You're viewing a single thread.
I’m more of a practical American socialist than a radical communist (since that’s unlikely to happen here) but it offends me because republicans are just so ignorant. The average Republican essentially has no idea what socialism, communism or fascism actually are, and conservatives have been using this as a scary label for my entire life.
I’m more of a practical American socialist than a radical communist (since that’s unlikely to happen here)
Why do you say this? What's a "practical American Socialist?"
- practical: I don't have any delusions that the US will implement leftism more extreme than EU style socialist policies any time soon
- American: I'm from the US
- socialist: I feel the government should be involved more in regulating industries, owning certain categories of services, moderating excess wealth, and ensuring the financial/economic well-being of citizens, as opposed to the conservative style which is basically 'well, if you're poor then fuck off'.
- practical: I don't have any delusions that the US will implement leftism more extreme than EU style socialist policies any time soon
The EU doesn't have socialist policies, you're referring to social safety nets.
- socialist: I feel the government should be involved more in regulating industries, owning certain categories of services, moderating excess wealth, and ensuring the financial/economic well-being of citizens, as opposed to the conservative style which is basically 'well, if you're poor then fuck off'.
So you're talking Social Democracy, like the Nordics, not Socialism.
Not precisely as I mentioned public ownership of some industries and services that are privately owned. Healthcare and drug production would be two good examples.
Those are found in the nordics, that's still dependent on Capitalism as the basis unless you also want to entirely restructure government.
I'd love for the US economic system to somehow be wholly restructured, but incremental improvements are the best we can do currently.
Not really, we have no actual control over policy.
Look, people have been debating the definition of socialism for decades, and you guys are not going to figure out here today on Lemmy World.
its pretty settled actialy, its the worker ownership of the means of production
It's not a debate so much as a propaganda war where every state is lying.
Defeatist (based on observation of fact)
Defeatist because I'm not pushing for full communism or are you referring to something else?
The thing about defeatism is that sometimes it's just correct, the war is lost. Socialism as in the workers owning the means of production is a currently impossible concept for America. Social democracy would need a tidal wave of the YOOTHS building a New Deal-type political coalition as the Boomers die off but it's something you can work towards.
The capitalist and nationalist propaganda against communism has been at a completely insane level in the US for 70 years now... yeah, it's hard to go against, but I do have faith it's dying out. Conservatives can't even really remember the USSR currently and younger people, mainly liberal (IN A US POLITICS SENSE) can clearly see the problems with the current system and have desire and will to make it change. Still lots of completely deluded younger folks too, though, and the levels of fascist propaganda we're dealing with now are massive.
Both parties agree on the standard indoctrination. They only disagree about the purpose/topics of the brainwashing. Neither party wants it to include an honest discussion about socialism, fascism, etc. It's a self-perpetuating problem where the indoctrinators don't even understand what this stuff means.
I agree that corporate hegemony is non-negotiable in mainstream US politics. The question is what to do about it, and which version is worse. Republicans are far, far worse about everything that is on the table. Democrats are willing to reign in the corporations a little bit and actually help people. The Republican propaganda and the insane policies they think of are far, far worse.
In order not to be confounded with economic socialists, who the right accuses of wanting everything for free at the expense of others, I always inform people that I am a Nathan J. Robinson socialist.
I read about Robinson and it all sounds pretty reasonable.