Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I wondered how a representative of the Democratic Party was not able to explain the difference between such terms as a Democrat and a Socialist.
Bernie Sanders’ candidacy from the Democratic Party definitely made some misunderstanding, and now is the time to explain to voters the difference.
Let's help Debbie Wasserman Schultz to do it.
What's it mean to you to be a democrat and to be a socialist? I mean not a academic definitions, but how you see it in 21 century?
And whether such a candidate as Sanders is able to survive in modern American politics?
This is stupid.
Germany is a "socialist" country if you apply the same reasoning.
They have a vibrant export based economy and their quality of life is not any less than ours. Perhaps higher. And, as far as freedom goes, I'm afraid we're not winning there either.
Any modern "capitalist" system is in fact a mixture of capitalist and socialist tendencies. It's the % of the mix that counts.
Most of European Socialist parties are just as far removed from Stalin as we are. They are capitalist parties with more socialism in the mix.
Remove any socialism, and you get the robber baron monopolistic oligarchy. Definitely not the kind of society I'd want to live in.
Remove any capitalism, and you end up in the USSR. We all know how that worked out.
Both Dems and Repubs favor socialism to a point. The question is how much is good and optimal versus how much is too much.
Exactly.
It's time to stop treating it as a scary word, and instead start thinking of the best recipe for this country.
So far these scary socialist Canadians seem to slowly but surely overtake us in the quality of life department (of course sitting on all that oil helps...)
Huge difference. Democrats are essentially a centrist neoliberal party who believe in some moderate redistribution of wealth. Socialists advocate for worker ownership of the means of production.
It's time to stop treating it as a scary word, and instead start thinking of the best recipe for this country.
So far these scary socialist Canadians seem to slowly but surely overtake us in the quality of life department (of course sitting on all that oil helps...)
I'm all for a single payer health care system either similar to what Canada has or what is common say in Spain or France. This will require tackling the people making fortunes on the current system. I also support a better public transportation system with subways in major cities. To me, those are no-brainers but beyond that, I don't want to reward freeloaders that aren't contributing.
I'm all for a single payer health care system either similar to what Canada has or what is common say in Spain or France. This will require tackling the people making fortunes on the current system. I also support a better public transportation system with subways in major cities. To me, those are no-brainers but beyond that, I don't want to reward freeloaders that aren't contributing.
The problem is, under the current system only the non-contributing get rewards. Instead of providing more help to the people who work, we provide it to the ones who don't. To the point where it makes more sense to sit on welfare than to get a low paying job. This is wrong and backwards.
It's time to stop treating it as a scary word, and instead start thinking of the best recipe for this country.
So far these scary socialist Canadians seem to slowly but surely overtake us in the quality of life department (of course sitting on all that oil helps...)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tall Traveler
I'm all for a single payer health care system either similar to what Canada has or what is common say in Spain or France. This will require tackling the people making fortunes on the current system. I also support a better public transportation system with subways in major cities. To me, those are no-brainers but beyond that, I don't want to reward freeloaders that aren't contributing.
According to the Heritage Foundation (a think tank that I believe needs no introduction), Canada is the 6th most economically free country in the world. They may have what some what call "socialism," but in reality they're making it work and maintaining the type of fundamental "freedom" that conservatives in this country at least claim they support.
There are different terms: socialist, communism, democrat, liberal, social-liberal, etc
Socialism: economic system where the gov't owns and controls the means of production. May or not believe in private property. May or may not have a monetary system. The government distributes jobs, controls regulations, basically dictates everything.
Communism: a type of socialism that eliminates the class system and money. Government controls and dictates everything. It eliminates all political opposition. It is a totalitarian regime. No private property. One party system.
Democrat (U.S): see social-liberal
Democracy: system of government where the people vote and elect representatives.
Liberalism: economic system that believes in capitalism, free markets, free speech, freedom, equal opportunity, freedom to own private property, personal rights, etc.
Social-liberal: hybrid between socialism and liberalism. Believes in capitalism but only if very regulated by the government. Believes in the liberal ideals: free speech, personal rights, equal opportunity, etc; however, they feel that the free market is dangerous and counter productive to society's needs. It needs to be regulated in order to combat the class gap, protect people's rights, and monopolies. Nanny state.
There is some confusion amongst people in regards to the differences between socialists, liberals and democrats. The Democratic party is aligned with social-liberalism. Pure socialism is more extreme. Republicans would be aligned with classic liberalism which supports the conservation of American ideals and traditions. Both parties are technically liberal and support democracy. For some reason people refer to Democrats as liberals when they should be referring to them as social-liberals. They are emphasizing on the equal opportunity and rights part of the definition. We live in a democratic liberal society that transitioning into a more left-wing quasi-socialist nation.
With your 'hammer and sickle' rendition of the American flag it seems that you are all set to tell us what socialism is. Thanks but no thanks. That is straight up trolling and I won't bite
I am avoiding this thread as one would the plague. I'm with you.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm with you.
