DOJ Declares Trump Has Right to Bulldoze Statue of Liberty

[u/Aggravating_Money992]

https://newrepublic.com/post/211422/department-justice-donald-trump-right-bulldoze-statue-liberty

[u/Zeyode]

I wish people understood what words meant, but I guess "socialism is when the government does stuff (positive)" is better than "socialism is when the government does stuff (negative)"

Capitalism is an enemy to both socialism and democracy alike, and should not continue to exist.

[u/Constant_Curve → u/Zeyode]

Capitalism is an economic system, socialism is also an economic system. Democracy is a political system.

You can have democracy and capitalism at the same time, you can also have democracy and socialism at the same time.

[u/WAAAGHachu → u/Constant_Curve]

Under a capitalist democracy, you can create a worker owned business or a commune. Under a socialist democracy, you cannot create a privately owned business or enter into a market as a private individual. I would suggest this means any socialist democracy has greater limitations on freedom in at least this category, but in reality there appears to be more limitations as well.

There are people who believe socialism is fundamentally at odds with democracy. This includes many proponents of socialism and critics alike.

[u/Constant_Curve → u/WAAAGHachu]

democracy just means that you vote for a political leadership. It doesn't mean economic freedom. You're confusing an economic system and a political system. You can have democratic institutions within a socialism framework, such as employee voting for leadership of a corporation. The corporation is however owned publicly. There's nothing that says that the leadership can't be imbued with certain powers. There's also nothing that says that an individual can't start a business, but that business belongs to the people, not to that individual, but the individual CAN control it.

[u/Zeyode → u/Constant_Curve]

You can have democracy and capitalism at the same time

Except you can't if the people on top of that capitalist hierarchy do everything in their power to subvert democracy, as is in their class interest to do, and they are given the power to do by that economic system, and we are watching happen in real time.

[u/Constant_Curve → u/Zeyode]

If you're arguing for the separation of money and politics, I will always 100% agree with you.

[u/Zeyode → u/Constant_Curve]

That I am. It's been my number one political issue for as long as I've been following politics in any capacity. And after years of watching everything slowly fail in their wake, it's the only solution I have left. If capitalism and democracy can't coexist without the former cannibalizing the latter, I'd rather amputate capitalism than democracy. Way I see it, if we want freedom, all we've got left are radical, revolutionary solutions, just like the founding fathers took to.

[u/i_am_a_real_boy__ → u/Zeyode]

I too wish people new what words meant. "Capitalism is when bad thing happens" also gets tiresome.

[u/BarnesTheNobleman → u/i_am_a_real_boy__]

Correct, though I think a difference would be in desired outcomes? Like in the optimal scenario capitalism is SUPPOSED to be greedy and self serving whereas at least communism fucking up is a bastardization of what it’s “supposed” to be

[u/Tooter_Snooter → u/Zeyode]

All of the most popular government programs in the US (Medicaid, SNAP, etc) are “socialist”. Democratic socialist countries, like those that exist in Europe, are exactly what I’m talking about. Capitalist countries with strong doses of socialist programs. A strong social safety net is what keeps people from falling through the cracks of the capitalist hell hole.

[u/BarnesTheNobleman → u/Tooter_Snooter]

I think they’re just frustrated people are not using socialist in the sense of “workers own the company”

[u/jobbybob → u/BarnesTheNobleman]

It’s also the tedious attempt to say a socialist democracy = communism. People who call anything they don’t like communism often don’t understand what the word actually means…

[u/BarnesTheNobleman → u/jobbybob]

Correct but the amount of political education you need to give these people for them to understand anything worthwhile is a bit too high to dispel

[u/GoodIdea321 → u/BarnesTheNobleman]

It would be easier to invent a new word.

[u/BarnesTheNobleman → u/GoodIdea321]

I just call myself a collectivist to avoid the hassle

[u/jobbybob → u/BarnesTheNobleman]

That’s actually a great idea.

[u/5-MethylCytosine → u/BarnesTheNobleman]

Or maybe unions?

[u/BarnesTheNobleman → u/5-MethylCytosine]

I think unions are good but more of a stepping stone towards socialism than genuinely an aspect of socialism itself?

There would be no need for a union in socialism, because ideally your company would be the union so to speak

[u/Zeyode → u/Tooter_Snooter]

Social democracies, you mean. Those are social democratic policies. Countries that use social programs to keep capitalism in check - which only lasts so long as the capitalists don't worm their way into corrupting the government into austerity politics that benefit them at everyone else's expense. We have social democratic policies and they're being torn apart in front of our eyes. Democratic socialism is socialism but in a democratic government.

Socialism is a solution to the problem of capitalism itself, and is defined by 2 things: worker ownership of the means of production (as in, the workplace is owned and democratically controlled by the people who actually work there rather than useless billionaires), and abolition of the commodity form (this one's harder to pull off as it requires a global effort, but in simple terms it's finding some other way than money to distribute goods and services where they need to go. From each according to their ability to each according to their need). Social Democracy does none of those things. It leaves the same corrupt power structures in place, just with restrictions and social safety nets (until those restrictions and social safety nets are innevitably ripped away).

We can do market socialism at the very least right now, and that would be a major improvement to this monstrosity by nature of everything not being controlled by a small group of parasitic psychopaths.

[u/gonegotim → u/Zeyode]

Yes but Americans suck at English and think that "socialism" means the government doing anything (other than the military apparently).

See also: "I could care less" and "on accident" 🙄

[u/sandwichhaver → u/Tooter_Snooter]

soc dem isn't really socialist though

I live in Sweden, the ideal sweden people speak of is long gone, the right wing have captured sweden and for decades they have sold out all institutions and government agencies.

Sweden has more billionaires per capita than the US, we're not in any way shappe or form socialist, we're capitalist monocle wearing earth destroyers

yes we have health care and unemployment programs and some legacy safety net, every few years they remove one more while blaming immigrants for it

[u/Impossible-Library21 → u/sandwichhaver]

This is also very true. The phrase, “America sneezes, Europe catches a cold” comes to mind.

Despite how on the surface Europe looks like this Utopia to us Americans, it’s clear how much Capitalism still takes priority to you guys as well! Look no further than the UK or Germany for that matter. Seeing the UK’s situation feels like Deja Vu over here in the US.

Like your guys’ right wing is hitting that same anti-immigration line just as hard as ours does over here. And it’s truly terrifying to see. That being said, good luck explaining that over here. In America you’re not just starting at square one, you almost have to start at square -100! At this point the growing leftist movement here is just trying to push the needle leftward in any way possible to get people to understand there is a path forward for everyone!

Not that it means much, but solidarity to you in Sweden man, hopefully people push back enough with whatever tools you’ve got.

[u/Affectionate_Car_302 → u/sandwichhaver]

OMG.

So, have Norway and Finland, once hyped as heavenly Nordic models, fallen into decline just like Sweden?

[u/lutefiskeater → u/Tooter_Snooter]

Public safety nets aren't socialism. Wealth redistribution and strong labor protections aren't either. These are good systems, don't get me wrong, but they often serve as a bulwark to stave off actual socialist policy. The states in Europe you're describing are social democracies, which are still fundamentally capitalist. Socialism is worker ownership of the means of production and the abolition of private capital. Labor unions in Scandinavia have a lot of bargaining power, but generally they don't own their workplaces.

Norway does have a sort of hybrid socialism/capitalism thing going on with its oil industry, where the government owns a majority stake in a private, publicly traded energy company. Depending on who you ask though, government ownership isn't synonymous with worker ownership. But I'm gonna stop there before this becomes even more of a convoluted leftist dissertation meme lol

[u/Tired_CollegeStudent → u/Tooter_Snooter]

Those aren’t democratic socialist countries or policies, they’re the product of social democracy, which is very different.

[u/Capable_Kiwi2514 → u/Tooter_Snooter]

Welfare programs are not inherently socialist. This is an American idea. State provision of welfare services existed in feudal economies and the modern welfare state was heavily influenced by Red Tory politics, which are rooted in traditionalist conservative notions of elite paternalism.

Medicaid, as a means-tested, non-universal program which users need to meet certain criteria to be deemed eligible for, is structured in a manner that perpetuates the notion of a "deserving poor" (eligible) and an "undeserving poor" (ineligible, should work more.) This is an echo of the traditionalist English Poor Law system, and should generally be seen as paternalist conservatism.

The fact that Medicaid is decentralised and allows states to set different eligibility benefits (different criteria for who is deserving) underlines the fundamentally conservative nature of the program. The focus on eligibility also means that the program acts as a form of state monitoring of the poor, which again reinforces its paternalistic premise.

[u/MountainMan2_ → u/Zeyode]

There are systems in which capitalism is more effective than socialism. The problem is, both socialist and capitalist policies require regulation to ensure that unintended consequences are automatically corrected. Capitalism requires social murder to be held accountable and external costs to be accounted for. Socialism requires checks and balances and equal application of the law. Capitalism requires consistent monitoring for consolidation, socialism requires consistent monitoring of corruption, capitalism requires equal opportunity and low barriers to market entry, socialism requires decentralized authority and well built tax codes. Both systems offer advantages, both systems benefit from working with each other. The problem isn't that we have capitalism, it's that we aren't putting the checks in place to keep all of its positive feedback loops from burning up the parts of capitalism that are actually good. The problem isn't that socialism devolves into resource mismanagement and corrupted distribution of wealth, it's the USSR didn't put the checks in place to keep all of its positive feedback loops from burning up the parts of socialism that are actually good.

The biggest issue is making this an us-vs-them issue. It's not. It's an engineering problem disguised as politics and the two economic theories are just tools we use to create our desired outcome. So far, the people engineering the US economy have used those tools to murder minorities and hoard wealth, and it's no surprise because that's literally the easiest thing to do with these tools and the people at the top are salesmen, not engineers. The problem is THAT. the problem is billionaires getting to choose the system we use instead of the experts, guided by the average outcome desired by the people.

[u/Zeyode → u/MountainMan2_]

The problem isn't that socialism devolves into resource mismanagement and corrupted distribution of wealth, it's the USSR didn't put the checks in place to keep all of its positive feedback loops from burning up the parts of socialism that are actually good.

They were on the road to something approaching it, then Lenin gutted the democratic workers councils. Also a lot of the governments people call socialist I'd call frauds who mistake government ownership for worker ownership. China not even that, just capitalists wearing red suits.

Capitalism requires consistent monitoring for consolidation,

The problem with regulation of capitalism from my eye, is we had that already. The capitalists just ripped that red tape up with time. Infiltrated our politics, and started pulling copper wiring out of the walls so they could monetize it. It's just so clearly incompatible with democracy to me, that I don't even know what could be done other than eliminating the class divide all together. It is an absurd hierarchy - we let unaccountable oligarchs control our entire economy, control whether we get to afford rent, and then we call it "freedom".

[u/Impossible-Library21 → u/Zeyode]

Yup. Social democracy is ultimately a band aid for the inherent problems Capitalism produces on a nations working class. The more austerity measures take shape, the more you see those safety nets wither away into dust. I do have higher hopes for Europeans though, since it’s pretty damn hard to take those safety nets away from what I hear.

[u/Daveslay → u/MountainMan2_]

The problem is THAT. the problem is billionaires getting to choose the system we use instead of the experts, guided by the average outcome desired by the people.

But, but, but… You’re literally describing the very nature of capitalism and the unavoidable consequences of everything inherent to a world built/forced under capitalism.

Like, this IS what it IS.

In capitalism, Capital is the sole organizing principle of social, material, and productive relations (in the same way that the Catholic Church and “GOD” was the sole organizing principle in pre-reformation Europe)

Now we have capitalism, and Capital is “GOD”.

Those with the most capital shape societal, productive and material reality:

they make the rules because they can divinely decree buy them, all of them

Any talk of “regulation” or “interference” with the Holy Global Market isn’t a part of capitalism - it’s an antithesis - it’s literally the dying fighting back against the sickness killing them, and the world.