Democratic Socialism Surging in the Age of (President) Trump

[Tehon]

Did anyone else actually bother to read their website?

In their own words: "We believe that working people should run both the economy and society democratically to meet human needs, not to make profits for a few."

Does that really sound so wrong? If so, why?

Does this really sound so wrong? If not, why?

There is little distinction made between the terms "democratic socialism" and "socialism" in the group's literature. While Ringelstein and other DSA-backed candidates promote a "big-tent" philosophy, the DSA constitution describes their members as socialists who "reject an economic order based on private profit" and "share a vision of a humane social order based on popular control of resources and production, economic planning, equitable distribution, feminism, racial equality and non-oppressive relationships."

Members during public meetings often refer to each other "comrades," wear clothing featuring socialist symbols like the rose and promote authors such as Karl Marx.

It is wrong because it is fake news. From the New York Times no less.

 

[Tehon]

Did anyone else actually bother to read their website?

In their own words: "We believe that working people should run both the economy and society democratically to meet human needs, not to make profits for a few."

Does that really sound so wrong? If so, why?

My bad. It was not a misquote and is in fact in the DSA Constitution.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Democratic socialism surging in the age of Trump

www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/politics/ct-democratic-socialism-midterms-20180720-story.html#


From the piece:

"There are 42 men and women running for offices at the federal, state and local levels this year with the formal endorsement of the Democratic Socialists of America, the organization says. They span 20 states, including Florida, Hawaii, Kansas and Michigan."

"The most ambitious Democrats in Washington have been reluctant to embrace the label, even as they embrace the policies defining modern-day democratic socialism: Medicare for all, a $15 minimum wage, free college tuition and the abolition of the federal department of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, also known as ICE."
______________________________________________________________________________________

To aid in the debate:

Party Info/Websites:
Democratic Socialists of America
Democratic Socialists of America - Wikipedia
Communist Party USA

Socialism vs. Communism:
Comparing Economic Systems [ushistory.org]
Capitalism vs. Socialism.
Difference between Communism and Democracy | Communism vs Democracy

Papers:
Capitalism vs. Socialism
Capitalism Vs. Socialism - Research Paper
SOCIALISM vs. CAPITALISM: Past, Present and Future
______________________________________________________________________________________

What do you think, fellow Americans and others? Has the Democrat Party run out of other options? Do you support the idea of a socialist America, and if so, why? Is anything but "Trump" justification in your minds for voting socialist?

If the corps get socialism , and if by socialism you mean healthcare for all, Yes. Also I believe in progressive taxation for that, and the rich should have that top bracket moved up to say 45%.

Thats not socialism. Thats communism. It has always failed.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

I'll put myself out there first.

I voted No.

I view myself politically as a Paleoconservative. Defense of culture, family and nation are of first importance in defining my political views. That being said, like many others, the journey to get 'here' has been a long one. Over four plus decades I have come full circle from conservative Democrat roots, to explorations of atheism, Hinduism, borderline radical leftism back to conservatism tradition of Christian roots and cultural preservation. Today, I find the concept of a socialist America to be a very troubling one; antithetical to the will of our Founders and the foundation concept of the Constitution. Ultimately, I believe in a balance between liberalism and conservatism under which tradition can be preserved while a degree of liberal philosophy prevents stagnation and popular push for radical change.

Which culture, and what do you mean by family? Christian roots gave us slavery.

Slavery was started in babylonian times and had nothing to do with christianity. Many of those slaves owned homes and were given salaries. The hebrews were forced into slaves for the egyptians. Slavery was not borne out of christianity.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Democratic socialism surging in the age of Trump

www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/politics/ct-democratic-socialism-midterms-20180720-story.html#


From the piece:

"There are 42 men and women running for offices at the federal, state and local levels this year with the formal endorsement of the Democratic Socialists of America, the organization says. They span 20 states, including Florida, Hawaii, Kansas and Michigan."

"The most ambitious Democrats in Washington have been reluctant to embrace the label, even as they embrace the policies defining modern-day democratic socialism: Medicare for all, a $15 minimum wage, free college tuition and the abolition of the federal department of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, also known as ICE."
______________________________________________________________________________________

To aid in the debate:

Party Info/Websites:
Democratic Socialists of America
Democratic Socialists of America - Wikipedia
Communist Party USA

Socialism vs. Communism:
Comparing Economic Systems [ushistory.org]
Capitalism vs. Socialism.
Difference between Communism and Democracy | Communism vs Democracy

Papers:
Capitalism vs. Socialism
Capitalism Vs. Socialism - Research Paper
SOCIALISM vs. CAPITALISM: Past, Present and Future
______________________________________________________________________________________

What do you think, fellow Americans and others? Has the Democrat Party run out of other options? Do you support the idea of a socialist America, and if so, why? Is anything but "Trump" justification in your minds for voting socialist?

If the corps get socialism , and if by socialism you mean healthcare for all, Yes. Also I believe in progressive taxation for that, and the rich should have that top bracket moved up to say 45%.

What is your justification for taking nearly half of one's income?

Personal greed. There is no other answer.

 

[Maxdeath]

Did anyone else actually bother to read their website?

In their own words: "We believe that working people should run both the economy and society democratically to meet human needs, not to make profits for a few."

Does that really sound so wrong? If so, why?

How exactly do the working people plan to pull this off? Do they plan to have all of Amazons workers pool their money and buy out Amazon? Do they plan to just tell Amazon that this is the way your company is going to be run? Perhaps they plan to just pass a law and take Amazon under some eminent domain excuse?
How many on this forum agree on any issue? Do you think it would be better with each having a say in the way a company is run? There are those that are inherently lazy, so do they fiqure into this grand plan of workers? Who gets the profit So? Does it go to those that only want to work a few hours or does it go to those that work 10 or 12 hours a day? Does it go to the state or federal governments?

I could go on but I think you see what I am getting at here.

 

[basquebromance]

You can’t establish socialism without force – it’s a transition between capitalism and complete communism. This is what Democrats are fighting for.

 

[deanrd]

Democratic socialism surging in the age of Trump

www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/politics/ct-democratic-socialism-midterms-20180720-story.html#


From the piece:

"There are 42 men and women running for offices at the federal, state and local levels this year with the formal endorsement of the Democratic Socialists of America, the organization says. They span 20 states, including Florida, Hawaii, Kansas and Michigan."

"The most ambitious Democrats in Washington have been reluctant to embrace the label, even as they embrace the policies defining modern-day democratic socialism: Medicare for all, a $15 minimum wage, free college tuition and the abolition of the federal department of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, also known as ICE."
______________________________________________________________________________________

To aid in the debate:

Party Info/Websites:
Democratic Socialists of America
Democratic Socialists of America - Wikipedia
Communist Party USA

Socialism vs. Communism:
Comparing Economic Systems [ushistory.org]
Capitalism vs. Socialism.
Difference between Communism and Democracy | Communism vs Democracy

Papers:
Capitalism vs. Socialism
Capitalism Vs. Socialism - Research Paper
SOCIALISM vs. CAPITALISM: Past, Present and Future
______________________________________________________________________________________

What do you think, fellow Americans and others? Has the Democrat Party run out of other options? Do you support the idea of a socialist America, and if so, why? Is anything but "Trump" justification in your minds for voting socialist?

Where is Appalachia?
The largest area of the US betting welfare payments.

 

[basquebromance]

liberals howl when President Trump does the exact same thing that they cheered Obama for.

 

[Coyote]

I don’t have an issue with DS being part of the larger mix that is the Dem party. I see them as more like the Tea Party wing is for the GOP. Socialist type programs, in a democracy aren’t necessarily bad. Look at healthcare and benefits like paid maternity/paternity/family leave, retirement etc in countries like Scandinavia. It means higher taxes and it may not be everone’s cup of tea but the benefits are undeniable when you see those counties consistently ranked at the top for many factors. Folks will always bring up Venezuela as an example but socialism is not the only problem, as it was struggling with significant poverty and corruption for years.

 

[Norman]

Anti-Americans identifying.

A pleasure!!

 

[Norman]

I don’t have an issue with DS being part of the larger mix that is the Dem party. I see them as more like the Tea Party wing is for the GOP. Socialist type programs, in a democracy aren’t necessarily bad. Look at healthcare and benefits like paid maternity/paternity/family leave, retirement etc in countries like Scandinavia. It means higher taxes and it may not be everone’s cup of tea but the benefits are undeniable when you see those counties consistently ranked at the top for many factors. Folks will always bring up Venezuela as an example but socialism is not the only problem, as it was struggling with significant poverty and corruption for years.

Here is a factor those countries rank #1 in:
1. Being white.

 

[Crepitus]

Did anyone else actually bother to read their website?

In their own words: "We believe that working people should run both the economy and society democratically to meet human needs, not to make profits for a few."

Does that really sound so wrong? If so, why?

How exactly do the working people plan to pull this off? Do they plan to have all of Amazons workers pool their money and buy out Amazon? Do they plan to just tell Amazon that this is the way your company is going to be run? Perhaps they plan to just pass a law and take Amazon under some eminent domain excuse?
How many on this forum agree on any issue? Do you think it would be better with each having a say in the way a company is run? There are those that are inherently lazy, so do they fiqure into this grand plan of workers? Who gets the profit So? Does it go to those that only want to work a few hours or does it go to those that work 10 or 12 hours a day? Does it go to the state or federal governments?

I could go on but I think you see what I am getting at here.

You seem to be under the mistaken impression they are going to seize all the businesses.

 

[night_son]

Did anyone else actually bother to read their website?

In their own words: "We believe that working people should run both the economy and society democratically to meet human needs, not to make profits for a few."

Does that really sound so wrong? If so, why?

How exactly do the working people plan to pull this off? Do they plan to have all of Amazons workers pool their money and buy out Amazon? Do they plan to just tell Amazon that this is the way your company is going to be run? Perhaps they plan to just pass a law and take Amazon under some eminent domain excuse?
How many on this forum agree on any issue? Do you think it would be better with each having a say in the way a company is run? There are those that are inherently lazy, so do they fiqure into this grand plan of workers? Who gets the profit So? Does it go to those that only want to work a few hours or does it go to those that work 10 or 12 hours a day? Does it go to the state or federal governments?

I could go on but I think you see what I am getting at here.

You seem to be under the mistaken impression they are going to seize all the businesses.

Socialist Revolution

And I quote:

"Whether a socialist revolution is peaceful or violent depends on the extent of the bourgeoisie’s resistance. An armed struggle for power is inevitable and justified if the ruling classes deprive the working class of the possibility of winning over the majority of the population to socialism by peaceful means, if they forcibly suppress the legal activity of the revolutionary vanguard. However, an armed insurrection can succeed only during a national crisis, when the majority of the people will give it their support and sympathy"

 

[night_son]

I don’t have an issue with DS being part of the larger mix that is the Dem party. I see them as more like the Tea Party wing is for the GOP. Socialist type programs, in a democracy aren’t necessarily bad. Look at healthcare and benefits like paid maternity/paternity/family leave, retirement etc in countries like Scandinavia. It means higher taxes and it may not be everone’s cup of tea but the benefits are undeniable when you see those counties consistently ranked at the top for many factors. Folks will always bring up Venezuela as an example but socialism is not the only problem, as it was struggling with significant poverty and corruption for years.

Socialist Revolution

Quoted from the above reference material:


"The direction taken by Marxist-Leninist parties in the capitalist countries is the antithesis of the reformist concept of the “transformation” of capitalism into socialism. Despite its gradual nature, the peaceful transition to socialism is a revolutionary leap involving the seizure of all power by the working class and other working people and a radical change in ownership relations. Even if the transition to socialism is a peaceful one, a nationwide upsurge in the class movement of the working class and its allies must occur at the decisive moment in order to paralyze and break the resistance of the bourgeoisie and to ensure the transfer of power to the working class.
Whether a socialist revolution is peaceful or violent depends on the extent of the bourgeoisie’s resistance. An armed struggle for power is inevitable and justified if the ruling classes deprive the working class of the possibility of winning over the majority of the population to socialism by peaceful means, if they forcibly suppress the legal activity of the revolutionary vanguard. However, an armed insurrection can succeed only during a national crisis, when the majority of the people will give it their support and sympathy."

 

[Coyote]

I don’t have an issue with DS being part of the larger mix that is the Dem party. I see them as more like the Tea Party wing is for the GOP. Socialist type programs, in a democracy aren’t necessarily bad. Look at healthcare and benefits like paid maternity/paternity/family leave, retirement etc in countries like Scandinavia. It means higher taxes and it may not be everone’s cup of tea but the benefits are undeniable when you see those counties consistently ranked at the top for many factors. Folks will always bring up Venezuela as an example but socialism is not the only problem, as it was struggling with significant poverty and corruption for years.

Socialist Revolution

Quoted from the above reference material:


"The direction taken by Marxist-Leninist parties in the capitalist countries is the antithesis of the reformist concept of the “transformation” of capitalism into socialism. Despite its gradual nature, the peaceful transition to socialism is a revolutionary leap involving the seizure of all power by the working class and other working people and a radical change in ownership relations. Even if the transition to socialism is a peaceful one, a nationwide upsurge in the class movement of the working class and its allies must occur at the decisive moment in order to paralyze and break the resistance of the bourgeoisie and to ensure the transfer of power to the working class.
Whether a socialist revolution is peaceful or violent depends on the extent of the bourgeoisie’s resistance. An armed struggle for power is inevitable and justified if the ruling classes deprive the working class of the possibility of winning over the majority of the population to socialism by peaceful means, if they forcibly suppress the legal activity of the revolutionary vanguard. However, an armed insurrection can succeed only during a national crisis, when the majority of the people will give it their support and sympathy."

I'm not sure as to how that relates to today's Democratic Socialists? This is what they have to say about themselves, their platform: What is Democratic Socialism? Q & A

 

[night_son]

I don’t have an issue with DS being part of the larger mix that is the Dem party. I see them as more like the Tea Party wing is for the GOP. Socialist type programs, in a democracy aren’t necessarily bad. Look at healthcare and benefits like paid maternity/paternity/family leave, retirement etc in countries like Scandinavia. It means higher taxes and it may not be everone’s cup of tea but the benefits are undeniable when you see those counties consistently ranked at the top for many factors. Folks will always bring up Venezuela as an example but socialism is not the only problem, as it was struggling with significant poverty and corruption for years.

Socialist Revolution

Quoted from the above reference material:


"The direction taken by Marxist-Leninist parties in the capitalist countries is the antithesis of the reformist concept of the “transformation” of capitalism into socialism. Despite its gradual nature, the peaceful transition to socialism is a revolutionary leap involving the seizure of all power by the working class and other working people and a radical change in ownership relations. Even if the transition to socialism is a peaceful one, a nationwide upsurge in the class movement of the working class and its allies must occur at the decisive moment in order to paralyze and break the resistance of the bourgeoisie and to ensure the transfer of power to the working class.
Whether a socialist revolution is peaceful or violent depends on the extent of the bourgeoisie’s resistance. An armed struggle for power is inevitable and justified if the ruling classes deprive the working class of the possibility of winning over the majority of the population to socialism by peaceful means, if they forcibly suppress the legal activity of the revolutionary vanguard. However, an armed insurrection can succeed only during a national crisis, when the majority of the people will give it their support and sympathy."

I'm not sure as to how that relates to today's Democratic Socialists? This is what they have to say about themselves, their platform: What is Democratic Socialism? Q & A

I was simply highlighting the historic context for transition from capitalism to socialism. Reading the fine detail of the Maoist Red Guards cultural revolution in 60's China is quite chilling in the face of similar movements in today's America--particularly on campuses nationwide, and in direct relation to the Political Correctness movement of the last few years.

 

[Maxdeath]

Did anyone else actually bother to read their website?

In their own words: "We believe that working people should run both the economy and society democratically to meet human needs, not to make profits for a few."

Does that really sound so wrong? If so, why?

How exactly do the working people plan to pull this off? Do they plan to have all of Amazons workers pool their money and buy out Amazon? Do they plan to just tell Amazon that this is the way your company is going to be run? Perhaps they plan to just pass a law and take Amazon under some eminent domain excuse?
How many on this forum agree on any issue? Do you think it would be better with each having a say in the way a company is run? There are those that are inherently lazy, so do they fiqure into this grand plan of workers? Who gets the profit So? Does it go to those that only want to work a few hours or does it go to those that work 10 or 12 hours a day? Does it go to the state or federal governments?

I could go on but I think you see what I am getting at here.

You seem to be under the mistaken impression they are going to seize all the businesses.

I am sure it is hard to keep up with the things you post. You stated that they wanted to run both the economy and the government. So how do you run the economy with out owning those things that are the economy? Do you just believe that they only want to run mom and pop stores?

Last time I looked we had a government that was by the people, for the people.

 

[Crepitus]

Did anyone else actually bother to read their website?

In their own words: "We believe that working people should run both the economy and society democratically to meet human needs, not to make profits for a few."

Does that really sound so wrong? If so, why?

How exactly do the working people plan to pull this off? Do they plan to have all of Amazons workers pool their money and buy out Amazon? Do they plan to just tell Amazon that this is the way your company is going to be run? Perhaps they plan to just pass a law and take Amazon under some eminent domain excuse?
How many on this forum agree on any issue? Do you think it would be better with each having a say in the way a company is run? There are those that are inherently lazy, so do they fiqure into this grand plan of workers? Who gets the profit So? Does it go to those that only want to work a few hours or does it go to those that work 10 or 12 hours a day? Does it go to the state or federal governments?

I could go on but I think you see what I am getting at here.

You seem to be under the mistaken impression they are going to seize all the businesses.

I am sure it is hard to keep up with the things you post. You stated that they wanted to run both the economy and the government. So how do you run the economy with out owning those things that are the economy? Do you just believe that they only want to run mom and pop stores?

Last time I looked we had a government that was by the people, for the people.

What? That's a dumb question. Does the government own all the businesses right now?

 

[whitehall]

I happened across a documentary about the Jonestown massacre/suicide in Guyana. I knew most of the details but the political aspect was interesting. Jim Jones was an avowed socialist and he made no bones (pardon the pun) about it. He was the darling of the California liberal political establishment including the likes of Jerry Brown and a few democrat mayors and politicians. He was credited for helping at least one San Francisco democrat win the election for mayor by turning his congregation out to vote. Jones is a stunning example of the capacity of the crazy emotional left to make bad political choices and an example of a badly researched dream of a socialist utopia courtesy of a madman.