Impact of the Democratic primaries: MS Now has been cutting back and forth to this bland-looking chart comparing democratic socialism to communism
Are they wrong though? "social democracy is objectively the moderate wing of fascism" and all that.
That's just soc dem. Socialism requires building the conditions to end capitalism
I saw a segment on Fox that was basically talking about how Democrats have always wanted these extremist policies and at least the deranged Hasan Piker is being honest about it.
There's definitely a push to portray socialism as "mega liberals" and not something else entirely
Same vibe 
What I always liked about this meme is that it includes Luxemburg and Trotsky who both supported Lenin, and would have used similar measures as him.
I mean Trotsky was instrumental in a lot of authoritarian, anti-democratic stuff. He was in charge of crushing the Kronstadt Rebellion ffs. You can argue one way or the other about a lot of it, but his recasting as 'the nice one' is utterly ludicrous
Trotsky was an opportunist who quickly flipped to whatever position was expedient. He was in both the right and left oppositions, back and forth. He was whatever he needed to be. He was a Menshevik when they looked the strongest and swapped to the Bolsheviks when the wind blew the other way. It’s why Lenin never trusted him.
Marx also hated succs and social chauvinists and openly shat upon them constantly. These people clearly never read Marx. They had Bernie-types in his day too and ripped them into pieces.
Given that authoritarian means "theres laws and they are enforced" which is true of both of these columns, yeah the communism sounds pretty good to me. Why let things like train tickets or computers be market set prices when they could be government set? And why would I want private home ownership? If youre in favor of private hone ownership and homes as investment, youre in favor of the social murder of homeless people. I dont want people to die, so homes cannot be investment or privately owned and sold/traded on a market. And yes, incentivizing individualism does harm the working class. Suck my taint land~~lords~~scums and bootstrap believers, take a long walk off a short pier.
"Authoritarian" is when billionaires have their wage-slaves taken away from them. I am very smart.
now they should post home ownership rates between the commie countries and the sucdem/demsoc countries.
WHERE are they pretending to get this information from? you can't just unquestionably shout unsourced shit with the justification 'idk lol vibes' and expect anyone to listen to you
This is what is taught in schools across America in middle school social studies. This is just the common sense of this shithole, and nobody questions the ideology they swim within
They are completely politically illiterate, none of them knows what any of these words mean. It's like watching children pretending they're grown-ups.
I think they can
Yeah, the liberal audience already agrees so they won't stop to ask for sources. Communism = authoritarian by default.
In contrast, most communists have had their worldview shaken to the core. This lends itself to healthy skepticism about political/economic beliefs such that new beliefs require more justification. Which doesn't make all our political/economic beliefs correct--we don't all agree, after all--but we will at least point to some historical or theoretical evidence to back up our views.
Time; Hampton Roads Naval Museum.
It's not a useful source declaration but more then I'm used to from liberal media.
I've already depicted you as the column with "bad stuff" and me as the column with "good stuff".
Social democracy. The term you're looking for is social democracy
Everybody wants to look better than they are:
Social democrats: Look, we're demsocs!
Liberal-Conservatives: Look, we're social democrats!
Fascists: Look, we're liberal-conservatives!
It's a distinction without a difference really.
The democratic socialism column disagrees with DSA's platform in some key ways. In particular, DSA explicitly states capitalism needs to be replaced with socialism.
I was going to say; the last one is the bright dividing line between social democrats and democratic socialists.
Capitalism can be reformed
The Manifesto is like 40 pages and even has a very simple list. They really cannot read can they.
Nevertheless, in most advanced countries, the following will be pretty generally applicable.
- Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.
- A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
- Abolition of all rights of inheritance.
- Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
- Centralisation of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.
- Centralisation of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State.
- Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
- Equal liability of all to work. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
- Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of all the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the populace over the country.
- Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children’s factory labour in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production
Very insightful
I think even DSA is mostly on board with the 10 points
Notice how they never actually talk about whether these are actually effective strategies for improving society, it's entirely vibes based. You must not think about what works, only what feels good. Consume. Don't think.
my favorite source for determining the qualitative differences between a communist or democratic socialist would have to be the Hampton Roads Naval Museum in Norfolk, Virginia
I imagine they probably just had a small blurb about it since it was slightly related to a naval thing, and they decided to run with that because it fit their definition.
Claiming Democratic "socialism" has "free and fair elections" is laughable after the shit we've witnessed the past decade. Shit's gonna backfire on them when they're laughed it off the room saying this stuff.
I mean, this is very much my experience with DSA-types. Its libs that want social safety nets. Still a nice thing to vote for, but absolutely not what I would call socialist.
I’ve met a lot of different DSA members that range wildly. It depends on the person and on the local chapter.
My local chapter has a bunch of Marxist Leninists in the leadership and a reading list indistinguishable from the reading list on this site.
That philosophy part of the graphic also goes directly against DSA’s official position, which is to abolish capitalism.
The whole "DSA are bunch of libs" take is wildly outdated. There are ABSOLUTELY liberals/ideological social democrats in DSA, and it varies widely like you said.
The people who rise to the leadership positions tend to be compatible in ideology to this site, though.
For posting all the anonymous reactionary bullshit that you can't post anywhere else.
Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.
Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.
Rule 3: No sectarianism.
Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome
Rule 5: No bigotry of any kind, including ironic bigotry.
Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 7: Do not individually target federated instances' admins or moderators.