Why is socialism becoming increasingly popular in the United States?

As I have said previously my concept of socialism differs from many Americans who measure the concept in other ways. Usually only economic ways.
I believe it is about a nation or a community making some sacrifices in order to pool resources that lead to a beneficial outcome.
For example roads being built for everybody to use freely.
There are institutions that come about from similar pooling of resources like public schooling, or the judiciary, and there are agreements made that people (mainly) adhere to, like deciding which side or the road to drive on, or refraining from murder.
I see all of that type of stuff as Socialist, yes with a capital ‘S’, as they strike me as the kind of things that create a society. Inevitably that type of stuff is also a restriction on those who wish to do whatever they please come what may.
However we are all subject to the social contract aren’t we?
Like no man is an island kind of thing and…ask not for whom the bell tolls, it tolls for thee. And for many the notion that Socialism is a dirty word or something to be feared seems rather absurd, some see the creation of a coherent society as something to be embraced.

 

1st I never claimed that the former soviet union was communist though that was always what the claimed their goal was until Stalin took over. For one thing If you read Marx at all you know that you have to pass through the dictatorship of the proletariat before one could get to that utopian state called communism. Note no one to date has ever made the transition. I suspect no one ever will power is just to seductive. That's why, I think, that modern "communist" Theologians are now trying to find a work around to avoid the dictatorship of the proletariat and go directly to nirvana which more than a few seem to believe are worker owned businesses. If you don't count owner operator long haul truck drivers such businesses are 1/10 of one percent of US businesses.
I never heard the term state capitalism until after the fall of the former Soviet Union. Unlike you I don't think socialism and communism are the same things or even particularly close.

 

You live in her district?

Your high opinion of the democratic socialist is noted.

She's very Far Left (not liberal) and I doubt you're aware of everything she has said. If you were you'd probably have a restraining order on you right now.

Of course, I never claimed that Democrats aren't socialists - those are your words not mine, and it is dishonest of you to put words in my mouth.

My point was pretty clear - American "progressives" are socialists of one stripe or another who hide behind the "progressive" facade, like AOC and her ilk going back to the days of FDR's one-time Vice President Henry Wallace and his merry band of Soviet sympathizers.

So you thought "progressives" just popped out of thin air recently?

It's not my term. It was coined long before I was born.

As I recall, your "point", which was not my own, was a bizarre claim that socialism "has only been implemented in the real world as a cover for totalitarian oppression". I'm still rather amused by the whole concept that a totalitarian ideology was implemented to cover for totalitarian oppression. That has to be the worst cover ever (or an amusing exercise in redwashing) - How exactly does that work?

Oh, so all Democrats are "progressives"?

Very interesting. I guess I'll have to take your word on that...

Not even close. I rejected what you said.

And you sit on Comer's committee and are privy to all the information/evidence/testimony he has obtained against Traitor Joe?

Of course, you don't and you're not....

Amusing you think that. Is it Traitor Joe's inability to pass a cognitive test or his mishandling of the withdrawal from Afghanistan that convinced you he has "restored dignity to the office of President of The United States at home and abroad"?

You have a very vivid dimagination, I'll grant you that, but I would agree that "we're back"...



...in a Malaise 2.0 kinda way. How 'bout cardigans are back?

But enough of that "we're back" nonsense, already - everyone who doesn't worship at the Altar of Brandon recognizes that for the hollow rhetoric that it is:

U.K., French, German Leaders Blast Biden Over Afghanistan: 'We Thought America Was Back'
https://www.newsweek.com/uk-french-...ghanistan-we-thought-america-was-back-1621228

Obviously, they thought wrong.

 

I think VonMises are right about some things, wrong about others. You treat them like gods.

 

Ok, well I wouldn't be interested in discussing private non-standard definitions or conditions related to them. Bye.

 

Yours is not the standard definition so you’re discussing it anyway.

 

An example of screwy thinking:

"It cannot be denied that Fascism and similar movements aiming at the establishment of dictatorships are full of the best intentions and that their intervention has, for the moment, saved European civilization. The merit that Fascism has thereby won for itself will live on eternally in history. But though its policy has brought salvation for the moment, it is not of the kind which could promise continued success. Fascism was an emergency makeshift. To view it as something more would be a fatal error."​

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludwig_von_Mises

 

I don't know if I agree with that. There are many shades of Grey when it comes to social policies. There are countries that have spanned laissez fair capitalism through communist principals following the economic theories of Marx.

In order to have a logical conversation about economic policies, inclusive of expected outcomes we have to speak specifically about intent.

I don't think many people who advocate for socialism really know what they want.

 

That may be because the transition from socialism to communism would take a number of generations.

Is that "no one ever will" or "will power is just to(sic) selective"?

Will communist society ever happen? I dunno. It seems a bit too "perfect" for me to believe it could. But it doesn't matter since it would be so far in the future and we haven't even begun the process with socialism.

Hmmm. I don't know of that happening. If it is, then those "communists" are parvenu wannabee know-nothings because such a leap is impossible. Communist society must grow out of a socialist society as it matures.

Maybe you weren't keeping up with Marxian ideas and analysis?

Then you might want to study into it honestly and objectively. The key is in understanding how communism would evolve out of socialism. That alone will clear of plenty of misconceptions.

 

No, mine is the original definition not created by capitalists and their advocates.

 

I substantiated that in #481 and can quickly cite another source - this information isn't difficult to find:

I'm surprised you don't remember that - I certainly haven't forgotten.

It was the emergence of that independent trade union in Gdańsk and the profound implications of a workers union striking and opposing its socialist-communist government that set the fall of the Communist Bloc in motion.

Of course, this:



and the brutal murder of Fr. Jerzy Popiełuszko contributed to its demise....



19 October 1984. The priest was beaten to death by three Security Police officers: Captain Grzegorz Piotrowski, Leszek Pękala, and Waldemar Chmielewski. They pretended to have problems with their car and flagged down Jerzy Popiełuszko's car for help. Popiełuszko was severely beaten, tied up and put in the trunk of the car.[6] The officers bound a stone to his feet and dropped him into the Vistula Water Reservoir near Włocławek from where his body was recovered on 30 October 1984...More than 250,000 people, including Lech Wałęsa, attended his funeral on 3 November 1984...

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

 

I'm not so sure about that. Several people on the right I've talked to have warmed up to it as Trump's wing of the party moves further and further away from capitalism. These days, I have more debates with the right than the left when I defend the free market, and that's been the case ever since Trump started running.

 

I don't need to make that up. I'll cite just two examples for you,

National Federation of Independent Business v. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration and Murthy v. Missouri.

And yes, our two-tiered "justice" system that allows scofflaws like Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton to escape prosecution for crimes others have been convicted for is an affront to the rule of law and only breeds contempt for our government and legal system.

Of course, that's only the tip of the iceberg. Shortly before his death, Antonin Scalia noted that the language in our laws doesn't matter anymore, which means we are no longer a constitutional republic governed by the rule of law and we have become a lawless banana republic governed by the arbitrary fiat of government officials. Which is enough to make one wonder what we are paying Congress, the President and the Supreme Court for - the privilege of paying for an extravagantly expensive charade that pretends that there is some point in writing, executing and adjudicating such "laws"?

Evidently so, but I digress...

 

Look to the seven deadly sins.

 

So let's revisit this for a moment.

All you posted here are your words and they claim a reference to something but lack any link for anyone to confirm what you said. So they aren't sufficient.

OTOH I have something for you here.....

And then I found this about Mussolini's corporatism .....
https://arplan.org/2020/02/21/mussolini-corporate-state/

"Mussolini on the Corporate State

"Benito Mussolini’s resolution and speech of 13-14 November, 1933, outlining the shortcomings of capitalism and presenting the corporatist alternative.

"Despite the Corporate State being the centerpiece of fascist economic ideology, its implementation in Italy occurred gradually, in piecemeal fashion over more than a decade. Mussolini’s primary concern upon attaining the Prime Ministership in 1922 was, much like Hitler’s over a decade later, the maintenance of economic and political stability.

"It wasn’t until the 1933-34 period, however, that the Corporate State became solid reality rather than a series of inspiring articles and decrees.


ON THE CORPORATE STATE
Resolution and Speech by Benito Mussolini before the
National Council of Corporations,
November 13-14, 1933

Resolution on the Definition and Attribution of Corporations
November 13, 1933

"This resolution drafted by the Head of the Italian Government and read by him on November 13th 1933, before the Assembly of the National Council of Corporations, on the eve of his great speech:

“The National Council of Corporations:

• define Corporations as the instrument which, under the aegis of the State, carries out the complete organic and unitarian regulation of production with a view to the expansion of the wealth, political power, and well-being of the Italian people;
• declare that the number of Corporations to be formed for the main branches of production should, on principle, be adequate to meet the real needs of national economy;
• establish that the general staff of each Corporation shall include representatives of State administration, of the Fascist Party, of capital, of labour, and of experts;
• assign to the Corporations as their specific tasks: conciliation, consultations (compulsory on problems of major importance), and the promulgation, through the National Council of Corporations, of laws regulating the economic activities of the country;
• leave to the Grand Council of Fascism the decision on the further developments, of a constitutional and political order, which should result from the effective formation and practical working of the Corporations.“

=========================================================================================

Speech on the Corporate State to the National Council of Corporations
November 14, 1933

"Corporate economy rises at a particular moment in history when the two concomitant phenomena of capitalism and socialism have yielded all that they could give.

"We have inherited everything that was still alive in each of them."

==========================================================================================

(And then it goes on to describe Mussolini's plan for the merging of corporations and government.)

All the above is found here ......
https://arplan.org/2020/02/21/mussolini-corporate-state/

The original text of the actual speech is found here - https://archive.org/details/CapitalismAndTheCorporateState

 

Socialism is a broad and malleable term that can mean many things, including the collectivizing private property and production and some government programs and spending.

In many cases it is socialist, but I've never contended that all government spending is socialist.

I don't think so, but they might fit some people's idea/definition of the term.

In most cases "Progressive" = Socialist (or Communist), and many socialists and communists embrace the term. On the other hand, many socialists hide behind it.

Hence socialism has become increasingly popular.

Of course, during these times of high Bidenflation, most Americans are having difficulties making ends meet, and ironically government programs and spending are responsible for much of that inflation.

They are massive - they cost trillions of dollars per year.

I also lived in the Washington DC area after the social welfare programs of the 1960s were enacted and watched the federal government and DC area explode in size. Massive doesn't even begin to describe it....

I can agree with that, and as I stated I consider some of those programs necessary (such as the VA health care system).

I'll tell you what I actually want - not what you say I want - and that is the government the Founders wanted - a limited, fiscally responsible government. What I don't want is an unlimited, fiscally irresponsible government that is the greatest threat to our individual freedom and prosperity because it is too large, too expensive and too intrusive.

Personally, I am not a "MAGA-type" (or a Big Government Democrat/Leftist type), but I am a working class American and slashing welfare spending will not reduce my standard of living because I don't depend on government for my standard of living. However, a reduction in government spending, whether it is limited to entitlement spending or expanded across the board (which is what needs to happen) would improve my standard of living on account of the economic benefits associated with reduced government spending (lower deficits and debt, lower inflation, etc.).

The Big Government Democrat/Leftist types need to wake up - this is unsustainable:

https://www.usdebtclock.org

$34 trillion in debt and we're on the hook for another $213 trillion in unfunded liabilities. Last year, payment on the interest alone on that debt exceeded $1 trillion/year for the first time, and federal revenue was $4.4 trillion for 2023. That makes the interest payment alone 23% of revenues, and that percentage is going to keep getting higher. Either we reign in our government and get our fiscal house in order or we end up like Greece, the USSR or the Ancien régime in France circa 1788-89.

 

I treat him like an economist and sociologist. I'll leave it to you to treat men like gods.

 

There is no such thing as state capitalism so I have no way to compare them. If the state operates businesses that is communism, not capitalism.

 

So just out of curiosity define socialism.

 

I think they care about making money, not "capitalist policies." They'd push their mama down the stairs for a buck.

 

Collectivized production. Public schools are socialized.

 

Both Mussolini and Hitler sold off government enterprises.

 

That's because I was reminding you of what I posted earlier, most notably in #352. In addition to posting their words, I posted links to sources that also quoted their words.

Moving along....

Thanks for digging this up and posting it, Kode. Unfortunately, I can't respond at length right now but I will tomorrow, and it will make a nice segue to the subject of Stakeholder Fascism that I mentioned in the OP.

 

Then every country in the world is socialist and absurd fomulation but nice try.

 

And then coopted them.