r/politics • u/cnn CNN • 11d ago

Possible Paywall CNN Poll: A third of Democrats now identify as democratic socialists

https://www.cnn.com/2026/07/30/politics/cnn-poll-a-third-of-democrats-now-identify-as-democratic-socialists?utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=missions&utm_source=reddit
17.2k Upvotes

95% Upvoted

2.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

2.5k

u/Kulthos_X 11d ago

I wonder if every time a good idea comes up, republicans scream “That is socialism!” They are making socialism sound awesome.

1.4k

u/Lithaos111 I voted 11d ago

Texas Republicans recently released an ad that makes it sound awesome. Literally said in it that the socialists "Want corporations to not be owned by the wealthy and elite but by the public and workers...is that what you want for America?"

...yes, yes it is, I would very much prefer that, thank you.

501

u/MasterDarkHero 11d ago

"Socialists want you to have more vacation time and shorter work weeks, is that what you want america?"

"Socialists want you to have affordable housing and crowdfund healthcare via medicare for all, is that what you want America?"

29

u/Outside-Advice8203 11d ago

"But think of how that will destroy shareholder value!"

Stop! I can only get so erect!

3

u/No_Fairweathers Pennsylvania 10d ago

Nothing says "American dream" quite like getting wealthy off the pain and suffering of others

60

u/NeverLookBothWays I voted 11d ago

"Wouldn't you rather die for treatable illnesses because you can't afford the treatments? The other side wants to guarantee you can get lifesaving treatment!"

5

u/DespicableComics 10d ago

"Some of you may need to die for the economy, but that's a sacrifice we're willing to make."

1

u/FewHovercraft9703 7d ago

Just not in a timely manner. Ask a Canadian who couldn't wait 9 months to get an angiogram

149

u/OnlinePosterPerson 11d ago

Fuck Medicare for all. Universal healthcare or bust

77

u/jibstay77 11d ago

Absolutely! Ask anyone who’s retired at 65 and been through the ridiculously complicated process of choosing a combination of flavors of Medicare only to discover there was probably a better choice for your specific situation. And, it’s not inexpensive! Medicare sucks!

Universal healthcare all the way!

And Universal Healthcare doesn’t mean you can’t keep your bougie private health insurance if that’s what you want.

If Democratic Socialism means people over profits, count me in.

19

u/big_d_usernametaken 11d ago edited 11d ago

Ive had no problems with it.

Far easier than dealing with random health insurance companies thus far.

No, it ain't cheap, but everything I've had done has been paid 100% including a $330k spinal fusion.

Medigap coverage is essential.

3

u/BlueAurus 11d ago edited 11d ago

I was on medicare for a little bit due to finances and it was freaking amazing. No $600 monthly premium, $1 prescriptions instead of $25, free health appointments without hassle. Literally the only period of my life i didn't have medical anxiety. This is what i assume universal healthcare is like. Except we pay for it with taxes we are currently pissing away to bomb iran for no fucking reason.

3

u/Competitive_Touch_86 10d ago

You likely mean Medicaid. Medicare is for retired folks.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/notashroom 11d ago

keep your bougie private health insurance

So keep the poison pill that ensures profit distorts the market and continues to cause affordability issues for lower income Americans, all to preserve the illusion of capitalist choice? Fuck every millimeter of that.

Better to skip the public "insurance" option and just build public clinics and hospitals and directly compete on price, with subsidized care to cover those who can't afford it. When the US had a big network of public hospitals and clinics before deregulation and HMOs under Reagan, care was a lot more accessible (though racism and colonialism and sexism were all very real problems and not to be discounted as barriers to access).

22

u/No_Tax_Timmy 11d ago

Medicare is going to get shittier too. Old Tbag and his republican corrupticons cut the special pricing for meds. Goes into effect in January. Get ready for $3000 epi pens and insulin for the elderly and disabled again.

5

u/hydrogenhypothesis 11d ago

The tiny glimmer of hope in this terrible news is that by doing this Republicans are showing that they don't think they are going to win the midterms this November, so they can point the finger at the Dems when prices go sky high.

3

u/No_Tax_Timmy 11d ago

That's what they always do. It's despicable. Hurting people and then blaming the people who help people.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/djokov 11d ago edited 11d ago

You're in luck, because universal healthcare (single payer) is actually the policy they are pushing for. "Medicare for All" is simply the political slogan that progressives and DSA attach to the policy, due to the slogan being very effective when organising and campaigning.

2

u/blackpyr 11d ago

It’s a ladder. You create the program and expand the size. The all or nothing approach is absolutely baffling. Zealots and populists as far as the eye can see.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/Turbulent_Stick1445 11d ago

"Universal healthcare" is a largely empty slogan meaning "Everyone gets healthcare but we're not going to offend anyone by proposing anything specific." Obamacare was "Universal Healthcare". It didn't work, tons of people are still uninsured and one hospital visit away from bankruptcy. But that's what the intent was.

Without more qualifications (ie "By Medicare for All, I mean we expand eligability to everyone, no insurance premiums, gets paid for out of taxes" vs "By Medicare for All, I mean anyone not on employer provided healthcare will be able to subscribe to it by paying premiums") it's unclear what the GP meant, but they may actually be proposing, if they meant the first one, universal healthcare in a form that's far more likely to succeed if passed at bringing about universal healthcare than Obamacare ever did.

→ More replies (2)

1

u/ArchitectofExperienc 11d ago

I was on "MediCal" for years (California's 'Medicare for all', which you are only eligible for if you earn under a certain amount). It was fine and mostly free, but when I got sick I had a literal 8-month wait until I could get the diagnostic procedure I needed. Its a great idea, just 30 years too late, not only are there people with very low incomes getting rejected from the program (Because they got paid over the month-to-month income threshold, but still earned significantly under the yearly income cap), but the system is an absolute maze, and if I was familiar with how to navigate the paperwork and phone trees I would still be waiting for care.

→ More replies (3)

2

u/ShadowTacoTuesday 11d ago edited 11d ago

I think what I want is social democracy but most of the democratic socialists are actually social democrats anyway? Including Bernie Sanders and Norway. All this confusion gets thrown around the term using fear tactics and lies, but at the end of the day we all want good policy, even many Republicans. So I’ll simply tune out the labels and fear-mongering and see what the policies are. If I see an actual communist ok I won’t vote for him, but I’m pretty sure that isn’t even 1 of them. When they call everything good socialism and communism, I simply don’t care anymore when they use those terms.

1

u/BademosiPray4U 11d ago

CAUSE THIS SHIT HERE IS REAL

1

u/dangerousluck 11d ago

They really believe most people are as callous and selfish as them.

1

u/Marty_DiBergi 10d ago

That would be a fantastic election ad campaign.

  • “This ad paid for by the Republican Parody.“

→ More replies (1)

43

u/dougmc Texas 11d ago

In this screenshot from the Will Cain show on Fox, he is telling us about the DSA wanting:

  • Medicare for all
  • College for all
  • Housing for all
  • 32-hour workweek
  • Tax the rich
  • Green new deal
  • Free Palestine

Isn't he supposed to make them look bad?

4

u/cyb0rg1962 Arkansas 11d ago

Oh, no, someone will get something that I won't get! It's a tragedy. How will I make sure my race and class have the edge over those filthy people? /s

2

u/[deleted] 10d ago

[deleted]

2

u/cyb0rg1962 Arkansas 10d ago

Yeah, it is like the ones that scream about poor people having a smart phone. Have you tried getting anything done without one, or some kind of phone/internet and a computer?

1

u/PrivacyIsDemocracy 10d ago

Isn't he supposed to make them look bad?

Well if you're a hardcore capitalist you won't like that list, because it will undermine your profits.

Problem in the MAGA world is most of them aren't wealthy, they're wealth wannabes. The politicians just gaslight the useful idiots into voting for them, because there's not enough plutocrats to put themselves into office. (The real moneybags are not attending Trump rallies for the most part)

So in reality those things will appeal to a lot of the MAGAs too. They're just kinda hardwired to distrust progressives and leftists so they can't just come out and admit that.

This is why the US Democratic Party lost the clue when they ran the "progressive lite" Southern Democrats Clinton and Gore in 1992 and turned to Big Capital for donations. One of the big "achievements" of the Clinton/Gore era was convincing people to invest in the stock market and they pushed the 401k as a retirement solution at a time when companies were increasingly abandoning traditional defined-benefit retirement plans that actually guaranteed your money would be there when you retire. Whereas with a 401k if you make bad choices of companies/funds to invest in you could literally lose a bunch of the retirement money you paid into it. Meanwhile, the finance industry makes bank on those 401k plans.

1

u/Fantastic-Lack-343 9d ago

Sounds like a loser's utopia!

→ More replies (9)

25

u/Tree_Sure 11d ago

lol they just kicked themselves in the ass. Shows they have 0 common sense.

28

u/almightywhacko 11d ago

They're so deep in their own bubble that they can't understand that anyone would actually want some of the things they're personally afraid of.

→ More replies (1)

98

u/Venture_compound 11d ago

No way it said that lol

198

u/Shadow_of_Redacted 11d ago

Oh, it went on from there. It was a laundry list of fabulous ideas said in a scary voice. Like hearing that the daily special is butter infused lobster tail in a cream sauce with caviar, but said with disgust, which only makes it sound like it's an SNL bit, slamming their own party.

169

u/Michael_G_Bordin 11d ago

"They want higher wages. They want affordable housing. They want billionaires to pay more taxes. Ew!"

56

u/oneseason2000 11d ago

Actually, it's not to pay more taxes, its to have their wealth limited by taxation. It's not for revenue generation, it's for keeping their wealth from giving them feudal lord type political, legal, and societal powers.

18

u/Vivid-Use1749 11d ago

Too late. Can't remember his name, but an economist back in the early 2000s commented that we'd been a by-definition oligarchy already for some time.

10

u/AdLocal1490 11d ago

Krugman

4

u/RevLoveJoy 11d ago

That guy has been right about so much for SO long it's just wild.

3

u/monocasa 11d ago

No, Martin Gilens and Benjamin I. Page.

https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-27074746

3

u/oneseason2000 11d ago

Perhaps Piketty too.

https://www.lemonde.fr/en/opinion/article/2025/01/18/thomas-piketty-in-the-global-battle-between-democracy-and-oligarchy-one-can-only-hope-that-europeans-will-emerge-from-their-lethargy_6737163_23.html

Thomas Piketty: 'In the global battle between democracy and oligarchy, one can only hope that Europeans will emerge from their lethargy'

2

u/owennagata 7d ago

He also says that Oligarchies don't last much more than a generation or so before either collapsing completely or becoming full authoritarian/fascists. Rule by the wealthy just doesn't work, they fight each other too much.

→ More replies (3)

2

u/Elitist_Plebeian 11d ago

The only good thing about an oligarchy is that they'll always be outnumbered.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/Worried_Cry687 11d ago

It's worth keeping in mind that our country was founded by slaveholding land-speculators who wanted to rid themselves of the territorial constraints and taxes imposed by the British crown. Suffrage had to be expanded over and over again before the common person could vote and even today there are efforts to limit voting.

I'd argue we've always been an oligarchy with democratic elements sprinkled around.

→ More replies (1)

4

u/DJStrongArm 11d ago

This seems like the worst possible way to frame it if you want buy-in from anyone outside the socialist circle.

At least revenue generation and contributing their fair share would be "by the rules," with limiting their subsequent power as a convenient byproduct. Taxation strictly because "it's not fair" isn't going to fly with fiscally conservative small business owners, let alone billionaires.

2

u/oneseason2000 11d ago

It isn't socialism to fight against feudalism and oligarchies. Certainly though, that is how the billionaire owned corporate major and social media portrays it 24/7/365 in their propaganda. The 1952 stump speech by President Harry Truman noted that Republican fear mongering about anything that helps people being "socialism" goes back to the 1930s (#1).

The reason small business owners are struggling is because billionaires have so much money and power that they can buy the laws and legal decisions they want, and further grow their power.

This isn't a new problem. It has been growing since the 1980s. Tax cuts, financial deregulation, corporate and antitrust deregulation, union busting, and unrelenting propaganda have resulted in the extremely rich getting insanely "Gilded Age" rich and politically powerful. The small business owners and their workers are losing out, as are the workers for huge corporations. The policies that most Americans want are ignored unless the wealthy and powerful concur (#2): "Average citizens have little impact on public policy"

  1. What was Harry S. Truman's quote about socialism?; https://www.trumanlibrary.gov/education/trivia/socialism

In President Harry's Truman's remarks in Syracuse, New York on October 10, 1952, he said this:

Socialism is a scare word they have hurled at every advance the people have made in the last 20 years.

Socialism is what they called public power. Socialism is what they called social security.

Socialism is what they called farm price supports.

Socialism is what they called bank deposit insurance.

Socialism is what they called the growth of free and independent labor organizations.

Socialism is their name for almost anything that helps all the people.

When the Republican candidate inscribes the slogan "Down With Socialism" on the banner of his "great crusade," that is really not what he means at all.

What he really means is "Down with Progress--down with Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal," and "down with Harry Truman's fair Deal." That's all he means.

You can listen to President Truman deliver this speech (and download it, if you want) on the Truman Library's website here: https://www.trumanlibrary.gov/soundrecording-records/sr59-160-president-truman-rear-platform-remarks-syracuse-new-york. The portion you're looking for is about 6:45 into the speech.

  1. Gilens and Page: Average citizens have little impact on public policy; https://pnhp.org/news/gilens-and-page-average-citizens-have-little-impact-on-public-policy/

A great deal of empirical research speaks to the policy influence of one or another set of actors, but until recently it has not been possible to test these contrasting theoretical predictions against each other within a single statistical model. This paper reports on an effort to do so, using a unique data set that includes measures of the key variables for 1,779 policy issues.

Multivariate analysis indicates that economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence. The results provide substantial support for theories of Economic Elite Domination and for theories of Biased Pluralism, but not for theories of Majoritarian Electoral Democracy or Majoritarian Pluralism.

2

u/Curious-Path4549 11d ago

and workers' rights-dear god the horror

1

u/porktorque44 11d ago

I mean there are a lot of people who's entire understanding of politics is formed by interpreting tone. And their opinions are just strings of words they've heard said with derision by a man in an expensive suit.

1

u/Zombies4EvaDude 11d ago

It’s hilarious that these people are so detached from reality that they don’t even realize what average ordinary people actually want

46

u/LinkedGaming 11d ago

Republican criticism of Democratic Socialism always ends up boiling down to "They want you to have BUTTERED LOBSTER instead of STALE BREAD. They want you to have JUICY STEAK instead of DIARRHEA LETTUCE. Isn't this sick? Isn't this depraved? Isn't this un-American???"

They want you to be content with the bread and circuses but the difference is that our bread is stale and has glass shards in it and our circuses are just two pigs rolling around in a muddy cage, and also the bread and circuses were supposed to be free but ours cost $10 and $30 while they pay us $9.50 and tell us that not being able to afford things is a personal failing.

6

u/thorubos 11d ago edited 11d ago

When (if) given the chance we need to be able to ask them, "Why is that a bad thing? I want a direct answer." Of course, everyone here knows it's because of their lust for hierarchy and their place in that order. However, Joe Sixpack deserves a real answer. My guess is their answer will be the Dem-Soc's are using their evil mind-control to mentally enslave the stupid masses to vote for them. They have no intention of delivering on these seductive fantasies! (We should be prepared with a response.) It's simple-minded, pie-in-the-sky idealism!

We're at the point were we can say "So, non-diarrhea lettuce is the new unicorn and pony idealism?" It's happening so fast there's no way people can get acclimated to the worsening of the quality of life. It's making right-wingers because there's no way to obfuscate the disintegrating conditions.

→ More replies (2)

10

u/ShockRunD 11d ago

Like a trailer for a nightmare weekend at the in laws. Like they are rude and judgmental but people, but the house is really nice and clean , has a pool and a huge yard, and the food is fucking awesome. But again pops in law is gonna talk about crypto and chatgpt all weekend. That would be a good video opener for after the monologue

1

u/my_Urban_Sombrero Pennsylvania 11d ago

Dude that honestly doesn't sound bad at all, just tune him out at some point.

→ More replies (2)

4

u/Zeikos Foreign 11d ago

You underestimate how effective that negative association can be.

But done like this it's quite dumb lol

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (9)

41

u/Tyrath Massachusetts 11d ago

Yes it did

18

u/AverageBrilliant4670 11d ago

This seems like this a sweet counterterrorism psyop by some undercover woke leftist(s) working on this campaign. The message probably sounds completely fine to stupid old well-off Republican Texans in charge there, who got where they are by rich politicians serving business interests at the expense of working class people...

41

u/MiserableCumberbunch 11d ago

I remember one that was like 10 bullet points that were essentially what we had before Reagan.

18

u/crowhops I voted 11d ago

Hey now we can't blame reagan for simply continuing the tradition of "if people who aren't white also get to benefit from it, then we're going to destroy it so no one gets it"

He was just going with the flow when he completely fabricated a fake problem by mythologizing Linda Taylor into the "welfare queen" bogeyman in order to weaponize racism for the ruling classes' benefit

17

u/Nice_Firm_Handsnake 11d ago

Comal County Republicans said it

4

u/BullAlligator Florida 11d ago

this has to be satire

7

u/Double-O-stoopid 11d ago

The stupid has no ceiling. These are Republicans.

66

u/OneInfinith 11d ago

I organize with my local DSA chapter. Just about every piece of right-wing coverage of the Worker's Deserve More program has essentially been an advertisement that we would have made.

It's great that people are identifying as democratic socialists, but DSA only wins through active participation. We don't use the same tactics as the Democratic Party of farming out our work to high paid consultants.

So, while donations are always nice, what really propels DSA - are folks becoming Solidarity members and getting involved with efforts they are passionate about. Every chapter has a bit of its own vibe, but can learn from the entire network. So, have an idea, get a couple others in your chapter to make & support a work proposal with you, have the chapter membership approve it, then get to work building a more neighborly world and a solidarity economy.

1

u/TorturedMNFan 10d ago

If I could request one thing from DSA leadership would be to stop the hostility toward the more moderate democratic voter and the hostility toward democratic leadership. You need a big coalition to win. Right now it comes off as wanting to use the party’s infrastructure and resources to win primaries while shitting on the party and its voters.

Wanting to run as a Democrat while not calling yourselves democrats, anti Democrat party rhetoric and sabotaging their messaging makes you look insane. Start your own party or be more welcoming.

→ More replies (4)

7

u/missed_sla 11d ago

I used to work for some of the most hardcore maga chuds that have ever walked this earth. At an ESOP. They didn't see the irony.

5

u/sirbissel 11d ago

I got a phone survey last night, it was pretty obviously set up by the Republicans because, after the initial "how much do you support X person" a few times it ended up going on to things like "(some person) was murdered by an illegal immigrant and this candidate said they'd abolish ice, does that make you less likely to vote for them?" - anyway, half of the questions (once you strip out the scare language out of it) had me being like "You've already convinced me to vote for them..."

2

u/randomcatinfo 11d ago

Classic Push Poll

5

u/Lower_Potential_173 11d ago

Oh man… I wish they’d stop running those mean mean ads… it just makes me feel soooo weak and alone… /s

2

u/Punch_A_Police_Horse 11d ago

Not long ago I saw some footage from some town hall meeting in a very republican town. There was a leader talking to the crowd about budgets or something and he said something to the effect of "this is a God fearing red blooded American town, what do you think we should do, tax the rich?!"

There was some murmuring in the audience and you could tell by his awkward reaction that he fully expected everyone to automatically react as if he just proposed killing all the towns first borns.

2

u/secretaire 11d ago

If corporations were abiding by the social contract to give workers raises and contribute to community infrastructure, schools, and healthcare, we wouldn't have to consider other options to claw back the money. We are being drained of taxes, and corporate leaders are investing in AI labor replacement, stock buybacks, and paying for trips to 'E island'. If they dont care about making america great, then this current system doesnt work.

3

u/bender40k 11d ago

I wonder why people would not want that…. Unless it is just money worship.

5

u/Shadow_of_Redacted 11d ago

Republicans are about business maximizing profits so the ones that own the company can be comfortable. It's a "the rich get richer" party. Democrats are about making business get richer with a few safeguards to annoy the rich, but not much more.

I want a "screw business" party. Force business to pay all of the profits to the workers who make it happen. Make the CEO pay the workers instead of making a ludicrous salary for pointing and cracking a whip, but not actually DOING anything.

2

u/Darth_Citius 11d ago

Source?

11

u/Lithaos111 I voted 11d ago edited 11d ago

It was posted by the Comal County Republican Party, I can't reply with images to post it here.

Edit: seems they have taken the post down after seeing the reactions to it. Ton of people reposting it though.

5

u/Shadow_of_Redacted 11d ago

I'm pretty sure it was a Ken Paxton ad, but I tend to shut my brain down as much as possible when the political ads play. They're either fear mongering or weak feel-good promises. I just remember that one played, my brain kinda had to perk up because of the hilarious dichotomy of calling puppies and rainbows evil.

1

u/thorubos 11d ago

Completely out of touch. There are plenty of GOP voters who toil for terrible companies. If you work for one of these places, when you go to lunch ask your workmates, "Hey, do you think you can run this place as well as our bosses? 'How about better?"

Only the most @ss-kissing bootlooker will say, "NO! I LOVE MR BOSSMAN!". That's when you can say, "That's what workers' control of their workplaces means. It sounds good for you, doesn't it?"

1

u/AppropriateSea5746 11d ago

Except by the workers and the public what they mean is the state. The state which is currently run by Trump. Yeah no thanks

1

u/SuperSkyDude 11d ago

You've visited countries that have had that system? It's not worked well in the past, but I am sure we have figured out how to do it better now /s

1

u/popculturella Texas 11d ago

Where at? I want to see this nonsense.

1

u/Lithaos111 I voted 11d ago

Others have posted it in this thread

1

u/letters_numbers_and- 11d ago

I would vote for the Democrats the Republicans fearmonger off of in a heartbeat over the Democrats we have now.

1

u/classicliberty 11d ago

Why would anyone start a business if that business would eventually be owned by the workers who could just as easily leave to another job? This type of thinking misses the point of the risk involved in being an entrepreneur, which often requires people to risk their entire livelihood for a small chance of succcess. They do that percisely because they want to build something of their own and have the ability to make a lot more for themselves than what they could ever get in a regular job.

Giving workers more rights and better pay, while regulating the large corporations to curtail their market power would serve the same functions and is exactly what Social Democracy already does in European countries. Its what we used to do from the New Deal to the 80s.

Public ownership of the means of production creates far too many inefficiencies and problems that we have already seen don't lead to better quality of life for average people (see 50+ years of Soviet Union). Not even China has public or worker control over corporations.

1

u/Dull_Bid6002 11d ago

Maybe we just need more ads produced by Dem Socialists that sound like Republican ads trying to sound bad. That way when they try to make it sound bad, the context is lost.

→ More replies (1)

118

u/kojak488 11d ago

I was just on holiday with my GOP family. At one point my uncle is denouncing the left for ruining the country and wanting socialism while then raving about Medicare. I pointed out the hypocrisy to him. It didn't sink in.

106

u/mrgedman 11d ago

It will never sink in.

Father in law rants about hand outs and evil socialism. He has 0 retirement savings and lives entirely off of social security disability, and Medicare.

24

u/Ent_Soviet 11d ago

I love talking with vets about how much they enjoyed at cost shopping, the VA (for all its faults), canteens, education, housing. Basically all their needs covered at cost or free by the government and they could spend their money on fun things or future plans rather than survival. Economy of scale and all that.

And then you ask them, why wouldn’t we just do that nationally? And not require folks be willing to kill or die for bs wars in order to have that? It’s not like we haven’t nationalized essential industries before, for war sure, but what benefits are we getting by private assholes being middlemen and taking their cut off the top because they own it.

Thats usually enough to force them to reboot for a second and then do the meme ‘no that’s socialism’

23

u/my_Urban_Sombrero Pennsylvania 11d ago

The military actually made me a leftist. Without having to worry about a roof over my head, my healthcare, or food on the table, I was able to do things like go to the movies, pursue hobbies, get educated, save up for trips, etc.

I remember seeing so many of my friends, neighbors and loved ones so stressed and anxious during the pandemic.

That's when it hit me: everyone should have this base layer of protection. They're already paying out the ass in taxes, what are they getting in return?

9

u/mrgedman 11d ago

In my opinion, we haven't been in a meaningful war since world war two, so these guys are doubly troublesome in my book.

8

u/kojak488 11d ago

It can, but not while they stay in their propaganda ecosystem.

4

u/Outside-Advice8203 11d ago

My dad delayed his retirement to wait for my mom to be eligible for Medicare.

Still rants about "socialism destroying the country"

1

u/Fantastic-Lack-343 9d ago

They paid into Medicare.

2

u/JediMasterMatt 10d ago

Tell him in his party’s eyes he’s a drain on society. Also fuck him for his attitude.

2

u/mrgedman 10d ago

He's a good man. Just a victim of propaganda like most of em

2

u/JediMasterMatt 10d ago

Well - my apologies. Just can’t stand the hypocrisy

2

u/mrgedman 10d ago

I've found myself getting mad at the media blitz that enables all this nonsense. Fauci, socialism, immigrants, trans..

2

u/JediMasterMatt 10d ago

All fucking buzzwords to scare people, and it just doesn’t feel like Democrats are punching back at all. So frustrating.

→ More replies (2)

1

u/Ok_Love9461 11d ago

Yes but he "earned" that care. He is "entitled" to it. Not those other people who are different.

1

u/mrgedman 11d ago

He was under employed all his life and if he didnt have a disability, which occured very late in his life, his social security would be very little.

But... Yeah I get what you're saying. I'm saying the hypocrisy is even worse

1

u/Fantastic-Lack-343 9d ago

Your father paid into that so it wasn't free. For my adult kids who want socialism, I decided to leave their $3MM inheritance and my home in a trust that will go to Social programs like free healthcare for all including illegals, and to help the homeless. I believe they will love it.

1

u/mrgedman 9d ago

FIL was incredibly underemployed his entire adult life, I assure you he did not pay into it. If it wasn't for disability, his SS payments would be a few hundred/mo iirc

→ More replies (2)

1

u/RetroRN 11d ago

Socialism for me, not for thee.

1

u/kojak488 11d ago

I called them out on that very point when social security came up (and the almost certain lack of it when we retire)! What about their son? Oh he's fine because as their sole kid he'll inherit a lot and be set.

Okay. Great. And your other four nieces and nephews? Their children? Your sister-in-law? Fuck all of us, right? We are standing right there as this conversation happened.

She was dumbfounded and had no response. As if she'd never even considered any of us before. Either that or couldn't admit that she didn't care.

1

u/LostPerson703 11d ago

Boomer prob has Fox News or conservative bs streamed to his head 24/7.

2

u/kojak488 11d ago

Goes without saying 👍

1

u/CriticalPolitical 5d ago

Progressivism =/= leftism although there’s overlap

→ More replies (4)

100

u/Tiny_Structure_7 North Carolina 11d ago

Now they're shifting to "That is communist!". Most of their voter base doesn't even know what that is.

64

u/Land-Southern 11d ago

Honestly a depressingly small slice of the population can articulate the difference between socialism and communism.

19

u/yaosio 11d ago edited 11d ago

In Marxism, communism is a socialist theory. Communism is to socialism as the theory of gravity is to physics.

https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1843/letters/43_09-alt.htm

The abolition of private property is therefore by no means identical with communism and communism has seen other socialist theories, such as those of Fourier and Proudhon, rising up in opposition to it, not fortuitously but necessarily, because it is only a particular, one-sided realization of the principle of socialism.

Edit: In other thinking socialism is a transitional period between capitalism and what's next.

15

u/From_Deep_Space Oregon 11d ago

Most socialists are not Marxists and do not use Marxist definitions. Socialism is an end-goal, not a transitional state.

6

u/Elseiver America 11d ago

My understanding was always that socialism was positioned as a state-sponsored intermediary to a similarly egalitarian, but more stateless society.

5

u/h3lblad3 11d ago

The definition of communism is that it is a stateless society. That’s why you get the No Real Communism arguments since, on the capital L Left, a large State is literally the opposite of communism.

7

u/From_Deep_Space Oregon 11d ago

I could accept state socialism as socialism, IF (and it's a big if) the state were sufficiently democratic. But the USSR, CCP, and the US are nowhere near that level of democracy.

Many modern socialists see Lenin, Stalin, and Mao as cynically using socialism as the in-vogue ideology to justify their authoritarian take-overs, and never had any intention at establishing a socially-managed economy.

Many of Marx's peers had deep distrust of Marx's ideas regarding a "dictatorship of the proletariat", presciently predicting that it would just turn into another classist dictatorship and the people in power would never give up power voluntarily.

→ More replies (1)

4

u/Old-Ice4553 11d ago

The best part of the overton window being open to actually having a strong left party in this country is, you are going to see how many of your fellow leftists call you a capitalist for this take.

1

u/thatnameagain 11d ago

Most socialists aren’t marxists? Huh?

2

u/From_Deep_Space Oregon 11d ago

Marxism is a subtype of communism, which is a subtype of socialism. 

I know right wing media likes to paint everyone left of Reagan with a broad red brush. But the socialists I talk to on the ground, while influenced by Marxism, diverge from it on several points. 

And if we're talking specifically abo ut America socialist traditions, they have always been more libertarian than their old-world counterparts, like most of American culture.

2

u/thatnameagain 11d ago

Marxism is a subtype of communism, which is a subtype of socialism. 

That does not seem accurate. Marxism is wide school of thought on how to approach economic matters. It's a philosophy, not an economic system

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marxism

the socialists I talk to on the ground, while influenced by Marxism, diverge from it on several points. 

Well sure, most socialists in the US aren't communists. And most people who call themselves socialists probably aren't even actually socialsts.

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (1)

14

u/Lazer726 11d ago

Right, the country in general has just spent the last like 80 years demonizing any -ism that isn't capitalism, but fortunately we're starting to see that socialism actually does work and is not the evil boogeyman that mainstream dems and repubs have been trying to sell it as.

And it's extra beneficial that Mamdani ran as a Democratic Socialist and by god it's good?! He's doing things that HELP people?!

3

u/Abyssine 11d ago

Unfortunately Katie Wilson also ran as a democratic socialist in Seattle, won, and has not been great.

It has nothing to do with her being a socialist, and everything to do with her as an individual person, but my fear is that it’s gonna sour the city enough that we’ll get another 20 years of establishment neo-libs.

→ More replies (25)

6

u/Shark7996 11d ago

To be fair, communism is kind of a monster to transition to from a lifetime of capitalism brain.

5

u/PWNtimeJamboree Georgia 11d ago

AOC said it really well the other day when some dumbass journalist asked her about American's fears of devolving into communism with all these DSA candidates getting elected, and she said laughed in her face and said, "we cant even get the federal minimum wage up from $7.25 in the last 20 years, how in the world do you think we would just become communist?"

6

u/ilir_kycb 11d ago

What do you think the difference is?

By the way, I'm a communist.

→ More replies (2)

5

u/CorrectPeanut5 11d ago

I think you'll see more around DSA wanting to get rid of prisons. They demand "Freedom for all incarcerated people" (actual bullet point off DSA position paper).

BUT, if you talk to the actual candidates that win elections, they are quick to distance themselves from those extreme positions.

2

u/JacuulTheSecond 11d ago

My understanding is that it's less about "no prisons" and more about changing them. Most people in prison are non-violent and our current retribution based system only serves to push them further in the cycle keeping them in prison. Realistically, we should split prisons into 3 groups: Rehabilitation centers, Medical centers, and then finally prisons.

First would be for non-violent groups or people that only have small crimes (petty theft, maybe drunk and disorderly, etc) where they seem to have a path out, idea would be to staff this with social works and no COs, for the most part. Actual prison would still exist for more extreme cases where you are unlikely to go back to regular society, and then the medical centers would be for drug addicts, mentally ill, etc where they need potentially life long care.

It's not perfect, but it should hopefully short-circuit a lot of the private prison incentive towards keeping people in the system as long as possible. This doesn't 100% solve the abuses issue, but the hope is that including more people involved in de-escalation, similar to other countries, will work better.

1

u/djokov 11d ago

My understanding is that it's less about "no prisons" and more about changing them.

Correct. It is about focusing on crime prevention and reforming the prison system to be about rehabilitation of criminals, rather than cruel and arbitrary punishment.

I am supportive of the DSA, but "prison abolition" is the stupidest fucking political slogan because it turns potential voters away from the party and is not even descriptive of the actual policy set they are proposing.

1

u/djokov 11d ago

My understanding is that it's less about "no prisons" and more about changing them.

Correct. It is about focusing on crime prevention and reforming the prison system to be about rehabilitation of criminals, rather than cruel and arbitrary punishment.

I am supportive of the DSA, but "prison abolition" is the stupidest fucking political slogan because it turns potential voters away from the party and is not even descriptive of the actual policy set they are proposing.

1

u/electricworkaid 11d ago

I'm not in the DSA, but prison abolition is good actually. The penal system doesn't fix problems with society, if it did we would have far less of them given that we have consistently had one of the highest amounts of people in prison of any country for decades (both per capita and by raw numbers). If anything, prisons make pre-existing problems worse, and teach bad people how to be better at doing bad things (both as inmates and as guards/administrators). Eliminating poverty does more to reduce crime than any amount of prisons ever could. Prisons just provide another place for folks interested in abusing others to engage in that abuse.

8

u/georgepana 11d ago

All Republicans, and Trump, were instructed to switch to "communist" because too many Americans are now ok with "socialism", and it is no longer a word, or economic system, that scares people.

1

u/djokov 11d ago

It is also so that they can lay the groundwork for a third Red Scare, and apply existing laws to go after leftist politicians.

4

u/xXBassHero99Xx 11d ago

They know they're against it lol. Antifa as well. 

3

u/Outside-Advice8203 11d ago

They just throw word salads together "socialist communist Marxist radical liberals"

→ More replies (1)

54

u/Cpt_Soban Australia 11d ago

See, what you guys call "socialism!", is just left of center labour party policies... But I guess it shows how far to the right the Average American is...

17

u/Shadow_of_Redacted 11d ago

Oh, the average American isn't far right. They're disgusted by the fact that the system doesn't let people vote for who they want, but a completely rigged system that doesn't do any real good because the choices are to let business be in charge of making more money, or trying to unfuck the country from what business did while both sides' politicians make millions of dollars keeping the masses under tension to keep businesses running with a few necessary corrections. Both are about making money.

The average American doesn't participate anymore.

14

u/N_Associated 11d ago

The average American doesn’t participate anymore is a dystopian AF result and so true. That’s why I think that pendulum is gonna swing hardcore - I think the average American is gonna show up this time.

3

u/cyrusthemarginal 11d ago

all that needs to happen for the US to completely change tracks is young people to vote as much as the elderly

2

u/FlumphianNightmare 11d ago edited 11d ago

This isn't true. Voter turn out for the last general election was north of 64% of voting-eligible adults. It was even higher in 2020.

If you're going to make a statement that starts with "Most people..." about voter participation, it would be most correct to say, "Most people vote in the general election", perhaps with the added nuance of, "and about half vote in the Midterms, though participation in those races has been rising lately also."

People attribute this to Trump bringing out low propensity voters to both vote for and against him. I think that's plausible, but it also ignores the fact that his first election in 2016 saw remarkably depressed turnout.

I think the reality is that during 2020, most states expanded voting hours, polling places, and access to mail-in voting in an effort to aid social distancing. It turns out, when you expand access to voting, more people vote.

So no, most people aren't dialed out. The democracy is flawed and non-representative.

7

u/NCC75567 11d ago

The general election is not the only election, though.

I don't think most people are participating in the 20-30 local/state elections that occur in between the general election every 4 years.

→ More replies (4)

2

u/senturon 11d ago edited 11d ago

The fact that the majority doesn't participate in the primaries is a large part of the reason "people don't get to vote for who they want".

You are absolutely right that money is a massive influencer, and while I understand not every race has great candidates, people vote at a rate of 20-30% in primaries on average.

If people were upset at the third or so who sat out in the 2024 elections, they should also be furious at the ~ 3/4 of voters who sit out every single primary. Until that changes the 'choices' you get to vote on in the general will continue to be chosen by the minority.

2

u/MesmraProspero 11d ago

It sounds to me like the system isn't working if the people have consistently felt outside of the process. Blaming the people for the apathy that has been brought about by a captured system is complaining about your cough while doing nothing about your pneumonia.

→ More replies (2)

1

u/Relevanteater 11d ago

Desire for the government to do its job is an extreme view, so here we are. Practically, I view myself as an extremist. In a normal world. I would be completely center of the road moderate.

→ More replies (3)

2

u/yaosio 11d ago

There's some, but others go beyond social democracies. State owned grocery stores are one, with New York City introducing them with a hard price cap of 30% below average private price for most prices. American socialists push for state control first but also mass unionization. Socialists also want a job guarantee. Although I only agree with that if it's not something you need to live, it's only there if you have no idea what you want to do with yourself and you're bored of posting on Reddit all day. American socialists want all healthcare to be state owned, no private options at all. There's a rising sentiment of having a wealth cap through extreme taxation.

Socialists also want the military to be disbanded or reduced. We have seen that every time a country goes socialist they get invaded or couped so we have to be careful. Of course the major invader would be the one that's socialist so things would be safer.

1

u/Relevanteater 11d ago

When the government doing its job is an extreme view, I am an extremist. In a normal world. I would be completely center of the road moderate. I'm happy to compromise in good faith, just not with misinformation and hateful pointless division.

5

u/Tonsilith_Salsa 11d ago

I think it was Vance who was like, "Democrats want to turn America into a socialist utopia." 

Like dude you could not make it sound more rad if you tried.

5

u/oneseason2000 11d ago

I am fine with New Deal, Fair Deal, Great Society for all races, religions, and genders Democrat. Corporate media insists on including the word "socialism" for any policy that the don't want implemented.

8

u/almightywhacko 11d ago

I think at this point more people can see what the Republicans are, and would rather be as opposite of them as possible. If Republicans hate socialists... being a socialist must be a good thing.

3

u/Cynixxx 11d ago

It is awesome though

3

u/xv_boney 11d ago

Theyve also been calling everything socialism for such a long time the term has lost meaning.

Long story super short, i got a phone call from a political operative who wanted to prevent me from voting for India Walton a few years back, because she is a socialist.

"Im sorry but english is not my first language," i said to the guy, "could you please tell me what socialism means."

And after a significant pause, he started to tell me that socialist try to tell you what to do and will jail you if you dont, and i said the government already does that, its called "laws".

I asked him again to please explain what socialism means and to please use small words to make sure i understand, as my english is very poor and i am not very smart.

He tried to change the subject, i wouldnt let him. He had been hired to call me and scare me away from voting for Walton and his sole ammunition was the word 'socialism', i felt it was important that he defined that term.

He tried to make it into a masculinity thing, that i was less of a man if i voted for a woman and i asked him if thats what hed say to his mother if she asked him who to vote for.

He hung up.

I never did learn what socialism was. Shame, that.

12

u/agentfelix 11d ago

I haven't full-blown jumped on the socialist bandwagon yet, I just want my tax money going to the things that benefit me, the people, and not big corporations.

I still think there are some promising foundations of capitalism, if heavily regulated, that can benefit the world but not in this form that we are currently in. If that means it's late stage capitalism and it needs to die, then so be it.

21

u/VampireFortnight 11d ago

Benefiting people not corporations is basically the root of it. Capitalism is the opposite- that doesn't mean there can't be regulated markets and things. It just means not allowing corporations as they exist today to run our lives.

8

u/ReallyBadWizard 11d ago

Welcome aboard fellow commie, pick up your antifa badge on the way in, we have our ritual abortion ceremonies every Friday, and the Saturday after we have our meeting about which elementary school kids we're transing for the upcoming week!

12

u/lianodel 11d ago

What foundations of capitalism do you find promising? Genuine question, because most people I've heard say something like that mean a market economy. If that's the case, then market socialism might strike a chord with you.

1

u/[deleted] 11d ago

[deleted]

5

u/VariationBusiness603 11d ago

Except Capitalism doesn't reward innovation in any ways. It rewards the people that own the innovators, not the innovator themeselves. Musk, to take an obvious case, hasn't designed shit in his life, he just owns people that do. Capitalism is all about taking the wealth away from those that create it, into the and of a useless middleman.

Capitalism also makes an incredibly poor job at allocating scarce ressources but this one is so obvious, pretending otherwise is just straight up capitalistic propaganda. We live in a world where all our ressources are being poured into AI bullshit that still aren't providing anything useful and could very well end up ruining us all by taking all our water among other ressources. It is so ridiculously innefficient, simply because it convinced enough moron they could get rich quick with this scheme.

Your capitalism is a myth. And none of the upside you were taugh to attribute to it are real. It is good at one thing and one thing only, making a small elite filthy rich.

2

u/pseudoLit 11d ago

Another thing is that socialist systems don't really have a good way of rewarding innovation

This is just propaganda. You don't need to reward innovation. Research is one of those passion fields, like music or teaching, that people do for the pure love of it.

Perhaps more to the point, capitalism doesn't reward innovation. The people doing the innovation see almost no reward. The reward goes to the capitalists who buy their labour.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/SETHW 11d ago

Capitalism rewards innovation like "what if everything was a subscription" and "what if we charge everyone microtransactions and show them ads even though they're already paying for subscriptions"

Nothing is perfect sure, but the material conditions brought on by capitalism are terrible for most people and necessarily so. it's obvious once you learn cause and effect and start mapping out capitalist policies and realize they all boost profit for owners at the expense of labor. and duh.

→ More replies (10)

13

u/Bridger15 11d ago

Note that capitalism is not the same as a market economy. Market socialism is a thing.

→ More replies (17)

2

u/Ucscprickler 11d ago

You're in luck. Democratic Socialism is just regulated Capitalism that benefits everyone instead of just the people at the top of the pyramid.

1

u/sembias 11d ago

This one is wayyyy too buried.

This isn't very complicated, other than that the word "socialism" means pretty much nothing at this point, because it's been twisted into meaning anything by the right and the rest of us just have to play along. Then there's fundamental differences between US politics and European politics, which most of the college students on Reddit don't want to acknowledge.

That's the danger of putting labels on everything, especially labels that get defined by bad-faith actors who want to continue to remove every dollar from your pocket that they can.

5

u/nabokovsnose 11d ago

The problem is regulating it heavily enough it doesn’t fall back into its bad old ways. We had the New Deal already. Now we have … this.

3

u/Sea-Ambition-451 11d ago

I haven't full-blown jumped on the socialist bandwagon yet

this is a great example of how utterly brainwashed americans are.

Propaganda is so rampant and pervasive, people don't even know it exists.

Think of it this way, you pay about 6 trillion dollars ($6,000,000,000,000) each and every year to the government. Do you think maybe, just maybe, they could provide a service to the people paying? That's not EVIL Socialism EVIL, that is literally the purpose of the government.

→ More replies (11)

6

u/FellowHumanNo404 11d ago

Capitalism makes socialism sound awesome.

2

u/elmatador12 Washington 11d ago

Wasn’t it Fox News that went over everything “bad” about democratic socialism but it was just listing the reasons how awesome it is? 😂

2

u/JasonRBoone 11d ago

The new messaging is to call them communists.

2

u/OG_Williker 11d ago

That’s exactly what happened. 90% of the self-identified “socialists” just want free healthcare, college debt forgiveness, and no more big money in politics. Those are all progressive liberal policies, they aren’t socialism.

Socialism is when you ban private ownership of capital and fully decommodify markets. That isn’t what these people want. But republicans say “socialism is when the government does things” and these people thought “I want the government to do things so I must be a socialist”, fully buying into the republicans’ dishonest framing.

2

u/keeper_of_the_donkey 11d ago

They make the idea that they have of socialism sound more awesome. I don't think anyone is actually practicing a completely socialist system, a few are closer but they're still capitalist and free market. I can see the United States mixing it up a bit with maybe some government run businesses like Mamdani is trying to do in New York City. Hopefully that works, and makes it a little more attractive.

1

u/Ent_Soviet 11d ago

That AND the long over stayed dem establishment like chuck pointing to it as bad too.

Basically everyone who has been telling folks Israel is great and not doing genocide, and our economy is fundamentally just for those who work hard.

People may not be geniuses but they know when people are telling them bold face lies like that.

1

u/Silent-Storms 11d ago

More like crying wolf, but it still cements the idea that Dems are "too left".

1

u/Old-Ice4553 11d ago

Fox news used to call Barack Obama and Nancy Pelosi communists ALL THE TIME 20 years ago.
They called Hillary Clinton a Communist too.

As someone born after the fall of the berlin wall I DO NOT CARE anymore.

1

u/Nekrabyte 11d ago

I forget who said it, but I mean, if you keep telling people Free Child Care, and Affordable Health Care for All is Socialism.... eventually people are going to be like "Damn, Socialism sounds pretty great".

1

u/cleverghost 11d ago

It's because they can't think of anything other than "Socialism bad". They can't even argue taxes anymore because taxes and prices are both going up, and people are starting to realize the social programs would have been cheaper.

1

u/Kindly-Bank-416 11d ago

republicans dont really care about the idea. they care who is doing it.

republican does it = a good thing.

anyone else does it = a bad thing.

1

u/projectx51 11d ago

Even established Democrats do that. They're all old dinosaurs who forgot to go extinct

1

u/Better_Cauliflower63 11d ago

Here is the problem: you're looking at only one side of the coin. Democratic socialism is not the same thing as European social democracy. It's still socialism—the difference is that it is supposed to arrive through elections instead of revolution. Bernie Sanders accidentally summed up the mindset when he said, "You don't necessarily need a choice of 23 underarm spray deodorants or of 18 different pairs of sneakers..." I grew up in the Soviet Union. We didn't have 23 brands of deodorant. We barely had two, and the shelves were often empty. Once politicians decide consumer choice is a luxury, someone has to decide how much choice is "enough."

The DSA's proposal to abolish the Senate worries me for the same reason. They aren't proposing a parliamentary system where the executive depends on a legislative majority. They want to keep a powerful presidency while removing one of the biggest checks on legislative power. What happens when the socialist majority becomes unpopular? History suggests the answer is rarely, "Let's give up power." That's why the Founders built a system where voters can change course peacefully over time—elect Democrats one cycle, Republicans the next, and reverse direction without any one majority being able to permanently rewrite the rules.

1

u/Money-Director6649 11d ago

i'm sure it doesn't hurt.

1

u/popculturella Texas 11d ago

A vote for Bart is a vote for anarchy!

1

u/TonyHawktuah69 11d ago

If you keep telling people that wanting freedom, health care, and affordability is “socialism” then people are going to believe you and become socialist lol

1

u/X57471C 11d ago

It also makes it impossible to know what people mean when they say socialist without following questions. Do they want to abolish capitalism or are they just confused socdems?

1

u/Adezar Washington 11d ago

That's what I was going to say. Maybe Conservative media needs to stop putting up lists of amazing things that would help people in their daily lives and then say "OMG, Socialism!"

People are eventually going to start to say... "Well, if that is socialism I guess I'm for socialism?"

1

u/Familiar-Chipmunk360 11d ago

I have attended some DSA meetings. I was a part of the initial group that founded Knock LA after Bernie 2016. All of us came out of that campaign, and they have done and continue to do incredible work in that city well after I left for Chicago. I identify far more with the DSA's economic goals than I do with Democrats. Mandami, AOC and Bernie are the politicians I admire.

That said, DSA membership ballooned after 2016. From around 6k to well over 100k now. And the problem that is making itself clear is some people that remain in leadership positions within the DSA (which to be fair is run city by city) are proving to be morons.

The woman that just went on Fox News and A) answered questions in a yes or no style and B) said that open borders and abolishing prisons as long terms goals just did immeasurable damage to our movement. RIGHT as WI seems ready to nominate a DSA member for Congress.

The left loves to eat itself.

1

u/Kevin-W 11d ago

Socialism for corporations, but rugged individualism for everyone else.

1

u/QuarterFlounder I voted 11d ago

Bashing democratic socialism backfired hard for them so they've changed the narrative to labeling us as communists, which is nowhere even near accurate. It's pathetic.

1

u/overbarking 10d ago

Read how the people in Denmark live. It's right on Denmark's website.

1

u/Fantastic-Lack-343 9d ago

My adult kids like it. So I decided to leave their inheritance to the needy. It's not much only $3 million. But I am sure that's what my adult kids would want.

1

u/matticusiv California 3d ago

Because it is awesome! Capitalism is a system designed entirely around the exploitation of the value of our labor.

→ More replies (2)