There is a candidate running for president who was branded a socialist for decades by the GOP, and has come to own the moniker after the GOP watered down the term.
I never said anything about the media. Beating communism was due to a global concerted effort of govts.
But then my govt (GOP side) went and watered down the word to win cheap (relatively) political battles. And it worked amazingly for decades (and still works today). If they were doing it on purpose to actually support socialism by confusing the term, I think it’d be something like this.
He was already a self-professed socialist since the 70s, wasn’t he?
True.
But what is your point here pertaining to calling out the actual use of the term? If the dems decide to own it, either youths will embrace the ideology and go down the rabbit hole or people will eventually find out the actual use of the term. It will not stay defined the same way as it is now in US politics even in the span of a couple of years.
This is the reason why it’s important to nitpick. If you devalue the original meaning of a specific term by incorrectly applying it - calling Bernie a “socialist” or Trump a Nazi you’re starting on a very dangerous path.
Let’s take the first case as an example. Because socialism doesn’t mean progressive taxes and free healthcare. Those are vanilla centrist positions in late 20th century European politics and not socialism. So you google fellow “socialist systems” because you support Bernie and you’re a “socialist” and lo and behold there are memes and nice bullet points and a bunch of seemingly well-meaning idealistic people who were thwarted by the CIA and um…reality - “workers self management” - cool, every company was basically a large co-op, right?
So you’re normalizing horrible ideas that have failed spectacularly throughout history and now out of spectacular naivete are suddenly being talked about with a straight face by American college students instead of being relegated to the dustbin of history.
The same problem appears on the right where moderate center-right positions are labeled as “Nazism” or “fascism” by leftists. So slowly by association there starts a initially imperceptible osmosis process where the dangerous ideas are slowly being absorbed.
It’s not the terms that matter, it is the ideas that count. Words change meaning all the time and can be different depending on your country of origin.
In hindsight, I should have said Democratic socialist, or just left leaning politician. However, in the USA, the terms are becoming interchangeable. If the ideas are different, and they are called socialists, what harm is there? I feel there is a thought that if we have politicians labeled as socialists, then we will be on a slippery slope to communism, which is just ridiculous. Am I off base here?
Is trump a socialist? I mean he’s a guy who doesn’t care about debt because we can default and we print the money. He’s talked about a cheaper health care plan where everyone has coverage (how we doing that part without massive government intervention?).
He might not be able to do the things politically but if words matter then I’m not sure how he isn’t. It’s not like a Bernie presidency is going to make his ideas magically appear. It’s going to have to go through the channels which will undoubtedly significantly change them.
Socialist not socialist the terms have gotten mixed up. At the very least Trump has no concern.
The idea that the right picked a guy who talked about defaulting and how we can’t go busto because man we own that money maker still boggles my mind.
Words can change in the way they are used casually or figuratively. There is a proper definition and an abundance of literature on socialism that can be found anywhere if anyone bothers to go read up on it. You can water down the term “nazi”, even turn it into a meme. The original meaning isn’t going to go away.
Let’s say “socialism” evolves. What will not change is the gradual shift towards authoritarianism. That is the main crux of socialism.
He’s just an idiot. For socialists, anyone educated on socialism can recognize the underlying basis on which their ideas are built on.
But, again, I gotta tell you. His campaign ads are second to none IMO. Dems need to work with better creative agencies if they want to beat him on this front.
I would struggle to believe he was labelling himself a socialist in the age of anti communism and it wasn’t actually just coming from his opposition.
Happy to be wrong though, he’s just 1 guy.
Again, what options do you actually think they have. Not a rhetorical question.
If we’re nitpicking, the focus should be on the offender. The Dems didn’t want or ask for the socialist label. They spent my entire life having it thrown at them until people just believed it.
Now? Don’t embrace the word. Stop supporting the lunatics. The GOP is constantly talking about AOC hoping to paint all dems in the same light. Right wing news covers her MORE than left wing news.
Bernie can simply call himself a social democrat and he can authentically push the Nordic Model without the Nordic States trying to distance themselves from him. It would be harder to for the right to keep bringing up Venezuela. He was a real socialist in college. He knows what the term really means. If he isn’t a real socialist, then he is still being dishonest by continuing to use it.
And stop denouncing “capitalism”. This is another thing that they’ve(the left, not just Bernie) been doing since the 70s. What are you telling people when you say you’re against capitalism during the Cold War era lol? Old farts that won’t die definitely remember that.
I get that Bernie called himself a socialist. What I don’t know is if he owned this moniker without a word from opposition, or if owning it was his only option (ala most of the Dems today and for the past 30 years).
What. are. the. literal. options.
By your very words, the things Dems are pushing AREN’T socialist, yet are called socialist to the point of being repeated into truth. The fuck do you actually want them to do.
What are the Dems supposed to do about this? It clearly works.
You mean if he decided to do this 30 years ago? 40 years ago?
Do you visit the USA much? Your words seem EXTREMELY out of place with what I would consider to be a very basic life experience throughout multiple regions of the country and globally from just basic news.
Wait. So when denouncing something (since they weren’t actually denouncing capitalism) now they’re also required for that population education as well?
The GOP gets to say the Dems are socialist AND anti capitalist for yeeeeeears and its… the Dems job to just fade into nothing? Because that’s what you’re actually suggesting. Clinging to the socialism tag that the GOP forced down the public’s throat has still resulted in an OVERWHELMING GOP grip on the country. It was barely effective at staying alive.
Agreed. But in the real world the left can’t do this en masse without the right doing it as well.
If you are worried about authoritarianism in the USA, you are currently worried about the wrong party. The GOP and especially Trump are very worrisome on that front.
He was praising Chavez and other dictators during that time.
Shit, get a good marketing agency to brand themselves and their opponents or something.
Why do they have to own it? There’s a proper definition that can be easily looked up. The GOP isn’t owning “fascism” and the like. They’re probably going to further turn it around on the dems by calling them fascists when more people get educated on real socialism.
Don’t support her or endorse things like The Green New Deal.
40 years ago, he was a real socialist. Is he one now?
A couple of times. Certainly not enough to develop a real understanding of the culture. I can only go by what I read in the news. There is one thing though. I’m quite familiar with the US consumer market because it’s part of my vocation to analyze these things, if that’s relevant.
I’m not sure what you’re saying. They literally used the term. There’s a fixed definition of “capitalism”. The only ones who defined capitalism differently were the commies.
How can you fade away into nothing just because of this if you really have something to sell people? From the ads I saw from Hilary, they were all over the place. There was no clear message, no proper slogan, nothing. This was one of the reasons why I made a big bet on Trump at the bookies. The left are supposed to be the creative ones. Go come up with a proper unified campaign.
What “internet police”? I properly defined the word. You debated it with me. Even if we agree to disagree, it’s fine. I never attacked you or stopped you from expressing your opinions.
I’m sorry. I just dont remember what prior conflict we had. I just dont have the time or desire to talk to the liberal dumbfucks on this board who think that any form of socialism is a good idea.
The discussion that’s been going on actually ties in well with the original intent of the thread:
Trump’s Fundraising and organization is far ahead of most of the DEMS (as stated; a lot of that can be expected since he is a sitting President).
He is “out-branding” the DEMS with a clear message(s) a) “MAGA”; and the one that appears to be the theme of his 2020 Campaign: “Promises Made/Promises Kept”.
Trump and the Right are doing something that I think Bill Clinton or James Carvell? are credited with…(I’m paraphrasing):
“If you let your opponent define who your are…then you have already lost”
The Right (and by extension Trump) have done a damn good job of that to the DEMS…and they are not letting up…
