1年前

Ah Bernie, what could have been...

Memes @midwest.social

Based

257 17

您正在查看单个线程.

235 留言

FDR was much closer to being a Social Democrat than a Democratic Socialist. They sound similar but are quite different. Hell I think Bernie is closer to a Social Democrat, too. He praises the Nordic model and they're textbook social democracies.
- I've always felt that's just pragmatism from Bernie, and in truth he's ideologically a democratic socialist. If it makes any difference this is coming from a democratic socialist who's a member of a social Democrat party.
  
  I've always felt that's just pragmatism from Bernie,
  If you read his book "It's Okay to Be Angry About Capitalism" it becomes very very obvious that this is the case. From quoting very radical anti-capitalists to tongue and cheek (somewhat) insider jokes such as naming the chapter on his time in mayoral politics "Socialism in one City", it shows he's definitely way more ideologically aligned with socialism than people give him credit for.
  
  As an European, I have never understood why so many American leftists don't see that, even by simply listening to what he is saying or looking at what he is doing. I mean he literally has a picture of Eugene Debs on his desk and mentions how he is this political role model and hero any chance he gets, that alone should tell you where he stands on an ideological or philosophical level..
  And of course, he has been involved in various socialist groups his whole life and literally still calls himself a democratic socialist. Why would he do that if it wasn't true? To gain a political advantage, in America of all places, where calling yourself a socialist would have generally been political suicide?
  And then are his policies, where many will focus on healthcare and say "he just wants healthcare" and ignore anything else. But of course, healthcare is a major issue because it makes the working class even more dependend on their employers because they lose tgeir healthcare if they get fired, so it makes sense for him to focus on tgat first. And of course, he also had other policy in his program, like transfering 20% of ownership over major corporations to their employees and having workers electing half of the board of directors.
  You can call him a reformer, you can call his participation ineffective, but why deny his political believes?
  
  Completely agree with everything you said.
  The same has also started to be done with Bernie's "successor's" like AOC and Jamaal Bowman, I'm not sure how exactly they can stop that other than regularly virtue signaling how radical they are and potentially alienating any moderates.
  The oddest part to me is the people who downplay Bernie's radicallness. I've only ever heard it done by left wingers who think he's not actually left wing enough, thereby distancing themselves from their best option, and by right wingers looking for an easy gotcha against lefties by going "He just wants Denmark that's not socialism". Literally the only people downplaying Bernie's radicalism are the ones who would seemingly have a vested interest to do the opposite.
  
  The same has also started to be done with Bernie’s “successor’s” like AOC and Jamaal Bowman
  Don't know too much about Jamaal Bowman, but AOC also seems like a genuine leftist activist that happened, mostly because of a glitch in the system and pure luck, to slide into somewhat of a political position.
  And of course, there will always be severe limits to what that path can bring. Which is why they mostly focus on rhetoric and making their ideas more mainstream viable and popular. I think at the moment, that's probably the best they can do. They cannot solve our problems for us, and even if they could, that shouldn't be the goal. The goal should be that we get into a position where we can solve our own problems.
  The oddest part to me is the people who downplay Bernie’s radicallness. I’ve only ever heard it done by left wingers who think he’s not actually left wing enough
  In my view, it's mostly done by "radical online Marxists" and edgy radicals, who I suspect aren't actually doing much except for complaining about it on twitter, which is probably why they get uncomfortable with people actually doing real world stuff? And not gonna lie, sometimes I get my tinfoil hat on and start to question if those are actual misinformation bots.
  I also have seen it a lot on the right and with other anti-socialists, who just want to paint Bernie as a hypocrite. Same people who say "But Bernie is a millionaire, what a hypocrite"..
- He wasn't even a social democrat. At the time, social democrats were democratic socialists, the shift away from reformist socialism happened around the 80s (some social democratic parties still hang onto reformist socialism, at least in theory).
  He was a smart liberal who realized that in order to save capitalism from collapsing again, some regulations are necessary. In Europe, similar policy was often pushed by social democrats, which sometimes leads to confusion. But actual social democrats at the time went (or at least wanted to go) further, like nationalization and socialization of major industry, worker representation at companies, and increasing worker and union power in general.
  Social democrats stated endgoal was a socialist society. FDR's endgoal was to protect and maintain capitalism.
  Edit: Also, Bernie is definitely a reformist socialist, I will never understand why people think otherwise. He literally mentions Eugen Debbs, one of the most influencial socialists in American history, as his role model and hero every chance he can.. And he praises the nordic model because the nordic model was literally pushed by reformist democratic socialists.. Here is Olaf Palme, one of the most important figures when it comes to the nordic model and prime minister of Sweden (until he was murdered), explaining why he is a democratic socialist:
  https://youtube.com/watch?v=7i2Ws1X5DSA
  Just imagine a conservative politican, calling themselves a fascist, keeping a picture of Mussolini on their desk, saying he is their political role model. Would you claim that he isn't really a fascist? It's not even as if Bernie Sanders was dog whistling, he couldn't be any clearer about his believes.. Yet somehow, so many American leftists seem to sonehow doubt his intentions? Why? Because he isn't radical enough? Because he isn't throwing molotov coctails at the police? What does he have to gain from falsely calling himself a socialist??
  The man's presidental campaign was giving 20% of major corporations to it's employees and having about half of the board of directors be elected by workers, among other stuff..
  if you don't even want to acknowledge his values and his ideology simply because he is playing the politics game and is a reformist, send him to Europe, we would love a genuine leftist like him with so much charisma. I don't think you appreciate him..
  Imagine dedicating your life to fight for a better life, involve yourself in the civil rights movement, work in various socialist groups, calling yourself a socialist and calling for major industry to be socialised, being constantly attacked by right wingers for your socialist believes, etc, only for fellow leftists denying that you are a "real socialist"..
  
  Thanks for write-ups, there are certainly some things I have to read up on
  
  I appreciate the positive response, if my tone might have been a bit aggressive, that was not my intention. I understand why people were mislead about Bernie, there was a ton of media reports about how Bernie "isn't a real socialist" and it's not like Bernie is god or anything, there are obvious limits to his approach. It forces people to make compromises and water down their believes. But I do believe he is genuine, or at least the most genuine seeming politician I have seen.
  Also, AOC seems to be very similar, although she doesn't have the same knowhow yet about politics and mostly focuses on rethoric. But she is basically a leftist activist who, with a shit ton of luck, managed to get into politics.
  
  When people in the modern day call someone a social democrat, they generally refer to the modern definition. The modern social democrat aims to reform capitalism to be more fair, as opposed to democratic socialists, who want to achieve socialism.
  Social liberals like FDR are rather similar to modern social democrats. They have a different lineage, but in terms of policy the main distinguishing factor is a distaste for state-owned enterprises.
  While I do not discount the possibility that he is intentionally moderating the positions he espouses publicly, he does not want to do away with private ownership, which is the goal of socialism. That being said, he goes much further than most social democrats in how much he wants to nationalize, how much he wants to incentivize coops, and how he wants 20% of major companies to be owned by the employees.
- Can I see the venn diagram on this?
  
  Socialists want the workers to own the means of production.
  Capitalism/liberalism wants capitalists to own it (though the workers can be the capitalists in question). Social democracy is a form of liberalism that seeks to improve quality of life and economic outputs through the creation of a well regulated welfare state (typically).
  Other than that, it depends. The two groups mostly agree that poor people shouldn't starve, that living wages should be a thing, and democracy and human rights matter, and one of the best ways to accomplish this all is the empowerment of worker unions. Everything else gets complicated.
  FDR was definitely not a democratic socialist. He also wasn't what modern views would consider a social democrat, but if it wasn't for America still being segregated he probably would have counted as one easily enough. For the time? Probably. Some Greek Social Democrats wanted to conquer Turkey and expel the Muslims...
- Not to be agist, but bernie is rapidly approaching his UBD. Closest we have to him in a viable position is AOC
  
  Hey, nothing wrong with being agist in this situation, let's be honest. Nobody - not Biden, not Bernie, not Trump - will be as cognitively-sharp when they are 80 as they were when they were 50, 40, 30. We wouldn't want an 80-year-old lifeguard or firefighter, right?
  And until an 18-year-old can be president, we're already agist in one direction.
  That we think putting geriatrics in the White House to run one of the most stressful jobs that is on-call 24/7 is a good idea... I mean it's absurd. Just look how much Obama aged in 8 years. Forget the fact that the general risk of all-cause mortality is far greater, that's just another risk-factor for running the country.
  So yeah unfortunately I agree... Bernie's opportunity was missed. When AOC runs one day, I will campaign as hard as possible for her victory.
  
  I would happily see an elderly Bernie in office. Why? Because he would fill the system with younger, capable individuals, and trust their opinions. He would leave the system a better place.
  
  That's actually the main reason I didn't want Bernie as president. His campaign staff were terrible for both of his runs.
  
  She's a Democrat. If she doesn't fall in line she doesn't keep her job. You've been conned.
  
  Not

235 留言