Americans are backing progressives not because they want socialism, but because they want candidates who will fight for the working class
Dropout has a point.
I will believe it after the 2028 DNC Presidential primaries are over.
If it turns out to be Newsom versus AOC, the DNC will burn everything to the ground to give it to Newsom.
Well yeah haven’t you heard? The reason Hillary Clinton and Kamala Harris lost was because they were women not because they were so conservative as to be almost indistinguishable from a Republican.
Socialist do fight for the working class.
So do social democrats, anarchists, communists, etc.
“For far too long, our party has seen its job as managing decline instead of delivering material change for working people,” Mamdani said at a rally headlined by Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders. “It has seen its job as explaining why we cannot instead of showing how we can."
My 27 year old son grew up under MAGA, and he and his friends don’t understand why we would want to go back to the same weak, broken system that spawned MAGA. Clearly, it was a failure.
So why not try Socialism? Healthcare, higher wages, job security, free education, no student loan slavery, affordable housing, and more. What’s to not like? The joy of watching our slavemasters become trillionaires?
don’t count your chickens…
Reich has been fighting this fight for a long time. If he says it’s happening, I’m cautiously optimistic.
Biden got elected on “$15 an hour”; minimum wage is still seven and change.
Watch, there will always be a “few DINOs” (or RINOs, depending) in their majority to stop legislation that Bezos doesn’t approve of.
The funny part is, they could skip this “super majority” dog and pony show at any time with a majority vote (called “nuclear option” because it frightens the proles, haha it’s not nuclear it is just a vote, suckers)
Americans are backing progressives not because they want socialism, but because they want candidates who will fight for the working class
That’s the literal goal of socialism though…
They’re voting for progressive Democrats not because they want socialism, support the Democratic Socialists of America, or reject candidates called “moderate”.
They’re voting for candidates whom they believe will fight to make housing, food, healthcare and childcare affordable to average working families. And who’ll take on Trump’s billionaire backers, CEOs and Wall Street titans who are rigging the economy against them.
So they are voting for socialists not because they want socialism, but because the alternatives are refusing to reign in, or are overtly in favor of, unfettered capitalism…
not because they want socialism, but because they want candidates who will fight for the working class
That’s the literal goal of socialism though…
they are not fighting for the dirty word but for the more acceptable wording of the same thing
Socialism is a dirty word, an “extremist” pov to those who value inanimate objects and concepts over human life, to those who dismiss the magnitude of human suffering in the name of self, over collective prosperity.
In reality, it’s the most rational outcome to create a world of less suffering that provides more insurance to the survival of our species.
The rich don’t think of the poor as members of their species. That should be very obvious by now.
Well the S word is bad so they want all the S stuff but without the word.
I know a Trump supporter who complains about stuff in their life and their solution is basically socialist stuff.
But when I use the socialist terms to describe it, they deflect or somehow say what they are saying is different.
Seriously when will a progressive finally do some rebranding? Call your position “Freedomism” and scream it from the rooftops to establish it. Make the tenants of Freedomism the exact same as Socialism but Americanized™.
Because “progressive” is itself a more liberal term with its basis in inevitable, linear societal development. It often functions to naturalize the continuation of a liberal-capitalist on the assertion that “progress” (which can be either the institutionalization of social justice values or economic growth, depending on the period) is inevitable except when impeded by bad actors “misusing” what is fundamentally a stratified and violent system.
Unsurprisingly then, socialism is not very compatible with this basis save for the oftem-shared (though not necessary) idealized arc of social development and the more colloquial understandings of “progress” that are more in reference to a vague sense of social justice and its association with the more egalitarian, collectivist politics socialists subscribe to. Since socialists are also often quite mired in the linguistic specificities of political ideologies and rhetoric (for good reason), it would also create complications where further alienation of this word from its liberal use while maintaining its underlying political and social meanings could put socialist values even more at risk at appropriation by “progressive” liberal thinkers or politicians.
What you’re describing is exactly that, the process by which liberals appropriate potentially challenging ideals and politics into their logical frameworks and effectively disarm dissenting movements by forcing them to integrate liberal values into their talking points if they wish to negotiate at least a marginally “better” chance at the adoption of their politics. We are living in the consequences of this when Democrats can claim ownership over queer and anti-racist politics while they consistently erode the rights and securities that those groups gained through more radical and disruptive politics than what is currently tolerated by them.The current wave of trans genocide in the US is very much a consequence of the liberal adoption of queer rights and social justice into their political rhetoric and platforms performatively, and therefore removed from the fundamentally anti-capitalist, anti-liberalism elements of anti-heteronormativity and anti-patriarchy.
What you’re talking about may seem to make sense intuitively --adjust the language to something with less propaganda baggage – but the problem is that this has failed multiple times in less than a century, and “Americanized Socialism” is already something Democrats have established when they argue that basic welfare liberal policies are somehow “leftist” policies. Since we all must be conscious of the coming genocides liberals 100% intend to commit in response to climate change, it is even harder to argue we have time to do anything else but clearly delineate their politics from what must be done in reality.
Totally love this idea. It’s insidious enough that it just might work. “Pro-democracy! Pro-employee! Pro-consumer! Pro-family!” And then a wild card like “pro-football!” or something for plausible deniability and to appeal to the blue collar vote.
(also fyi the word you mean is “tenets”)
I love the fact that people are dumb enough for this to work.
They want to live by the s word and die by the s word?
Americans are backing progressives not because they want socialism, but because they want candidates who will fight for the working class
Mostly I want everyone involved in the Trump admin prosecuted, after that… socialism.
If were going with the goals of socialism, the goal is to have social ownership of companies directly by the workers or through the state which is something that by and large Americans don’t support but yes, some Americans are voting for progressives and democratic socialists because they’re promising to enact regulations to help the median wage earning American.
And a reminder that this is what MAGA, in all its forms, also ran and promised and won because median Americans kept being disappointed with Democrats not doing a damn thing to help them when they got into power.
I mean I’m hopeful that the Democratic party will get its head out of its ass and and continue to vote in progressives and DSA members but overall in median America, I still have my doubts it’ll be a quick change since it’s been over a decade since Tea Party/MAGA have continued to hold power with median Americans, George Carlin voters continuing to vote these charlatans in power.
George Carlin voters continuing to vote these charlatans in power.
Um what?
They’ll get it all from you sooner or later ‘cause they own this fuckin’ place. It’s a big club and you ain’t in it. You and I are not in the big club. By the way, it’s the same big club they use to beat you over the head with all day long when they tell you what to believe. All day long beating you over the head with their media telling you what to believe, what to think and what to buy. The table is tilted, folks. The game is rigged and nobody seems to notice. Nobody seems to care. Good, honest, hard-working people: white collar, blue collar, it doesn’t matter what color shirt you have on.
- George Carlin, Life is Worth Losing, 2005
You took the time to paste this section of his set yet neglect the literal previous ten minutes where he talks about the stupidity of the American people.
Referring to those idiots as George Carlin Voters as if they’re following his advice is disingenuous and an insult to a great man.
When capitalism fails the majority of the citizens the citizens will vote for socialism. This is literally Marxism.
Earlier America capitalists were aware of this and pushed capitalist values while instituting social programs to ensure the free market stays fair and that citizens are taken care of so that socialism never looks interesting.
Right now the capitalists have forgotten this warning have decided to go full theft and consolidation, so the people are turning to anything that will give them a chance.
Socialism isn’t going to be better, and I wish the elites would recognize they need to give up a lot more of what they have to maintain a semblance of capitalism because the alternative is pitchforks, hangings, and forced redistributions with a different type of corruption at the top.
History has already run all of these experiments before, the problem as I see it is the elites of our time, like elites of the past, think they are above history. They aren’t, and like many times prior in history their arrogance will harm everyone.
I thought maybe the last 100 years we were building institutions that could begin to break this cycle but sadly people die and new people without the knowledge emerge and start pounding chests.
It’s so sad to me sometimes.
I’ve heard this sea change largely attributed to the fall of the Soviet Union, which removed any pressure to continue selling capitalism to the masses.
That’s an interesting theory, it says the US has become the victim of its own success.
Socialism is going to be better tho.
It could be, but I have yet to see historical evidence of it being better.
All systems come with trade offs, but I really worry about fully planned economies being really fragile.
Having social programs and guardrails capitalism is probably the best system. You make sure people are treated with dignity and are taken care of, but you provide mechanisms for bad ideas to fail and encourage risk taking the wasn’t thought of by the government. Pure socialism has been proven to be just as historically toxic as pure capitalism.
Really wish more people understood cooperatives.
The “regulated capitalism” you think of came as a direct result of a threat of socialist revolution, brought by interventionist USSR. Without a threat like that, capitalism degrades rather quickly into what you see today and way beyond. Capitalism itself is an awful system based on greed and exploitation, and it will blow through any guardrails you try to put on it given enough time.
I really worry about fully planned economies being really fragile.
As opposed to the very stable free market economy of the US, which is about to go through a third “once-in-a-lifetime” recession in 20 years?
Meanwhile e.g. Chinese economy is mostly managed by actual economists who aim to balance economic development, poverty alleviation, and quality-of-life improvements. The impact of their crises are felt most by those on top, not only financially but also in terms of prison sentences if they are to blame.
Pure socialism has been proven to be just as historically toxic as pure capitalism.
This is precisely what capitalists would want you to think. It is indeed what I thought a few years ago before someone pushed me to read a bit of Marx, Lenin, and Kropotkin, and look at the history of rising socialist states critically. If you actually examine what socialism has done for the working people, it becomes obvious that it is a flawed system but a massive improvement over capitalism.
I think America has farther to fall before a serious conversation about Marx’s ideas can hit mainstream. Right now “socialism” just means “progressive reformation” thanks to the propaganda machines. Fox news has been peddling “anything i don’t like is socialism” for so long that American’s just call good thing socialism.
because they want socialism
I’m guessing you mean democratic socialism or social democracy and not the Marxist kind.
Social democracy has created some of the best societies in the world, while the Marxist kind has created some of the worst.Agree to disagree. Marxism wasn’t the driving force behind the failure of Communist/Socialist endeavor that I’ve heard of.
Social democracy thrives only on exploitation of the working class elsewhere. Its citizens enjoy free healthcare and a robust social net, paid for by a person on the other side of the world hyperexploited by the capitalists in charge.
Meanwhile socialist societies, while imperfect or even awful in many ways, actually build the productive forces necessary for human development and thus actual positive human rights.
I would love to see data on this. For example how do the Scandinavian countries continue to exist while exploiting third world labor? As far as I can tell, all four are net exporters.
We really really need some progressives in gov. Like, a lot of em. Especially as the POTUS. Someone who is completely the opposite of the orange taint. The People should be the ones in charge, not the public servants.
His son is from Cambridge, Massachusetts.
In case you wanted to know.
Am i supposed to clutch my pearls?
Clutch em and weep!
…love the downvotes. It’s just an inside joke for fans of dropout.tv, where his son, among other tihngs, hosts a show called Game Changer, and one of the jokes on the show sometimes is people asking him where he’s from. So yeah, from the outside perspective it looks random, but it’s a pretty harmless post. :rolls eyes at the internet:
Not an ad, but the clip that got me to look into it more and eventually sign up becasue the entire series is fantastic: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/SsDyNOB1hZs
Ah, was unaware of that whole thing.
Just seemed like anti-intelectual cheap shot.
So i felt obligated to defend RR as having been one of the better intelectuals for the common people.
Ain’t no worries, it’s logical. lol. <3
And Robert Reich is a pretty good dude.
If you make a niche in joke, don’t be surprised when most people don’t get it, and don’t double down with an attitude when someone goes “wat”
Yeah, should just let the joke stand on its own imo. The people who get it will get it. Kind of the entire point of niche jokes like that.
I’ll have whatever attitude I want, mate. And you can either read me as being lighthearted about it or not, it’s your call. lol
How Gen X of you
He’s been here the whole time.
Wall Street democrats:
Hey we are the good guys, we want the same things Republicans want, but without the fascism. 🤢
Now we’ll see in the mid-terms and 2028 presidential elections if the average american voter wants to back socialism or just stay home.
