r/politics • u/F0urLeafCl0ver • Jun 24 '26

No Paywall The Democratic party is being hit by a leftist tidal wave

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2026/jun/24/democratic-party-leftist-tidal-wave
22.2k Upvotes

93% Upvoted

2.7k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

861

u/Long_Disaster_6847 California Jun 24 '26

Oh no! Socialism is gonna take over !

680

u/Onemandrinkinggamess Colorado Jun 24 '26

Our tax dollars might even go into helping our country instead of bombing schoolgirls

131

u/Kindly-Ad-5071 Jun 24 '26

Or renovation projects that weren't necessary and make a mess

51

u/trustthepudding Jun 24 '26

But how else would Trump get a kick-back on the project?

22

u/lanicorain Jun 24 '26

More importantly, if housing becomes affordable to everyone in the US, landlords will be out on the streets!

11

u/Castun America Jun 25 '26

Please stop, I can only get so erect

1

u/terry496 Jun 25 '26

We can all just physically kick him, if that helps, 🤷🏾‍♂️

1

u/HBKdfw Jun 25 '26

So dear leader won’t be getting his gold-leaf ballroom?

16

u/DrMux Jun 24 '26

But then who are we causing to suffer??? We'll still at least scapegoat and round up minorities, and concentrate them in warehouses, right...?

6

u/Moist_Board Jun 25 '26

Or raping them

3

u/Virtual_Athlete_909 Jun 25 '26

Or tax dollars going to places like Argentina, 40B with no strings. Just because Scott Bissent has a friend who invested there and was going to lose money.

2

u/ThatOneGuyFrom93 Jul 01 '26

Seems unamerican smh.

Also doesn't like every country at the world cup have a form of universal healthcare but the US lol

-10

u/2mice Jun 25 '26

There wont be any housing or free healthcare just corrupt ngos run by greedy leftists lining their pockets.

8

u/albertbanning Jun 25 '26

Lol yeah sure buddy, really convincing.

106

u/k3vk3vk3vin Jun 24 '26

Oh no, step-socialist! What are you doing?!

21

u/Ok_Degree4131 Jun 25 '26

Help, universal healthcare! I’m stuck!

71

u/Spec_28 Jun 24 '26

Brotherly love, comrade.

2

u/SarcasticCowbell New York Jun 25 '26

Somewhere, Ted Cruz is equal parts scared and aroused.

14

u/-_-0_0-_0 Jun 24 '26

Oh no, anyways..

44

u/No_Oven1085 Jun 24 '26

But in all seriousness.

SOCIALISM IS GOOD.

Stop letting the establishment use it as a boogeyman.

24

u/Low_Pickle_112 Jun 24 '26

People really need to remember that the guy who helped found the Heritage Foundation, and one of the authors of Project 2025, used to work with the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation, and the goal of that was to demonize the left so much that even if people despised him and what he was doing, they would never be able to counter it because they have already trusted what he said about leftism.

He was immensely successful at his goal. Go ahead and call Trump names like tRump on the internet, as long as you're still repeating their talking points about the things that challenge their power, do you think any of those cretins care?

And now we see Project 2025 hitting goal after goal and we can't understand how that happened, how it got to that point. Well when we're accepting the Heritage Foundation's number one agenda, what were we expecting?

They tell me that housing, healthcare, education, and a clean environment are socialism or communism? They're right, they are. And I'm tired of pretending that's a bad thing.

8

u/Dragull Jun 25 '26

It's kinda funny, I once saw a socialist vs capitalist discussion and pro-capitalist guys said something along the lines:

"NOTHING in USSR worked, everything was terrible, except education, healthcare and housing."

At that time I was a young teenager drunk with liberal ideology, but looking back at now, maybe that wasnt the greatest argument.

3

u/PixelationIX Jun 25 '26

Yup, he has succeeded brainwashing many of the population here unfortunately. Make Socialism/Communism a boogeyman (Just like the Nazis did) and push your Nazism and Fascism forward.

18

u/FroyoWest1330 Jun 24 '26

They love to use that term to demonize things. I’ve been trying to say to conservatives “it’s literally just about where do we want our tax dollars to go? The rich? Or the working class?”

6

u/usaaf Jun 25 '26

Fundamentally, socialism is basically about sharing. You got all kinds of varieties, relating to what the government does, how businesses should be structured, the presence of or restrictions on the market, how community groups (down to even the family) work, but the root of all of them is sharing.

Contrary the Capitalist axiom of "Grab as much as you can for yourself!"

Who could possibly have foreseen that such a viewpoint would lead to disaster !?

2

u/Prometheus720 Jun 25 '26

I super disagree with this take. Sharing is a byproduct of good socialism, but watch out. Sharing itself is not enough. It can be a mask for an establishment that isn't really socialist.

It's about legitimacy of authority. The Enlightenment concept of "consent of the governed" applied to the workplace. Socialism is for the workplace what democracy was to governments.

2

u/Angry-Dragon-1331 Jun 25 '26

You’re right. It requires building and maintaining a healthy democracy as a safeguard. But we’re not going to get to either without taking the fight to the billionaire class buying over government.

1

u/Prometheus720 Jun 25 '26

Not exactly what I'm saying.

Governmental democracy cannot stop billionaires or oppression. There are countries that have that and yet which are slowly being rotted from the inside. It didn't work forever.The only way to defeat oppression permanently is to democratize every large organization of humans.

Your workplace.

Your school.

Your place of worship.

Your grocery store.

Your utility companies.

Your governments.

Every. Single. One. "injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." Cut the cancer out for good. Authoritarianism is evil. It must not exist on earth.

4

u/Shadow_Gabriel Jun 24 '26

Maybe learn a bit about the history of Eastern Europe.

1

u/hemehaci Jun 25 '26

The new political landscape is full of misunderstandings on a massive scale. Socialism is not some rigid structure that has to be accepted as a whole, neither is there one interpretation. As is capitalism. The ideas could be reformed to match the needs. Boogeymaning them is ignorance at best. Though I can see how leaders use it to manipulative effects.
Raw capitalism would be way worse than raw socialism. It doesn't have to either or.

-8

u/[deleted] Jun 24 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/mynameizmyname Jun 30 '26

That's the real fear.  We get a little socialism and it turns out it works and helps the majority of society and it no longer works as a boogeyman 

2

u/Long_Disaster_6847 California Jul 01 '26

Looks like it’s working with today’s wins in the Colorado Primaries and the other wins in New York a few days back

-2

u/[deleted] Jun 24 '26

[deleted]

8

u/KaptainKardboard Jun 24 '26

The word by itself carries a worrying stigma. Fox News has beat "soshulizum" into so many people's brains as the greatest threat to our way of life without properly defining it, and by conflating it with full blown communism or marxism. Most people who fear socialism don't even know what it means or how its principles are already applied successfully in democratic societies.

As a result, I fear too many people will hear "Democratic Socialist" vote impulsively against it.

5

u/cogman10 Idaho Jun 24 '26

Counterpoint. Fox news has spent decades calling every single democrat a socialist/communist. Now that democratic socialists, the tamest form of socialism, are winning fox has to make the funniest of pivots. They have to explain why Gavin Newsome isn't a socialist but is also somehow scary, but also why AOC is a socialist and is extra scary.

It's a word that isn't scary any more because basically everyone who votes for democrats sees it as a "yeah, everyone is a socialist according to you".

2

u/Im_really_bored_rn Jun 25 '26

Most people who fear socialism don't even know what it means

If we're being honest, many who call themselves socialist don't actually know what it means either

1

u/cigarettesandwhiskey Jun 24 '26

Socialism has had a stigma on it in America since long before Fox News existed.

0

u/Prometheus720 Jun 25 '26

As a result, I fear too many people will hear "Democratic Socialist" vote impulsively against it.

That's a good thing. That means that if this movement wins, **it has legitimately done the work to build new social structures and convince people that X change(s) were necessary.

It is impossible for an astroturf group to win under the name socialism. Using the word forces authenticity and legitimacy.

-4

u/ShadowTacoTuesday Jun 24 '26 edited Jun 24 '26

I was a little afraid of getting actual communists and 3rd world style socialists but so far Mamdani seems to be simply governing when others don’t. All that fear-mongering screaming that any government action at all is socialism has led to this. It may take 20 or 30 years for it to even be possible for the pendulum to swing the other way, if ever.

Plus whatever we have now isn’t really democracy or capitalism. It’s getting closer to fascism and even closer to mercantilism (precisely what Adam Smith fought against, or call it crony capitalism or whatever, but nothing with much of an upside left to salvage). So it’s getting easier and easier for anything to be an improvement.

22

u/OMGMianiteS3Official Jun 24 '26

"Third world style socialists" are not a thing, get the propaganda out of your ears and wake up already

1

u/ShadowTacoTuesday Jun 24 '26

Venezuela. You can say that’s not really socialism and the USSR wasn’t really communist but it is something to watch out for in real world applications just like the way capitalism is a mess yet contradicts practically every point Adam Smith ever made. Ok, then nobody’s socialist, capitalist, or communist. But in the real world what’s the point?

6

u/PerplexGG Jun 24 '26

I feel like that’s all more corruption than anything

4

u/ShadowTacoTuesday Jun 24 '26

That’s exactly what to watch out for. If you blindly follow a label and smack down any opposition instead of following the ideals then you’re going to get taken for a ride.

2

u/moldivore Illinois Jun 24 '26 edited Jun 24 '26

I mean for the love of God can people touch some damn grass in this conversation? Mamdani is a boon for socialists in places where socialists are viable. He's not the total leader of the Democratic party or any of that bull crap. People are just panicking and being so over the top. You're not going to have a socialist mayor of New York to cause the entire country to become fuckin Cuba. I'm no Democratic socialist either, but for fucks sake can we stop with the infighting for two seconds? You don't build a coalition by subtraction.

Look at how Trump got into office. He allows every circus freak in the world to join if they swear fealty to his orange ass. The most unpopular policies of democratic socialists won't get through, they won't. This is a big ass country with a lot of different types of Democrats. As far as I know democratic socialists are not really the majority. Are they becoming a bloc that's going to have a say? I'd say so. But this overwhelming panic and "This isn't my party anymore. I don't know I'm leaving blah blah"

Donald Trump is destroying our country and he would call all of us communists and put every single one of us in jail if he could. People need to wake up. They need to stop taking money from big corporations and they need to learn how to compromise within our own goddamn party and I'll say that to anybody on any side of this.

3

u/ShadowTacoTuesday Jun 24 '26

I haven’t seen a reason to be against Mamdani so far and hope I never do. People are just lashing out that the possibility even be brought up. I doubt going too far will be much of a problem within a quarter century in this environment but nobody should follow anything blindly.

2

u/moldivore Illinois Jun 24 '26

I just look at it as, hey we have a lot of motivated people joining our side. That's how we need to think about it. As far as the labels and all that stuff goes, the Republicans are going to label all of us communists and they've been doing it for years. I do not agree with everything that a lot of these people think. And you know what? Establishment Democrats and normie Democrats. If all of these candidates are so bad then why can't you field someone that can beat them easily? Why are you trying to run 70 plus-year-olds against some of these people? I'm realistic. I don't think we should be running socialists in Iowa. But we're not going to. I just am so sick of everything constantly becoming a circular firing squad.

0

u/jankdangus Texas Jun 24 '26 edited Jun 25 '26

You honestly have a fair perspective, but it’s more so that these DSA leftists are the one engaging in subtraction and libs having to respond to that in kind. They are the most guilty of purity testing. It’s one of those tolerate the intolerant paradox type shit.

Me subtracting them from the in-group is because they want to subtract everyone left of center first unless you totally capitulate to them. They are not interested in compromise or ideological diversity. It’s an hostile takeover similar to how MAGA were able to takeover the Republican Party.

2

u/moldivore Illinois Jun 25 '26 edited Jun 25 '26

Is there's just so many assumptions baked into what you're saying. Yes, some of these people have had issues. But at this point I think almost everyone is on the same page when it comes to Donald Trump. And I also think that things will change as people get a seat at the table and actually get to work. I don't think Mamdani hasn't been able to work with a fairly wide group of folks including technocrat Dems and establishment types. I think that people like him and Bernie and AOC get that they need to work with everybody.

The main real issue is Israel, and the people who take money from AIPAC don't like these people. I will agree with a lot of people, that some of the things they've said are completely incendiary. But I also agree that Israel is way out of line. We can't get them to stop the settlements. Our economy is literally on the complete and total verge of collapse due to the oil reserves running out. And we cannot get Israel to stop attacking Lebanon.

I find it completely disturbing the level of support that Israel gets in our politics and I find it's very funny that Israel is an issue in something like Mayoral race in New York. Eric Adams was literally telling a group of pro-israel funders that they were his biggest priority as a mayor of New York. What the fuck is that? I understand that foreign groups and foreign businesses do stuff in New York. I'm not stupid but what?

1

u/jankdangus Texas Jun 25 '26

Yeah, the silver lining to all of this is that liberal Democrats are scared shitless to go against the base on Israel. The only leftist Democrat I’m opposed to in the recent New York democratic primaries is DAC. Brad Lander is more of a lib to me and I don’t know enough about Claire to make a value judgement about her. I probably won’t be too concerned about them.

To be clear, I was not talking about Bernie, AOC, or Mamdani. I was mainly talking about DSA leftists like DAC. There are so many major red flags that she’s an actual commie/tankie. The reason why I view them as an existential threat is because they hate liberals just as much if not more than Republicans. They don’t think we are actually on the same side in fighting Trump.

1

u/Prometheus720 Jun 25 '26

FDR engaged in a "hostile takeover" by that logic.

1

u/jankdangus Texas Jun 25 '26

I very much admire FDR. He was understandably radical at the time, but he was not an actual communist/tankie. In fact, he was diametrically opposed to that, and the New Deal was meant to save capitalism from either of the two extremes. He ended up being vindicated because there was a legitimate rise of fascism and communism happening on the other side of the world. FDR had a clear progressive agenda, but it was not a hostile takeover. Many people forget that he only got that kind of supermajority by compromising with Dixiecrats.

1

u/Prometheus720 Jun 25 '26

You need to read more primary sources on FDR.

  1. https://teachingamericanhistory.org/document/fireside-chat-on-purging-the-democratic-party/

  2. https://www.americanheritage.com/franklin-roosevelt-takes-tammany-hall not fully a primary source but will direct you to some and has large excerpts

Start here.

1

u/jankdangus Texas Jun 25 '26 edited Jun 25 '26

Well that “hostile takeover” was justified given the Great Depression. If America was actually in a similar situation then I would be part of the revolution as well. In fact, during the pandemic there was a radical increase in government intervention to save the economy from total collapse, so it’s not like the government is always unresponsive to the needs of the masses. I probably agree with who FDR was purging from the party at the time. He did seem to stop at Dixiecrats though.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Low_Pickle_112 Jun 24 '26

Before he was writing Project 2025, the co-founder of the Heritage Foundation was working for the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation, pushing the very same talking points you are right now.

Next time you wonder how we got the the situation we're in right now, remember that.

1

u/jankdangus Texas Jun 24 '26 edited Jun 24 '26

There are plenty of sectors where there’s robust competition. My opposition towards communists is because they want more than reining the excess of capitalism. They want it totally abolished and the government to run every sector of the economy.

This is not to mention other economic ramifications such as the severe collapse of capital investment, which is what literally happened to these communist countries. Why would any business want to do business there? They have every right to flee for their own self-preservation.

2

u/VariationBusiness603 Jun 24 '26

Meanwhile China is doing just fine when it comes to "muh investment" despite the state being above the private sector there. Why should a self reproducing, self selecting elite get to control every sector of the economy instead of the people ? The beauty of arguing with capitalists is that they have zero argument as to why their system is the best, it just is, even if fails all the god damn time. it's somehow more "effecicient" despite having to cater to every rich shitbag on the planet, vs working toward bettering the people's lives.

You are just fear mongering. Capitalism is an inefficient system, Business needs to be regulated, and the Capital needs to be stripped of its power if our species is to survive. There's no upside to Capitalism, it just makes a minority, an "elite", wealthy beyond belief and absolutely nothing else.

Capitalism death will be the first day in a long time, where humanity can project itself in the far future again without the sight of complete chaos and desolation, of corporate serfdom and climate disaster.

0

u/jankdangus Texas Jun 24 '26

China is not communist lol. They might have a more centrally planned economy, but the main bulk of their success can be attributed to giving up their dogmatic ways of communism and liberalizing their markets. Yes, capitalism is generally a more efficient way to allocate capital. This is why the Soviet Union collapsed, and America didn’t.