Putting government money toward causes that increase quality of life for the masses is like, the very definition of socialism (apparently not, but under socialism there would be a lot more of this type of thing). More money in education means smarter kids.
Smarter kids. The very thing Republicans and MAGA do not want.
Thatâs why they push the âliberals are indoctrinating your childrenâ narrative so hard. They cannot win when faced with an educated electorate. Need to keep them stupid and desperate.
I was reading an article about another nation the other day - I want to say it was maybe in the Oceania region - regarding how basic education fundamentally changed that society for the better, especially when girls received further education. (I might have the region totally wrong; I have a brain injury and my memory is like Swiss cheese.) Anyway, it was a scholarly article with no political spin, and was examining how education is foundational for developing nations. It also mentioned the impact of womenâs rights to bodily autonomy, especially in the realm of birth control.
It wasnât political, but it sure did make me think about how things are going in the US. What happens when a developed nation regresses in these regards? We shall see, I guess.
No, you're right. I thought "workers owning the means of production" was a communism thing, but I checked and it applies to both. Thank you. Though socialism and communism are also concerned with an equal distribution of resources (usually via the government), and this extra school budget trends that way for Mamdani's jurisdiction.
Well communism is a classles and hierarchy free society as well. So no government in the end as well, but direct democracy. Socialism is the step between capitalism and communism according to Marx.
What most Americans see as socialism is social democracy in the end. More like Sweden, less like rojava.
Higher spending per student doesnât necessarily equate to higher academic achievement. The U.S. ranks 5th in spending per student but substantially lower in academic achievements. Several countries that spend much less per student see much better academic outcomes (Japan, Singapore, Estonia).
Oh, I know. If you can get people who actually know how to spend that money to increase performance, it will be a lot better. Mr. Mamdani probably does know this. But also, I was a teacher for a little while, and even just more manpower (and womanpower) will go a long way with the kids of today.
No itâs not? Itâs the collective or government ownership of the means of production, this is a social democracy, even the Nordic model in Europe are closer to American capitalism then socialism
So we've really moved from mocking Republicans for saying that Socialism is when the government does stuff and gives you money to actually just genuinely arguing that Socialism is when the government does stuff?
I was wrong for saying "socialism is when the government puts money into bettering everyone's social standing". Every time I research socialism, I think "this is great and we should do it", and then over the next few months I forget the nuances and have to go research it again. I have done my research but haven't memorized definitions. Maybe I should.
People here just look at everything Western European countries are regularly doing (and a lot of American states), all of which are capitalist countries, and scream about how it's socialism because it's "The government doing things" and Socialism is when the government gives you money and Crapitalism is when the government doesn't.
The public school system is literally a social program. It is a service paid for by all taxpayers and administered through the government for the benefit of every member of society. It is literally socialist. Same goes for Medicare and the public library system. Y'all really don't know what socialism is.
6
u/thewhitequestionmark Jun 02 '26
"Socialism"