Socialism |OT| The Dawn of a Red Era

[Chikor]

I'd still argue the party on the by leans left then. Even with the albatross of the senate/EC. The party pushes for leftwing social issues and tries to go for leftwing economic ideas.

Slow progress is progress to me. I mean, we've got AOC and more SocDem/DemSocs now.

Click to shrink...

The Democratic party is not ideologically humongous, and I think there is quite a few people that fits the definition of centrist to a T.

Picking the definition from wiki: a political outlook or specific position that involves acceptance or support of a balance of a degree of social equality and a degree of social hierarchy, while opposing political changes which would result in a significant shift of society strongly to either the left or the right.

I also think that when you look at the policy outcomes of the Obama administration, it's very hard for me to call them left wing, but we might working with different definition of the term left and right here.

 

[SurrenderDorothy]

We don't talk from what I know, but welcome back from what was a seriously ludicrous ban. Hillary's a ghoul. It is known.

Click to shrink...

Finally, it took them long enough to realise how fucking ridiculous it was. Glad to see you back!

Click to shrink...

Thanks, sincerely. Was thinking why tf was I banned? Legit thought I said something out of turn until I found out which post it was.
Couldn't believe it, honestly, lol.

 

[Phoney McRingRing]

Artdayne

Really for anyone and everyone making the tired arguement about America and Dems being Rightwing/Centrists.

I felt this best to put here than that OT thread. Back to Communism/Socialism party!

Click to shrink...

Anything that lists Mr. Stop-And-Frisk as an advocate for any type of social progress can go straight into the trash. Are we really gonna square Obama as a Labour guy when he clearly hates Corbyn and his guy Jim Messina literally worked for Theresa May?

 

[IpKaiFung]

compared to the rest of the world the dems and reps are pretty right wing.

 

[Deleted member 7130]

...

Many thanks to you lot for having my back in that thread. Didn't appreciate others making up narratives around what I said, or calling it a drive-by or w/e.
Even though I skimmed and read transcripts of the interview itself.
Being called sexist for something so vague was a little disheartening. And no, it won't stop me from calling these politicians out, no matter how alarmist some users try to be about it.


But that's that.

Click to shrink...

Fuck yeah! Solidarity

 

[Chikor]

compared to the rest of the world the dems and reps are pretty right wing.

Click to shrink...

I think it's hard to make an apples to apples comparison between a two party system and a multi-party one. American parties are closer to blocs or coalitions I think.
Also, I think if all you're doing is defending the status quo, I don't think you get that many leftist credits just because your status quo happen to have a more robust welfare state (which I think is the case for many center/center left parties in Europe).

With that being said, I think the last time you can argue that the Democratic party was a left wing party was under LBJ.

 

[Deleted member 7130]

Personally my point of reference for how to the right something is, is actual leftists and leftism itself. It's about how close to the ideal of atomizing and diffusing capital, and curbing societal hierarchies. Most Democratic regulars prop up heirachies as opposed to being egalitarian in nature and in policy and are amenable or active in continued capital hoarding by the rich.

 

[Chikor]

I am a simple person and I was always partial to the good old -
Right wing = help rich people and promote their interests
Left wing = help poor people and promote their interests

I think it's as useful of a short definition as you can find.

 

[Deleted member 721]

I am a simple person and I was always partial to the good old -
Right wing = help rich people and promote their interests
Left wing = help poor people and promote their interests

I think it's as useful of a short definition as you can find.

Click to shrink...

The problem is there's lots of neoliberals that think they are helping the poor.

I Lost count How many times i have seen that graph and article that shows capitalism fighting poverty.

 

[Pekola]

I am a simple person and I was always partial to the good old -
Right wing = help rich people and promote their interests
Left wing = help poor people and promote their interests

I think it's as useful of a short definition as you can find.

Click to shrink...

What about the social stuff?

 

[Chikor]

The problem is there's lots of neoliberals that think they are helping the poor.

I Lost count How many times i have seen that graph and article that shows capitalism fighting poverty.

Click to shrink...

It's never 100% clear cut, but I think it's useful way to judge the overall policy agenda and priorities of an political party or an ideology. For example, if you devastate most of the welfare state and put work requirements on what you couldn't straight up kill, you're not left wing, even if you do CHIP (and let's remember that CHIP is only kinda pro-poor bill, poor people in the US gets their health insurance through Medicaid, but that's a whole different and unrelated discussion).

What about the social stuff?

Click to shrink...

You mean issues like gay marriage, abortion, gun control etc?
I think that's an orthogonal axis, and you can have right wing (or left wing) people on all sides of all these issues. I think the fact that in the US they are mostly neatly selected in the parties is a function of the American electoral system more than anything else.

 

[FliX]

This kind of news gives me life and hope for a not so distant future. We've had enough of centrism. Time to veer hard left!

https://apple.news/A1HqjNMAnTW2JijeGxYyH7w

 

[Mekanos]

...

Many thanks to you lot for having my back in that thread. Didn't appreciate others making up narratives around what I said, or calling it a drive-by or w/e.
Even though I skimmed and read transcripts of the interview itself.
Being called sexist for something so vague was a little disheartening. And no, it won't stop me from calling these politicians out, no matter how alarmist some users try to be about it.


But that's that.

Click to shrink...

Glad to have you back.

 

[Deleted member 14459]

Reposting this from OT, as you might need some good SocDem news here also from time to time - and I was told in the OT by a Finn that she's (Marin, the new PM) "practically a communist", so:



Here is her ideological mapping (according to the main election engine) on left - right, conservative - liberal axis (Rinne is the old PM who stepped down last week, Lindtman was the SocDem who ran against Marin as new PM):

 

[TheHunter]

Anything that lists Mr. Stop-And-Frisk as an advocate for any type of social progress can go straight into the trash. Are we really gonna square Obama as a Labour guy when he clearly hates Corbyn and his guy Jim Messina literally worked for Theresa May?

Click to shrink...

Look at the words not the damn pictures!

 

[TheHunter]

It's never 100% clear cut, but I think it's useful way to judge the overall policy agenda and priorities of an political party or an ideology. For example, if you devastate most of the welfare state and put work requirements on what you couldn't straight up kill, you're not left wing, even if you do CHIP (and let's remember that CHIP is only kinda pro-poor bill, poor people in the US gets their health insurance through Medicaid, but that's a whole different and unrelated discussion).

You mean issues like gay marriage, abortion, gun control etc?
I think that's an orthogonal axis, and you can have right wing (or left wing) people on all sides of all these issues. I think the fact that in the US they are mostly neatly selected in the parties is a function of the American electoral system more than anything else.

Click to shrink...

This is where you have it twisted my man.

Social issues are inherently tied to left/right.

Economic structures aren't. So you can be a leftwing capitalist or a right wing "socialist" (aka populism).

 

[Snowy]

This is where you have it twisted my man.

Social issues are inherently tied to left/right.

Economic structures aren't. So you can be a leftwing capitalist or a right wing "socialist" (aka populism).

Click to shrink...

This is the inverse of reality.

 

[TheHunter]

This is the inverse of reality.

Click to shrink...

Economic structures don't have political idealogies.

 

[Deleted member 7130]

Economic structures don't have political idealogies.

Click to shrink...

Wat?
They literally ARE ideological and political

 

[TheHunter]

Wat?

Click to shrink...

Economic structures (capitalism, socialism and communism) aren't political idealogies. They are how you structure your economy.

 

[Chikor]

This is where you have it twisted my man.

Social issues are inherently tied to left/right.

Economic structures aren't. So you can be a leftwing capitalist or a right wing "socialist" (aka populism).

Click to shrink...

You have people who want tax cuts for the rich kill social security but are supportive of gay rights and prison reform. Just like you have people who care much about the poor but are against abortion rights and gay rights. You can come up with a formula of how many left points you gain or lose by having those positions, but I honestly think trying to capture it on a single axes will always be problematic.

But like, feel free to use the term any way you want, I'm not the terminology police.

I agree that you can have left wing capitalists by the way, it's what democratic socialists are.

 

[TheHunter]

You have people who want tax cuts for the rich kill social security but are supportive of gay rights and prison reform. Just like you have people who care much about the poor but are against abortion rights and gay rights. You can come up with a formula of how many left points you gain or lose by having those positions, but I honestly think trying to capture it on a single axes will always be problematic.

But like, feel free to use the term any way you want, I'm not the terminology police.

Click to shrink...

Well that's why we use the x and y axis!

 

[Chikor]

Well that's why we use the x and y axis!

Click to shrink...

I'm gonna be honest, I'm not sure I understand what you're arguing.
I totally think that there are issues that are orthogonal to the left-right axis. I am personally not a huge fan of the way they do it in the political compass, but that's a different discussion.

 

[TheHunter]

I'm gonna be honest, I'm not sure I understand what you're arguing.
I totally think that there are issues that are orthogonal to the left-right axis. I am personally not a huge fan of the way they do it in the political compass, but that's a different discussion.

Click to shrink...

Fair enough.

 

[Deleted member 7130]

Economic structures (capitalism, socialism and communism) aren't political idealogies. They are how you structure your economy.

Click to shrink...

Cooperation vs competition

accumulation vs planned distribution

community vs atomization

alienation vs reconciliation

These are ideological battles within economic systems

 

[TheHunter]

Cooperation vs competition

accumulation vs planned distribution

community vs atomization

alienation vs reconciliation

These are ideological battles within economic systems

Click to shrink...

Yes...but none of those are exclusive to any one economic structures.

Though I'll admit planned distribution does lend itself better to communism than capitalism.

 

[Deleted member 7130]

Yes...but none of those are exclusive to any one economic structures.

Though I'll admit planned distribution does lend itself better to communism than capitalism.

Click to shrink...

Okay man, you're really just pulling things out of your ass. I got no other way to say it. You've been doing this for a while. Twisting into knots to try to reconcile your vague position between liberalism and the left. People have been trying to explain things to you, but you come up with these arbitrary qualifications for why basic academic axioms just aren't what we say they are.

Anyway, whether you believe they are exclusive or not, it doesn't deny them being ideological struggles. And they require political capital to employ, maintain, and exercise.

Please pick up some books. I'm sure people more qualified than me can recommend some in this thread.

 

[Sibylus]

Economics has been political from the very beginning of unequal societies. Private property, wages, barter, and currency didn't emerge fully formed out of nature, they emerged from political considerations and are daily recapitulated by such, whether that enforcement comes in the shape of force or appeal to some manner of authority (or in a society like ours, both).

 

[Deleted member 22490]

Economic structures don't have political idealogies.

Click to shrink...

This is complete nonsense and denying reality.

 

[TheHunter]

Okay man, you're really just pulling things out of your ass. I got no other way to say it. You've been doing this for a while. Twisting into knots to try to reconcile your vague position between liberalism and the left. People have been trying to explain things to you, but you come up with these arbitrary qualifications for why basic academic axioms just aren't what we say they are.

Anyway, whether you believe they are exclusive or not, it doesn't deny them being ideological struggles. And they require political capital to employ, maintain, and exercise.

Please pick up some books. I'm sure people more qualified than me can recommend some in this thread.

Click to shrink...

I'm saying you can be for cooperation and capitalist dude.

I'm not stupid. I've been pretty blatant in saying left right doesn't tie itself down to just pure socialist or pure capitalist.

 

[TheHunter]

This is complete nonsense and denying reality.

Click to shrink...

No it isn't. You pick your economic structures and then apply a left or right ideology to it.

 

[Deffers]

No it isn't. You pick your economic structures and then apply a left or right ideology to it.

Click to shrink...

?!?!?!
It's really not like that tho
economic systems don't live on the Platonic plane of ideas

 

[Deleted member 22490]

No it isn't. You pick your economic structures and then apply a left or right ideology to it.

Click to shrink...

That's still nonsense. The structures themselves fall on the spectrum, the spectrum doesn't get applied to them.

 

[Deffers]

Hunter, go read about base and superstructure. It's a really quick read and it'll help to understand why we're all in absolute bafflement.

 

[louisacommie]

Am I allowed to work as a field operator for Bloomberg for 6000 a month

Do i get kicked out of socialism

 

[Phoney McRingRing]

Let me preface this by saying you're a good sport in this thread and can take some of the heat we throw at you but TheHunter, you *really* need to do some homework on a couple things.

 

[Deffers]

Am I allowed to work as a field operator for Bloomberg for 6000 a month

Do i get kicked out of socialism

Click to shrink...

Just think of it as infiltrating the system from within. Pretend you're Engels 2: Second Engels. Jesus Christ that's a *ton* of money though.

 

[Deleted member 7130]

I'm saying you can be for cooperation and capitalist dude.

I'm not stupid. I've been pretty blatant in saying left right doesn't tie itself down to just pure socialist or pure capitalist.

Click to shrink...

I didn't say you were stupid. I'm saying you don't have a grasp on basic things and when you proceed from there, you say gobblygook like "economies aren't political"

please heed deffer's recommendation

 

[TheHunter]

Hey I can take punches.

Capitalism sucks.

 

[TheHunter]

I didn't say you were stupid. I'm saying you don't have a grasp on basic things and when you proceed from there, you say gobblygook like "economies aren't political"

please heed deffer's recommendation

Click to shrink...

Economic structures aren't though my dudes. Not the way you are all arguing, in a left right lense.

You can be leftwing capitalist and right wing socialist.

 

[Deleted member 25600]

Am I allowed to work as a field operator for Bloomberg for 6000 a month

Do i get kicked out of socialism

Click to shrink...

Take the job....then seize the means.

 

[Deffers]

You can be leftwing capitalist and right wing socialist.

Click to shrink...

We call those "a capitalist eating from the trash can" and "a socialist STILL eating from the trash can," respectively.

 

[TheHunter]

We call those "a capitalist eating from the trash can" and "a socialist STILL eating from the trash can," respectively.

Click to shrink...

Fair enough.

 

[Chikor]

Economic structures aren't though my dudes. Not the way you are all arguing, in a left right lense.

You can be leftwing capitalist and right wing socialist.

Click to shrink...

I think right wing socialism can't really exist, at least not with my definition of working toward rich people's interests.
I know for some people, not a democracy = right wing, but if we go by that, then you have Cuba or Thomas Sankara as right wing and I think at this point the term became kinda meaningless.

Left wing capitalism can and does exist though.

 

[A More Normal Bird]

Economic structures aren't though my dudes. Not the way you are all arguing, in a left right lense.

You can be leftwing capitalist and right wing socialist.

Click to shrink...

It really seems to me that the word you're looking for is liberal. I'm also curious to know where you've gotten this idea from, because even the political compass maps "economics" to left/right and liberalism to up/down. But in the end, what are you even arguing, other than a prescriptive take on symbolic spectrum that is largely out of line with the common use? If it is actually that economic structures can be neatly separated from ideology, then it's just wrong. If it's not that, then it's a pointless debate that only serves to make communicating more difficult.

 

[sphagnum]

I would argue that economic systems aren't "selected" in the first place as if this is some marketplace of economies, but that they are implemented over time in accordance with both ideological and material purposes. Sometimes it leans one way more than the other. See: the NEP or Dengism, which were returns to markets dressed up in socialist logic. But also see: the rejection of markets not only for ideological but material reasons. For example, the reason so many African and Asian nations adopted the Marxist-Leninist system in the 20th century wasn't just that they were enamored with Marxist-Leninist philosophy or something, but that they saw it as an alternate route for quickly building and advancing the mode of production and thereby enhancing their quality of life without resorting to reliance on western imperialist money and influence.

Whether it works out or not is another matter with many variables.

Ultimately ideology, as superstructure, arises from the base, which is the material. Yet just as much, ideology once in existence can drive actors towards manipulating the base.

 

[TheHunter]

Yeah what sphagy is going for in terms of economic structure being more a choice related to needs than ideals, but can be both.

I was arguing a purely academic sense which isn't fair. I started the Dem debate from a more real world sense and moved to academic for left vs right.

I was also on a phone lol. I'll make more concise arguments next time.

 

[Deleted member 22490]

Am I allowed to work as a field operator for Bloomberg for 6000 a month

Do i get kicked out of socialism

Click to shrink...

 

[Funky Dude Sparks]

That Chapo subreddit gonna git that job right real quick

 

[louisacommie]

I would do it in a way to not get fired

Bonesly life changing ammount of money

And Bloomberg won't win anyway and hurt Biden and pete