Democratic Socialism

[0nelilreb]

The difference is that capitalism is not actually a form of government.

That’s why I said trying to get in power over capitalism . I guess I should have said “install” it over capitalism.

 

[AM64]

Let's start with this first one:

Doesn’t socialism mean that the government will own and run everything?
Democratic socialists do not want to create an all-powerful government bureaucracy. But we do not want big corporate bureaucracies to control our society either. Rather, we believe that social and economic decisions should be made by those whom they most affect.

Today, corporate executives who answer only to themselves and a few wealthy stockholders make basic economic decisions affecting millions of people. Resources are used to make money for capitalists rather than to meet human needs. We believe that the workers and consumers who are affected by economic institutions should own and control them.

Social ownership could take many forms, such as worker-owned cooperatives or publicly owned enterprises managed by workers and consumer representatives. Democratic socialists favor as much decentralization as possible. While the large concentrations of capital in industries such as energy and steel may necessitate some form of state ownership, many consumer-goods industries might be best run as cooperatives.

Democratic socialists have long rejected the belief that the whole economy should be centrally planned. While we believe that democratic planning can shape major social investments like mass transit, housing, and energy, market mechanisms are needed to determine the demand for many consumer goods.


1. Corporations are answerable via the market mechanism. The answer above completely ignores the power of customer choice in holding corporations accountable. Likewise capitalism does not preclude employee ownership of businesses.

2. Favor as much decentralization as possible? Federal control of schools and school choice? Federal control of health insurance and health care? Holy crap who are they kidding?

3. Rejected central planning? Again when you begin with a premise that government can pick winners and losers you are drinking at the trough of central planning.

IOW - they are not being honest about what they are pedaling.

We need to exile some people to Cuba. My thought about Cuba, a very very droll "I really like what you've done with the place." It's not bad if you like government controlled education that decides which occupation to push, but still can't provide water seven days a week. Apparently their doctors are a cash crop they send to other places, and their own socialized medicine is a lot less than you'd think. They are another of China's bait and loan programs ... we lend you money for stuff you can't afford, and then we own you ... as in get the hell off our new military base.

 

[AM64]

Its simple. In a perfect Utopian society, socialism would work work well. However, NO ONE lives in a perfect Utopian society and implementing this will turn the US into Venezuela 2.0 in 10 to 12 years.

Doesn't matter how Utopian, unless you lobotomize the population, socialism/communism always turns totalitarian because that's the only way it works.

 

[Weezer]

Doesn't matter how Utopian, unless you lobotomize the population, socialism/communism always turns totalitarian because that's the only way it works.

In a true Utopian society, you wouldn't have idiots or corruption, that's why it would work there. That's also why we'll never have a true Utopian society.

 

[Weezer]

We need to exile some people to Cuba. My thought about Cuba, a very very droll "I really like what you've done with the place." It's not bad if you like government controlled education that decides which occupation to push, but still can't provide water seven days a week. Apparently their doctors are a cash crop they send to other places, and their own socialized medicine is a lot less than you'd think. They are another of China's bait and loan programs ... we lend you money for stuff you can't afford, and then we own you ... as in get the hell off our new military base.

But I like their cars.

 

[AM64]

Democratic socialism is great if you're poor and want to stay poor.

And it's just refined and repackaged communism.

It's more like ... if you are poor and you want everybody else to be poor and to stay poor with you. Only the pigs running the sh!t show are wealthy. But, hey, your democrat pulling your cart doesn't need a road like the road built for their limos.

 

[AM64]

But I like their cars.

Their new cars come from China. Those old cars are shells with Russian engines and transmissions - or cars like Ladas that the Russians left. I rode in a 50's Olds convertible with a Gaz diesel - that thing about keeping the original engines running is apparently a hoax.

 

[AM64]

In a true Utopian society, you wouldn't have idiots or corruption, that's why it would work there. That's also why we'll never have a true Utopian society.

I can't see how not having an original thought to pursue or wanting to be better could be Utopian - to me it would simply be existing in a world of androids.

 

[BreatheUT]

I'll not be wavering from the "anybody but Trump" position, unless someone more horrendously despicable than Trump were to win the democratic nomination......and with Epstein being dead and Don Jr. not wishing to challenge his father that's an impossibility.

Vote for the Bolshevik

 

[Weezer]

I can't see how not having an original thought to pursue or wanting to be better could be Utopian - to me it would simply be existing in a world of androids.

I think if Utopia existed, there would be nothing wrong with striving to be better. In a perfect society, everyone would be working together to achieve that goal. But human nature doesn't allow that kind of behavior.

 

[LouderVol]

Scandanavian countries aren't socialist

Sorry Bernie Bros But Nordic Countries Are Not Socialist

"What we find, however, is the Nordic countries rank quite high on this index of economic freedom. In fact, while Hong Kong and Singapore top the list and the U.S. ranks 12th, we can find the Nordic countries in quite respectable rankings. Denmark ranks 15, Finland 17, Norway 25, and Sweden 27. In terms of numerical scores, Sweden is only 5% lower than the U.S. For further comparison, South Korea and Japan, both considered fairly pro-free market, rank 32 and 39, respectively."

Lol. Less free than us. And we are being told all the free stuff will just help our freedom and liberties.

That 5% difference is a pretty big metric across a county of 330+ million.

 

[Hunerwadel]

Too many posters here think of socialism and communism as being interchangeable terms. I have posted the distinct differences in various threads many times. Too many posters also seem to be under the delusion that the United States isn't already close to being an even mixture of capitalism and socialism. Too many posters also don't seem to realize the numerous ways that Trump has implemented socialist policies... such as the bailout of the farming industry as an offset to the impact that his tariffs had on free trade. Some of you guys are just plain slow.

Many of them know better. They just want voters to equate socialism with gulags and government oppression when It more accurately equates to affordable education, healthcare, higher working class wages and Democracy.

 

[joevol33]

Many of them know better. They just want voters to equate socialism with gulags and government oppression when It more accurately equates to affordable education, healthcare, higher working class wages and Democracy.

Yep, all those great things are why people are having to be killed by their own government in Venezuela. They're not upset that they're hungry and suffering, they must be upset over all that great education and higher wages.

 

[0nelilreb]

Many of them know better. They just want voters to equate socialism with gulags and government oppression when It more accurately equates to affordable education, healthcare, higher working class wages and Democracy.

Well when you and your supporters talk openly about gulags and government suppression of people’s rights , what do you expect ? Now .. too many people on here know better , they are just having to convince themselves that voting for an old ,privileged , white , socialist ..is going to be good for education , healthcare , and Democracy .

 

[hog88]

Many of them know better. They just want voters to equate socialism with gulags and government oppression when It more accurately equates to affordable education, healthcare, higher working class wages and Democracy.

I associate all of that with capitalism.

 

[Vol737]

At some point the lines between socialism and communism become blurred. Bernie’s vision, if you read the tea leaves, certainly indicates a more authoritarian approach through his class warfare statements and confiscatory policies. The more steeped in socialism we become requires a more authoritarian approach and further separation from individual liberties. Bernie’s brand and our Constitution cannot coexist. The document may still exist, but the intent behind it will have to be eviscerated to accomplish Bernie’s goals. We should be very careful about continuing down the socialist rabbit hole as many of our socialist programs are unsustainable and have been horribly mismanaged by the bureaucratic system and politicians.

 

[tennvols77]

Socialism can not exist, it doesn't exist in reality, it is theory, in reality it is an oligarchy quasi-feudal communist monarchy.

It is impossible that the entire community, especially on any scale larger than a working farm/sustenance community, it's impossible to ever to be able to wholly own or regulate anything of any size more than a small village void of actual business/companies or government, as it is a "social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole".

So, take any city in America, water/waste/waste management, utilities/power/electric, maintenance, every company and business, how exactly is the "whole" going to run these with everyone's input without someone or some group deciding for the community as a whole...... any place that has over a couple hundred people will never agree on anything unless they are farmers/hunter/gatherers void of industry, infrastructure, and government. The minute there are any groups, or any entity making decisions on any matter that doesn't include the whole, it becomes something other than socialism.

Socialism is a concept.

 

[luthervol]

I associate all of that with capitalism.

Pure capitalism has never worked, and never will.
We are all well aware that we have a blended economy and that that will continue no matter who is elected.
All that will be different will be the mixture of the blend, which is appropriate.

 

[tennvols77]

With true communism, the nation is government under militaristic/dictatorship control of the elected leader, and the ruling class, who own the means of production is replaced by this "government". The people have no class, they are worker or citizen. Unless in high ranking government or military, you do not matter.

 

[luthervol]

Vote for the Bolshevik

If he's the nominee, I most certainly will.

 

[luthervol]

Socialism can not exist, it doesn't exist in reality, it is theory, in reality it is an oligarchy quasi-feudal communist monarchy.

It is impossible that the entire community, especially on any scale larger than a working farm/sustenance community, it's impossible to ever to be able to wholly own or regulate anything of any size more than a small village void of actual business/companies or government, as it is a "social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole".

So, take any city in America, water/waste/waste management, utilities/power/electric, maintenance, every company and business, how exactly is the "whole" going to run these with everyone's input without someone or some group deciding for the community as a whole...... any place that has over a couple hundred people will never agree on anything unless they are farmers/hunter/gatherers void of industry, infrastructure, and government. The minute there are any groups, or any entity making decisions on any matter that doesn't include the whole, it becomes something other than socialism.

Socialism is a concept.

Capitalism is also only a concept.
In their purest forms (which we will never have) they would take us to the exact same point.
The difference is in the motivating factors.

 

[Carl Pickens]

Eggsactly! In my small utopian society I call her house my wife has more space, is more comfortable and controls the money. I'm told that I'm lucky to have one cushion on the couch, 18" of bed, a chair at the dinner table and permission to use 1 bathroom.

Your society sounds a lot like mine.... I wonder if you and I should secede

 

[FLVOL_79]

No, it's not. I have posted this before, but here it is again. The distinct and significant fundamental differences between socialism and communism are:

(1) Under communism, all economic resources are publicly owned and controlled by the government (comprised of officials who were not necessarily elected to their positions) and individuals hold no personal property or assets. Under socialism, individuals own personal property but all industrial and production capacity is communally owned and managed by a democratically elected government.

(2) Under communism, production is intended to meet all basic human needs and is distributed to the people at no charge. Under socialism, production is intended to meet individual and societal needs and distributed according to individual ability and contribution.

(3) Under communism, classes are abolished and the ability to earn more than other workers is almost non-existent. Under socialism, classes exist, although the differences are diminished. It is possible for some people to earn more than others.

(4) Under communism, religion is effectively abolished. Under socialism, freedom of religion is allowed.

There are similarities, but these differences are distinct and significant and should be understood. The fact is that the United States has been a mixture of capitalism and socialism for over 100 years now. Both parties agree that pure capitalism does not work any more than pure socialism works. This mixture must exist. The difference between Sanders and others, is to what percentage of capitalism and socialism the United States should be working under. I do not believe that the majority of posters on this forum, who decry the evils of socialism, even understand what socialism is. They have just learned to treat it as a key word to attack liberals... those of you who argue that socialism and communism are the same thing, prove this point, as well as your own ignorance.

Like I said, its communism its just been cleaned up a bit and put in a suit so its less scary to people. It doesn't have to match in lockstep with old communism because its a new, modern form. What countries are practicing democratic socialism right now? I can think of a few off the top of my head..China..Vietnam..Venezuela...Nicaragua.. And guess what all those countries have in common? (other than being massive sh!tholes)

 

[FLVOL_79]

The difference is that capitalism is not actually a form of government.

You're going to blow left wing minds with that one. It goes against everything the media tells them.

 

[FLVOL_79]

I love the history books with all the examples of how socialism lifted nations from poverty.

My favorite story was about the Sandinista's in Nicaragua and all the good they did to bring that country out of poverty and become a beacon of hope for Latin America.