Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and the progressives' delicate truce with centrist Democrats is over

Discussion in 'Political Discussions' started by Lerner, Nov 11, 2020.

Loading...
  1. Lerner

    Lerner Well-Known Member

    Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and the progressives' delicate truce with centrist Democrats is over,
    and the battle over the party's future is already heating up.

    https://news.yahoo.com/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-progressives-delicate-140000716.html

    Socialism, Marxism pushing their way to Washington.
     
  2. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    I know it's hard for conservatives to understand this, but Democratic in-fighting is a strength, not a weakness. It's part of our ability to consider new ideas, wrestle with consequences, and set a far-reaching vision for the future.

    Conservatives like to be in lock-step on everything. But they're like pilot whales, beaching the whole pod because the leader did it. It's what they're doing regarding Trump right now: following down the same destructive path he's led. That rigidity is good for short-term issues--like keeping their caucus together on votes. But it provides no direction for the country, especially in turbulent times (like this pandemic). They're robots who don't know how to act independently. This is why Clinton cleaned up after Reagan/Bush, Obama cleaned up after GWB, and Biden will now do in cleaning up after Trump.
     
    Bill Huffman likes this.
  3. Mac Juli

    Mac Juli Active Member

    Hello!


    I fail to understand why socialism is, necessarily, such a bad thing. Agreed, when it was tried in the Eastern Bloc, the results were not pleasant, but in Sweden, Germany, The Netherlands and many other countries, many of the so-called socialist ideas some Americans avoid like the plague are in practice. And, there countries are far from being failed states (and have a higher HDI than the USA).

    Not tring to convince anyone. Just saying. No more, no less.


    Best regards,
    Mac Juli
     
  4. Bill Huffman

    Bill Huffman Well-Known Member

    I'll let you in on a little secret, when I saw an article about Bernie pushing for Labor Secretary. I said to myself, F.U. Bernie, I hope not. The funny thing about that is I wouldn't have minded if he'd beat Clinton for the nomination in 2016. That might say more about Clinton than Bernie though.
     
  5. SteveFoerster

    SteveFoerster Resident Gadfly Staff Member

    The confusion comes from social democrats in the U.S. who want to sound edgy and hip, and refer to themselves as socialists, when they're probably not, at least in the sense of Maduro, Castro, Kim Jong Un, and Mao. Socialism and social democracy are not the same thing. The former is a command economy that destroys incentives for production, resulting in tyranny, misery, starvation, and death. The latter is a thick layer of social programs on top of the market economy that's required to fund them, and the European experience seems to be that it's sustainable, although not without externalities.

    This is why when Bernie Sanders kept using explanations similar to yours, e.g., that the Nordic countries are socialist, the PM of Denmark said that that wasn't true and asked him to knock it off:

    https://www.vox.com/2015/10/31/9650030/denmark-prime-minister-bernie-sanders

    (I know, I criticized Vox a while ago, but for being left-leaning, which in this case would seem to add credence.)
     
  6. eriehiker

    eriehiker Active Member

    I am a Democrat and my initial reaction after the Republicans - likely - kept the Senate was that it might be a good thing for the Biden Administration. There won't be enough votes for a massively left-of-center agenda. In fact, it might be great to just win one of the Georgia run-offs so that there is a one vote majority and Biden could just flip Collins, Murkowski or Romney for broad-based issues.
     
    Lerner likes this.
  7. Bill Huffman

    Bill Huffman Well-Known Member

    Romney might appear moderate in the Trump administration but only because he stands up to Trump. In a Biden administration I doubt he'll be on such a list. Nothing against Romney though, I like him. :)
     
  8. Mac Juli

    Mac Juli Active Member

    Hello!

    Yes, there is some confusion regarding socialism and social democracy (and therefore, I wrote "so-called"). However, the countries I have cited have still, despite being market economies, some socialist elements. "Socialist" in the sense that the state operates some things - like state-run hospitals, water supply et cetera. Something that is abhorred by some in the US.

    Best regards,
    Mac Juli
     
    Last edited: Nov 11, 2020
  9. Lerner

    Lerner Well-Known Member

    I think, maybe its better to understand what kind of socialism, Marxism, communism and other ism's the fighting is for?
    Whats are actual actions, programs, regulations and way of governing the groups want to implement.
    How radical are the plans of centrist vs progressives?
     
  10. Johann

    Johann Well-Known Member

    Funny - there's a definite, American-only difference in use of the term "Socialist." Those people Steve named are not called "Socialists" here. They're Communists, leaders of Totalitarian states, Dictators, Tyrants etc. - but not Socialists. A Canadian who DID call himself a Socialist - Tommy Douglas, pioneered our Canadian health care system and got himself chosen as the Greatest Canadian ever - albeit in a poll some years after his death.

    I'm with Mac on the definition -- and I'm beginning to understand why Americans hate the word "Socialism" so much. They think of Lenin, Marx and Stalin as Socialists. I don't think they were. Communists, criminals, murderers - OK. As I see it, "socialists" is far too good a word for those guys. South of the border - YMMV, I guess.
     
  11. Mac Juli

    Mac Juli Active Member

    Keep in mind that "Nazi" is, of course, short for "national socialist"... Which certainly does not make the word "Socialism" more attractive!!
     
  12. Johann

    Johann Well-Known Member

    Sure doesn't. But I always thought of them as plain "Nazis" not "Socialists" of any stripe. That word "Socialist" was no more or less of a lie than calling themselves "Conservatives" or "Liberals." Calling themselves "Socialists" was just using a phony, made-up name. As phony as "Rev. Dr. Academician Johann." But far worse...
     
  13. Mac Juli

    Mac Juli Active Member

    Hard to say. Their program of 1920 had socialist elements, but the program was de facto meaningless. However, many socialists could identify themselves with it... well, it is a subject of a long debate. But as it is late in my country, and to use your quote: me go nap now?
     
  14. Lerner

    Lerner Well-Known Member

    This is why we should look beyond the labels.
    Actual action plans and ideology is what counts.
     
  15. Johann

    Johann Well-Known Member

    Sicher. Gute Nacht. Schlaf' ruhig! :)
     
  16. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    Vermont has a Republican governor. That means he'd appoint a Republican to replace Sanders. Not.Gonna.Happen.
     
    SteveFoerster likes this.

Share This Page