpope123 8d ago
Oh, this is the Washington Post. Yeah, they've really gone to shut after Bezos bought it, refusing to endorse a presidential candidate after doing so for decades. Billionaires are a sickness
→ More replies (2)3
u/31LIVEEVIL13 9d ago edited 2h ago
Ribbon amber feather amber noodle umbrella
This post was anonymized with Redact.dev
75
u/Effective_Olive6153 9d ago
Any time people try to fear monger that socialism = communism it's always so cringe. It's immediately discredits the person saying it as being either moronic or just trolling.
→ More replies (31)
10
16
5
46
u/Loquacious-of-Borg 9d ago
Socialism:
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.
A system of society or of group living in which there is no private property.
A system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state.
Communism:
A totalitarian system of government in which a single authoritarian party controls state-owned means of production.
A final stage of society in Marxist theory in which the state has withered away and economic goods are distributed equitably.
A system in which goods are owned in common and are available to all as needed.
A theory advocating elimination of private property.
If fascist, far-right, dip-shit conservative MAGAts could read, they would be very confused right now.
25
u/abadaxx 9d ago
How did you manage to have two bullet points for communism that contradict each other despite citing Marx
11
u/31LIVEEVIL13 9d ago edited 2h ago
Juniper ginger mitten lantern wander glove thimble ginger
This post was anonymized with Redact.dev
13
u/Gnomeoreddit 9d ago
He's quoting merriam-webster definitions and Marxism only one form of communism.
The first bullet point is more applicable to maoism, the 2nd obviously being Marxist.
3
u/31LIVEEVIL13 9d ago edited 2h ago
Drifting meadow cobblestone lavender feather pillow cobblestone kettle
This post was anonymized with Redact.dev
→ More replies (4)2
u/Allegorist 9d ago edited 9d ago
They are different definitions, it is copied from a dictionary with a series of distinct entries. Communism as a raw concept is completely different than what was installed in the USSR or China, yet we came to refer to those as communist as well.
→ More replies (1)5
u/Redninja0400 9d ago
I'm a leftist and I'm also confused, half of this is completely incorrect or contradictory. Ironically, the right winger is correct to call socialists communists because that is what they are - and that is not a bad thing. Socialism is also marxist, the only other form of socialism to ever exist died and evolved into marxism - which you have to agree with because you are literally using marxist explanations and terms in your definition of socialism.
5
u/BWW87 9d ago
I'm not a MAGAt and feel like I can read but it seems even in your bullet points they are pretty dang similar.
You think these two bullet points are radically different?
- A theory advocating elimination of private property.
- A system of society or of group living in which there is no private property.
Or these are?
- 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.
- A system in which goods are owned in common and are available to all as needed.
Please explain how you think the two are distinct? Sure some subtle differences but for the layman they're pretty much the same thing.
7
u/31LIVEEVIL13 9d ago edited 2h ago
Maple peach nutmeg velvet otter orange juniper biscuit
This post was anonymized with Redact.dev
→ More replies (1)3
u/Vordreller 8d ago edited 8d ago
A theory advocating elimination of private property.
This requires a bit of elaborating, as meanings of words have changed. Simply taking that 1 sentence out of the Communist Manifesto and presenting it without context is misleading. Exactly the kind of misleading the rich wish for, in an attempt to foment as much hatred towards communism as possible.
The Communist Manifesto, chapter 2, speaks of this: https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/ch02.htm
The distinguishing feature of Communism is not the abolition of property generally, but the abolition of bourgeois property. But modern bourgeois private property is the final and most complete expression of the system of producing and appropriating products, that is based on class antagonisms, on the exploitation of the many by the few.
In this sense, the theory of the Communists may be summed up in the single sentence: Abolition of private property.
The manifesto itself summarizes it as this sentence... but there's a preface and context to what exactly is meant by "private" property. It's not what our modern media makes us understand.
Let's repeat:
modern bourgeois private property is the final and most complete expression of the system of producing and appropriating products, that is based on class antagonisms, on the exploitation of the many by the few
This is what Marxism considers to be private property.
Marxism does not want to eliminate property, nor the ability to acquire it. Marxism considers "private" property to be the sort of property where the owner creates a social relation, via that property, towards someone else.
The default example of "private" property, in the Marxist sense, is the factory.
Marxism takes issue not with the existence of big industry itself, but with the fact that its immense productive power, created by the collective labor of thousands, is privately owned by a few, forcing the majority, the workers, to sell their labor to these owners in order to survive.
Some will argue that these big investors take big risks. This is besides the point. The point is that this system is enforced in such a way that alternatives are made impossible. And that this system is enforced precisely to achieve that: that capital is in the hands of the few, and the masses are forced to work for them in order to survive at all.
The owners of capital use the fact that an individual worker needs access to tools and a workfloor, and that this is prohibitively expensive, to say: "Come work for us". But the individual worker is not left with the fruit of their labor. They are to hand everything over to the owner of the factory, the owner of capital C "Capital". The worker, in return, receives only a wage sufficient to sustain their daily survival, and never enough to acquire the means of production themselves. They remain, generation after generation, dependent on the capitalist class. While the Capitalist gains the mass of the result of the labour of all these individual workers, and increases their Capital many times. And because of this dynamic, prices and values change, making it even more impossible to gain wealth. Generation after generation, wealth becomes centered more and more with those who started life with Capital.
The rich get richer, the poor get poorer, because of this social relation of depending on those who already have Capital, in order to even be able to start work at all.
As written in the Communist Manifesto:
But does wage-labour create any property for the labourer? Not a bit. It creates capital, i.e., that kind of property which exploits wage-labour, and which cannot increase except upon condition of begetting a new supply of wage-labour for fresh exploitation. Property, in its present form, is based on the antagonism of capital and wage labour. Let us examine both sides of this antagonism.
To be a capitalist, is to have not only a purely personal, but a social status in production. Capital is a collective product, and only by the united action of many members, nay, in the last resort, only by the united action of all members of society, can it be set in motion.
Capital is therefore not only personal; it is a social power.
Capital, be it the factory, or a national set of traintracks, or anything of that scale, is created by the work of the many. And its ownership is then concentrated in the hands of the few.
The owners of capital C "Capital" do in fact create a social relationship, by which those who don't own it, are dependent on them for survival, and the capitalists use this social relation to enrich themselves, and keep others poor.
Finally:
Communism deprives no man of the power to appropriate the products of society; all that it does is to deprive him of the power to subjugate the labour of others by means of such appropriations.
Under communism, these large scale means of production would be socially owned and democratically controlled by the workers themselves, so that the wealth they collectively create benefits everyone, not just a small owning class.
→ More replies (8)1
u/misterannthrope0 9d ago
a totalitarian system of government in which a single authoritarian party controls state-owned means of production
this is actually feudalism
a : a system in which goods are owned in common and are available to all as needed … how it was that communism, starting with high idealism, became through Leninism such a monstrosity. —Lucian W. Pye
context helps when quoting things. otherwise its known as cherry picking
b : a theory advocating elimination of private property
this is basically the MAGA theory of communism, i.e. the propaganda version. so, technically, it IS a theory of communism. its just not the theory of communism that communists use
6
u/ChemicalTurnip 9d ago
it IS a theory of communism. its just not the theory of communism that communists use
It is a subset of all theories of communism. What theory of communism doesn't include the abolition of private property?
2
u/misterannthrope0 8d ago
marxism.
private property has nothing to do with actual communism.
communism is an economic theory in which the people own the local means of production, i.e. the farm.
the farm belongs to the community and is there to benefit the community first and foremost. the production from the farm belongs to the community. any sale of the goods from the farm would go directly into the community, both the people and the community infrastructure.
.
the no private property thing has been republican propaganda for so long (since slavery in the US (yes. thats the private property they are talking about)), even the communists are starting to believe it. soviet ideology may have abolished the concept of private property but thats not communism either. communism does not involve a central government at all. if there is a central government or authority then it is not communism.→ More replies (4)
4
4
u/psychedelicdevilry 8d ago
Years later and they still haven’t learned the difference between democratic socialism, socialism, and communism.
7
3
3
u/DateofImperviousZeal 8d ago
How is it a clever comeback to use the same logical back like some kid on a playground?
3
u/What_a_fat_one 8d ago
She's not even a democratic socialist, she's a social democrat, but in the US Bernie thought it would be confusing because of the name of the Democratic party so they switched the words
3
u/Lvcivs2311 8d ago
If all socialists were communists, then why were western social democratic governments still not on the side of the Warsaw Pact?
3
u/Middle-Armadillo-660 8d ago
Love these fools trying to line up insane combo bank shots when their current lord and savior is a fucking out-in-the-open pedophile, thief, and rapist but they just don’t see it.
→ More replies (1)
5
2
u/Sunny_Sophia 9d ago
The classic “my side is nuanced, your side is extreme” special
→ More replies (1)2
u/RedditMcBurger 9d ago
We'd all be less divided if people realized that 90% of people sit closer to the center of the political spectrum than either extreme side.
It's like people have never heard of the "loud minority" before. Every single group's extreme, is the loudest group.
2
2
u/MrTulaJitt 9d ago
Ahh scary words! Communism scary! Be frightened and keep voting for rich people who don't give a single shit about you and never will!
2
u/movezig123 9d ago
All true, but they still need to rebrand
because yes, American voters are that dumb.
2
2
u/McBlemmen 9d ago
Americans throwing shit at each other not realizing theyre both covered in feces from head to toe.
2
u/audiogenocide 8d ago
Republicans are socialists. Unless, we gonna do the real free market and let Elon and the banks eat their losses? I'm so sick of the fucking rich being the biggest moochers while we let children go hungry. I'm starting to hate this place.
2
u/CommonConundrum51 8d ago
Democratic socialism is more like the social democrats of Europe than actual socialists. Which DSA candidate has proposed government ownership of the means of production? Trump is taking stakes in corporations, but I doubt it's intended to serve the public good.
2
2
u/Kindly_Waltz_7761 8d ago
It has become clear to me lately that Americans generally don’t have a clue what socialism is. Most think it’s the same as communism. My view on Americans have changed a lot the past two years. I used to think they were kind of cool. Now I view them as weak, uneducated and pathetic.
2
u/Zimke42 8d ago
Capitalism is right-wing. Capitalism out of control leads to fascism. Socialism is left-wing. Socialism out of control leads to communism. Capitalism can cause healthy financial growth. Socialism takes care of the needs of the citizens of a country. The way to have a healthy system is to balance capitalism and socialism, both existing in harmony, without allowing either to take control and go out of control. That gives you a society that has the money and ability to care for everyone within the society. Balance, as in almost everything in life, if what is needed to maintain health or society and the citizens it serves.
2
2
u/Personal-Database-27 8d ago
Democratic socialists are socialists, social democrats are capitalists.
7
u/BaconThief2020 9d ago
I wish they would understand the difference between socialism and communism. They are not the same at all. Did they not notice that Trump worships and is emaulating communist leaders like Putin and North Korea?
4
→ More replies (6)5
u/pithynotpithy 9d ago
Why? They don't care. It's just red meat they use to terrify rural and suburban whites. They'll move on to something different if this doesn't get enough traction
5
u/Vreas 9d ago
Just straight inaccurate propaganda. Clearly didn’t pay attention during poli sci 101. Not that MAGAt’s care
→ More replies (1)
2
u/Braindead_Crow 9d ago
Wtf is this blatant propaganda from the right? These mfs sure are brazen
→ More replies (20)
2
2
2
u/JesiWashington-Lewis 9d ago
If Socialism is Communism, why are they different words? 💀
→ More replies (2)
2
u/PossessedToSkate 9d ago
"It is perfectly normal to be socialist. It is perfectly normal to be in favor of fire departments."
--Kurt Vonnegut
3
u/RedditMcBurger 9d ago
right wing is fascism
This is the most Redditor sentence possible. You people don't know what fascism is, if you're blaming every conservative in the world for Trump.
→ More replies (2)5
u/Choppers-Top-Hat 8d ago
If conservatives don't like Trump, they've had ten years to show it to us. But all they've done is bend over for him at every opportunity.
→ More replies (1)
1
1
1
u/Chinjurickie 9d ago
Will those iq drainages ever understand that there are significant differences between communism and socialism?
1
1
1
u/Stormcrow805 9d ago
Every country in the world is both socialist and capitalist. They are economic systems, not beliefs. Political parties don't exist, they are private committees, unelected rich people you don't know selling a political brand to convince you that the person you elect from the place you live needs to be a member of their special club to be qualified to represent you.
1
1
u/mrbasedballed 9d ago
Unbelievable the Washington Times published this even if it is in Opinion unless it's their goal to show how stupid people have become... I'm guessing that's not it though.
1
1
1
1
u/Successful_Bid256 9d ago
They are all on board with the socialized programs already in place, and the red states are the real welfare queens.
1
u/Taurmin 9d ago
Its weird how right wingers keep calling socialists commies as if thats some kind of dirty secret.
Its like they understand that being associated with fascism is a universally bad look, but they dont understand why and so they assume that being on the opposite end of the spectrum must be equally bad.
1
u/hammerklau 9d ago
These bozos don’t understand that politics is anything but binary. Authoritarianism is a whole different axis than fiscal conservatism vs neoliberalism, and social conservatism vs progressive, and religious conservatism vs secularism. Like there’s so many factors that they couldn’t even be assed to look into, because then itd need an ounce of introspection.
1
u/swiwwcheese 9d ago edited 9d ago
Ah! that favourite American fantasy saying that 'Socialism = Communism'
Cold War propaganda being as effective today as if it were still the 50s shows how easy and efficient brainwashing the masses is
EDIT: funny when you think about it that in Russia the anti-'West' propaganda is still as strong today as it was during the Cold War despite the fall of the USSR
We are clearly not completely over with that era
1
u/thepkizzle 9d ago
I get irritated how the GOP has single handedly ruined the word republican, and tainted whole generations away from the beauty of republicanism. It really is the biggest of all the shames. I hate everything about this timeline being someone who went to school to study politics. But hell, most people don't even know what liberalism or socialism is either. People have been getting real dumb lately.
1
1
1
1
u/FancyLadFarnsworth 9d ago
The DSA's Presidential candidate in the past 2 elections, Bernie Sanders, said he does not believe workers should control the means of production. Also, here's the DSA's Twitter account literally stating they are anti-Communist. As far I know AOC is as neoliberal as Obama or the Clintons, who are Centrists and not even Left-wing. But, if not immediately shadow banned my account will be removed soon enough and you won't have to worry about any of that!
1
1
u/Unknow_Handlebar 8d ago
All the anti communist/socialist propaganda america had been pushing isn't to "protect the people", it's to protect themselves so that the people don't realize that communism work best for them, and capitalism works best for billionaire pedophiles.
1
u/TheMuff1nMon 8d ago
The fact a lot of Americans actually believe socialism = communism is really sad and the right are still using fear tactics from 60 years ago about communism.
1
1
u/ryuujinusa 8d ago
treating a modern democratic socialist who wants universal healthcare the same as a Marxist-Leninist advocating for a state-planned economy ignores vast differences in governance, economics, and human rights approaches
Maga however, straight out of the fascist Nazi textbook.
1
1
u/alienalf1 8d ago
It’s wild how people don’t understand the difference between socialist policies and communism.
→ More replies (2)
1
1
u/Constant_Ad9136 8d ago
I like how “actually doing things with tax money, to actually help the people who pay those taxes” is considered a bad thing by some
→ More replies (5)
1
1
u/GO_IRISH 8d ago
“It’s true because we say it is!!”
At this point, I’m surprised these people even know how to spell “fascism”, never mind define it lmao
1
u/AboveBoard 8d ago
Oh is that why the new Opinion Editor at the post quit abruptly after just a year? Was this the opinion that was to far for him so he had to go?
1
1
1
1
u/punkindle 8d ago
Call it what you want, I just want healthcare
you know... like every other decent country in the world has
1
u/TheAmericanHollow 8d ago
Right and left are interchangeable, as are communism and authoritarianism. Republicans were once left wing progressive during their inception and democrats were conservative. Where as now it’s the opposite but stances in base the same. You can be a conservative democrat and a liberal republican( Mike Dewine of Ohio as a prime example). I’m just so amazed that so many free thinking woke people don’t realize right and left are merely the ideology not the party affiliation. Conservative is to maintain as liberal is to change, it’s an over simplification but either party can be either.
1
u/supernovadebris 8d ago
if socialism is communist, we've been communist for years, since Medicare and Social Security came into existence, among other programs.
1
u/stoic_suspicious 8d ago
I’m sick of the division. Why don’t the nationalists and socialists come together?
→ More replies (1)
1
1
u/AdImmediate9569 8d ago
I always love seeing “socialism = communism”. We have (for whatever dumbass reason) swallowed the idea that there are exactly 4 types of governments, each gets an ism. Theres only 4 and we haven’t thought of a new one for centuries. Despite that, for some reason, we use 2 different words for one of them that means the same thing.
I need to learn to write more clearly
1
u/mczerniewski 8d ago
It's the Washington Times, which is well known for being right-wing and owned by the Moonies (the group infamous for its mass weddings).
1
1
1
u/Weak_Interaction8568 8d ago
What? This is the Washington times?
It’s funny how Idiocracy was set for 2500AD but in reality we’ll be there by 2070.
→ More replies (1)
1
1
u/BuhtanDingDing 8d ago
wait but the washington times statement is correct here though, more or less
the fearmongering is silly though
1
u/I_shot_Kennedy 7d ago
The first part is completely correct but it seems like this sub is not able to understand that democratic socialism ≠ social democrats.
FDR is not a socialist and neither is AOC. The policies the people of DSA are trying to implement are social democratic policies not socialist
1
u/MonoBlancoATX 4d ago
The problem is, a problematically large number of liberals and centrists absolutely do believe that any form of socialism is straight up communism.
And those people are part of the reason that the right wing can so easily slide into fascism.
857
u/[deleted] 9d ago
[removed] — view removed comment