Democratic socialism

[Gulo Blue]

https://www.businessinsider.com/difference-between-socialist-and-democratic-socialist-2018-6


Between Bernie Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez, the left-left seems to be all about 'democratic socialism'. I'm trying to figure out what the distinction is here. I'm not sure there is one. It sounds to me like a democratic socialist is someone that wants the government to have the power to control the means of production, but they will bend over backwards claiming they wouldn't use that power or wouldn't use it immediately.


It smells like deception. But then why even use the term 'democratic socialism'? If you're just going to deny or deflect the bit about government controlling industry, then why even use the term? What's left of the definition other than that?

 

[biggunsbob]

As long as they fix health care and give it for everyone so people don’t have to go bankrupt I don’t care what they do against the slave owning corporations. Corporations have way to much control and tax relief over people. Some regulations are fine to protect people from corporations and force them to pay a livable wage.

My wife may have a real serious health issue and we just found out you have to be at company 1 year before being able to use the family leave act. Oh and after 2 sick call in’s you may get written up and or fired. Werid pretty sure she is paying for short term disability but how can she use it for treatments if the company doesn’t let you? I don’t care what anyone says. ‘Right to work states’ just stink.. Corporations have way to much power in my opinion.


Healhcare for everyone and a livable wage and a different president and this country will be much better off.

 

[Michchamp]

"democratic socialism" is more descriptive than the labels of either "Democrats" or "Republicans"

I get the sense that the "democratic" part is included to defeat brainless comparisons to Soviet Russia and similar "one party states."

Socialism just makes too much sense to dismiss it out of hand. I think if humanity is going to survive, socialism is the answer; "capitalism" is just "the law of the jungle" with a nicer name.

I haven't delved super deep into definitions and who means what when they say it, but in my mind, any going concern big enough to cross state lines and control or strongly influence government decisions should be owned by the public. you can retain the ownership structure as is, but the public will hold more that 50% of the shares, and dividends will go into public funds and be distributed out as voted by the public.

There's still plenty of room for private enterprise under this model, just not for a comcast, Time-Warner, Exxon-Mobil, Walmart, Amazon, etc. as they exist now.

 

[Michchamp]

As long as they fix health care and give it for everyone so people don?t have to go bankrupt I don?t care what they do against the slave owning corporations. Corporations have way to much control and tax relief over people. Some regulations are fine to protect people from corporations and force them to pay a livable wage.

My wife may have a real serious health issue and we just found out you have to be at company 1 year before being able to use the family leave act. Oh and after 2 sick call in?s you may get written up and or fired. Werid pretty sure she is paying for short term disability but how can she use it for treatments if the company doesn?t let you? I don?t care what anyone says. ?Right to work states? just stink.. Corporations have way to much power in my opinion.


Healhcare for everyone and a livable wage and a different president and this country will be much better off.

Fox Business just had the "Duck Dynasty" guy on to tell us why everyone having government provided healthcare would be bad.

 

[tomdalton22]

As long as they fix health care and give it for everyone so people don?t have to go bankrupt I don?t care what they do against the slave owning corporations. Corporations have way to much control and tax relief over people. Some regulations are fine to protect people from corporations and force them to pay a livable wage.

My wife may have a real serious health issue and we just found out you have to be at company 1 year before being able to use the family leave act. Oh and after 2 sick call in?s you may get written up and or fired. Werid pretty sure she is paying for short term disability but how can she use it for treatments if the company doesn?t let you? I don?t care what anyone says. ?Right to work states? just stink.. Corporations have way to much power in my opinion.


Healhcare for everyone and a livable wage and a different president and this country will be much better off.

Everyone should get free healthcare, make $100K a year, live in great neighborhoods & get a free education, regardless of what they contribute. :cheers:

 

[Spartanmack]

Everyone should get free healthcare, make $100K a year, live in great neighborhoods & get a free education, regardless of what they contribute. :cheers:

easily the best way to do that is to nationalize everything and have the super efficient government run everything. The best way to fix a corrupt cleptocracy is to give it more money and more power - you know, because "socialism just makes too much sense"

 

[tinselwolverine]

https://www.businessinsider.com/difference-between-socialist-and-democratic-socialist-2018-6


Between Bernie Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez, the left-left seems to be all about 'democratic socialism'. I'm trying to figure out what the distinction is here. I'm not sure there is one. It sounds to me like a democratic socialist is someone that wants the government to have the power to control the means of production, but they will bend over backwards claiming they wouldn't use that power or wouldn't use it immediately.


It smells like deception. But then why even use the term 'democratic socialism'? If you're just going to deny or deflect the bit about government controlling industry, then why even use the term? What's left of the definition other than that?

Democratic Socialism is us.

It?s the United States.

We?re already Democratic Socialist.

 

[Gulo Blue]

Democratic Socialism is us.

It?s the United States.

We?re already Democratic Socialist.

It's not. We're a capitalist republic. The government doesn't own the means of production.


We could regulate the snot out of industry and we wouldn't be socialist. We can have super progressive taxes and single payer healthcare and we could even implement universal income and we still wouldn't be socialist.

 

[tinselwolverine]

It's not. We're a capitalist republic. The government doesn't own the means of production.


We could regulate the snot out of industry and we wouldn't be socialist. We can have super progressive taxes and single payer healthcare and we could even implement universal income and we still wouldn't be socialist.

Democratic Socialism isn?t Socialism.

If you have ever heard Sanders or Ocasio-Cortez describe democratic socialism you would have heard them calling for regulating the snot out of industry, super progressive taxes and single payer healthcare. They have never talked about the government taking over at the means of production. I doubt either one of them could turn on a factory machine.

I was being a little facetious saying we are already democratic socialist, but not completely.

A significant portion of our healthcare system is funded by the government.

We already regulate the snot out of industry.

We are moving back in the direction of higher top marginal tax rates - we are moving back because we already had 70% top marginal tax rates that Ocasio-Cortez is calling for for decades.

We are already pretty close to democratic socialist.

 

[Gulo Blue]

"democratic socialism" is more descriptive than the labels of either "Democrats" or "Republicans"

It's more descriptive, but they dodge 1 of the 2 things they describe.


I'm a vegan pizza chef! We're going to make great pizza!


OK, but pepperoni is my favorite.


You'll have pepperoni for now. Let's just focus on the pizza.


Then why do you keep specifying vegan?


To me, vegan pizza just means pizza.

 

[Gulo Blue]

Democratic Socialism isn?t Socialism.

If you have ever heard Sanders or Ocasio-Cortez describe democratic socialism you would have heard them calling for regulating the snot out of industry, super progressive taxes and single payer healthcare. They have never talked about the government taking over at the means of production. I doubt either one of them could turn on a factory machine.

I was being a little facetious saying we are already democratic socialist, but not completely.

A significant portion of our healthcare system is funded by the government.

We already regulate the snot out of industry.

We are moving back in the direction of higher top marginal tax rates - we are moving back because we already had 70% top marginal tax rates that Ocasio-Cortez is calling for for decades.

We are already pretty close to democratic socialist.

Regulating the snot out of industry is something you can do in a capitalist society. It doesn't make it socialist. Neither does government funding of industry. They dance around it, but they seem to genuinely be against capitalism. Instead of wanting to fix what's wrong with it, they want to go in a different direction altogether.

 

[Gulo Blue]

"I mean, to me, it means democracy, frankly," Senator Sanders added. "That's all it means."

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...ism-new-york-democratic-primary-a8425416.html


As the DSA's website states: "At the root of our socialism is a profound commitment to democracy, as means and end. As we are unlikely to see an immediate end to capitalism tomorrow, DSA fights for reforms today that will weaken the power of corporations and increase the power of working people."

 

[tinselwolverine]

Regulating the snot out of industry is something you can do in a capitalist society. It doesn't make it socialist. Neither does government funding of industry. They dance around it, but they seem to genuinely be against capitalism. Instead of wanting to fix what's wrong with it, they want to go in a different direction altogether.

Okay...how could Sanders fund his programs through taxing million-ayuhs and billion-ayuh in a society where there presumably are none?

Outside of private enterprise how does a society produce (get it? society produce? get it? get it?) milliona-ayuhs and billion-ayuhs to pay for even more free shit?

Democratic socialists are really just garden variety Democrats who call themselves something else.

It?s just rebranding.

It?s marketing.

That?s all it is.

 

[Gulo Blue]

Okay...how could Sanders fund his programs through taxing million-ayuhs and billion-ayuh in a society where there presumably are none?

Outside of private enterprise how does a society produce (get it? society produce? get it? get it?) milliona-ayuhs and billion-ayuhs to pay for even more free shit?

Democratic socialists are really just garden variety Democrats who call themselves something else.

It?s just rebranding.

It?s marketing.

That?s all it is.

You might be right that it's just marketing, but it's inaccurate rebranding. (I've been googling since I asked the question.)



It's like saying you are so opposed to atheists, you're Christian. If asked specifically about Christ...no, you don't believe in Christ, but you're sooooo against atheists, you want to go by the term Christian.

 

[tinselwolverine]

"I mean, to me, it means democracy, frankly," Senator Sanders added. "That's all it means."

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...ism-new-york-democratic-primary-a8425416.html


As the DSA's website states: "At the root of our socialism is a profound commitment to democracy, as means and end. As we are unlikely to see an immediate end to capitalism tomorrow, DSA fights for reforms today that will weaken the power of corporations and increase the power of working people."

Right. Sanders himself doesn’t even describe it as being socialism. The DSA doesn’t call for an immediate conversion to socialism-weaken the power of corporations and increases the power of working people-which is the same thing Democrats claim to stand for, even though a lot of the progressives on this board believe that that’s bullshit, and to a degree I agree.

There are a lot of rich fucking Democrats in Congress. None of them is giving back all their money tomorrow.

It’s re-branding.

It’s marketing.

It’s to differentiate themselves within the Democratic Party from the Party establishment to win nominations.

It worked for Ocasio-Cortez and not for the inherent corruption of the DNC it probably would have worked for Sanders.

 

[tinselwolverine]

You might be right that it's just marketing, but it's inaccurate rebranding. (I've been googling since I asked the question.)



It's like saying you are so opposed to atheists, you're Christian. If asked specifically about Christ...no, you don't believe in Christ, but you're sooooo against atheists, you want to go by the term Christian.

Are you saying there could be an amount of disingenuousness that occurs in marketing?

 

[Gulo Blue]

This history prof from Boston University validates what I'm saying, so I obviously think he knows what he's talking about.


http://www.bu.edu/today/2019/democratic-socialism/

 

[Gulo Blue]

Are you saying there could be an amount of disingenuousness that occurs in marketing?

What I first asked, I thought there might be some technicality, but now, I think I get it.


It smells like deception because it is deception.

 

[tinselwolverine]

This history prof from Boston University validates what I'm saying, so I obviously think he knows what he's talking about.


http://www.bu.edu/today/2019/democratic-socialism/

I read through it and it seems to validate what I?m saying too-she and Sanders are very progressive-they want to tax the socks off of people who make more money to provide more free shit for other people.

But how are you going to get people who make more money outside of an unregulated income opportunity economy, such as you find in free market capitalism?

You?re not.

The professor doesn?t see either of them as being a socialist, and hasn?t cited an instance where either has called for the government is taking over the means of production.

Just regular old Democrats rebranded.

Well Sanders was old anyway.

 

[Gulo Blue]

I read through it and it seems to validate what I?m saying too

Correct. I should have mentioned that. We're not at odds here.


This is a very knowledgeable professor.