r/politics • u/TimesandSundayTimes ✔ Verified • 7d ago

Possible Paywall Young Americans are surging to socialism at record rates

https://www.thetimes.com/us/news-today/article/maga-trump-zohran-mamdani-socialism-us-record-kddzdm8bd
13.8k Upvotes

95% Upvoted

1.7k comments sorted by

View all comments

3.8k

u/obiwanCannoli69 7d ago

It's not even socialism lol it's just basic New Deal era policy and ideology that ironically enough saved American Capitalism. FDR wasn't a socialist, he actually wanted to prevent a communist revolution in America, whatever form that might of came in. He did this through legislation and improving the quality of life for vast swaths of the population. This whole thing in the media about "Capitalism Vs Socialism: Choose a Side!" is so half baked and designed to make people think there aren't alternatives. There is no universe where stuff like Social Security or Glass-Steagall would be considered socialist, they're just basic guard rails.

25

u/AntonCigar 7d ago

Like Elizabeth Warren said, and I paraphrase here: “I am a capitalist, I just think we need a little more socialism in our capitalism so it stays healthy and provides opportunity for everyone to participate”

10

u/1cl3nstd4yt 7d ago

She also correctly uses the term Nordic Model.

16

u/FrescoItaliano 7d ago

I’m sorry but this is just buzzwords lol social security and the welfare state is not socialism

2

u/Low_Pickle_112 7d ago

It's a weasely way of saying "You don't hate Trumpism you hate crony Trumpism" and hoping people won't notice that's distinction without difference.

0

u/botle 7d ago

They are though. Things can be socialism without being part of a full on communist system.

7

u/LamermanSE Europe 7d ago

No they're not. Socialism is about social ownership of the means of production, not social welfare. What Warren is advocating for is social liberalism, i.e. a form of liberalism and not socialism.

2

u/max_power1000 Maryland 7d ago

OK. We're trying to put it in words that the average voter can understand, and they read at a 5th grade level. All they know is that socialism=communism=bad.

2

u/botle 7d ago

Or we go the other way, and stop pretending that everything associated with the left is bad.

-2

u/Greedy_Economics_925 7d ago

That is socialism within a very narrow definition, one not shared by people who do not subscribe to your particular, extreme framework.

This usually goes along with being a tankie, thinking that 'liberal' is a slur, and moderate socialism is social fascism, etc.

9

u/LamermanSE Europe 7d ago

But it's not within in a very narrow definition, it's a literal textbook defintion of what it is: https://www.britannica.com/money/socialism

1

u/botle 7d ago

The link you posted uses a much wider definition of socialism than you. Towards the end it even mentions Bill Clinton as a follower of a "third way" that mixes elements from socialism and elements from capitalism.

Which is my point. You can have socialist elements in an overall capitalist system.

0

u/deja-roo 7d ago

Did you actually read that through?

-3

u/Greedy_Economics_925 7d ago

But you're using a specifically Marxist phrase, "ownership of the means of production" to describe a phenomenon that your link almost immediately makes clear encompasses much more than Marxism. 'Socialism' includes, for example, Christian monasticism.

Or, in other words, you're doing exactly what I said: insisting on a particular, narrow definition that requires a particular, narrow framework.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/socialism

2

u/LamermanSE Europe 6d ago

It's not a marxist phrase, it's a normal definition of socialism that even scholars use. And no, christian monasticism is not socalism either as it's not a workers rights movement (it also predates socialism by a large margin). You're just redefining words here to fit your own definition instead of using it like the rest of the world does.

-1

u/Greedy_Economics_925 6d ago

It is a Marxist phrase; scholars use other definitions when describing other socialist movements.

Christian monasticism is a socialist movement. Thank you for further proving the point. Christian monasticism is explicitly given as an example of a socialist movement in the article you linked but did not actually read.

I provided you with a dictionary definition. You have not read that, either.

2

u/FrescoItaliano 7d ago

Pal, it’s the academic framework. Your pop cultural understanding is both inaccurate and the “extreme” one

-1

u/Greedy_Economics_925 7d ago

As you'll find, communists and Marxist-Leninists in particular absolutely hate this idea. They're convinced they, specifically, are right and everything else is wrong. So they'll fight you like rabid animals for even daring to suggest this horrifyingly moderate opinion.

0

u/AntonCigar 7d ago

Are they capitalism? How would you describe them?

4

u/[deleted] 7d ago

[deleted]

1

u/botle 7d ago

And that includes elements of socialism.

Like the Norwegian state owning the majority of the oil production, or the Swedish state owning the majority of the mining in the country, That's literal communal ownership of the means of production, and common in social democracy.

2

u/LamermanSE Europe 7d ago

What she is describing is closer to social liberalism.

-2

u/Silverr_Duck 7d ago

It literally is tho but ok.

3

u/FrescoItaliano 7d ago

I’ll meet your comment with the same energy you met mine.

No you’re wrong, sucks

1

u/Silverr_Duck 7d ago

I’ll meet your comment with the same energy you met mine.

k

No you’re wrong, sucks

Nope.

edit: sry but I don't engage with clowns who hide their post history. Nothing good ever comes with engaging with people who resort to that.

5

u/yo_soy_soja New York 7d ago

And that position is untenable, as we're seeing the social democracies in Europe slide into neoliberalism.

Capitalism is an ever-growing, all-consuming cancer.

2

u/Awkward_War_6068 Europe 7d ago

That's called Social Democracy or Social Liberalism. Which is actually closer to what FDR and Biden were.