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.
Once again, you never answered the question as to which is the real Bernie: his policy proposals or his self-description of "democratic socialist."
Do you think that Bernie is a)too dumb to know the difference between 'democratic socialism' and 'social democracy?' Or does he know the difference, but just intentionally and disingenuously conflates the two? It's gotta be one or the other.
"Socialism" is not merely a 'buzzword' (whatever that might mean). It's an important English word with a well-defined meaning: "collective ownership of the means of production." Do you believe Bernie Sanders is too dumb/ignorant to know that?
He said his model is Scandinavian countries like Denmark and Sweden. Therefore his model must be Scandinavian countries like Denmark and Sweden.
I don't think he even cares about any nuances or differences between "democratic socialism" and "social democrat" any more than people who write "could of" care that the correct phrase is "could have." The only reason you're insisting he should know and care about the differences between "democratic socialism" and "social democrat" is because you think you're scoring some sort of point by making him sound like a communist, or think you're being clever, or something dumb like that.
And again, I'm not even a fan of the guy, but obviously he's not advocating pubic ownership of the means of production. If he was he would be extolling the Soviet Union, not Denmark.
Status:
"everybody getting reported now.."
(set 24 days ago)
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,558 posts, read 16,548,014 times
Reputation: 6041
Quote:
Originally Posted by travis t
Huh? Where did I admit that it's semantics? I couldn't have stated more clearly that it is NOT semantics. I ask you the same question. Do you believe that Bernie is ignorant of the actual definition of socialism? Or is he being disingenuous in conflating 'socialism' and 'social democracy?'
OH, im not a Bernie supporter, Im fine with admitting he is a moron and using the term wrong, which again, you agree with.
The fact that you do so make it disingenuous any time you and the rest of the right try to claim he wants actual socialism when you know for a fact he wants what Sweden has.
Huh? Where did I admit that it's semantics? I couldn't have stated more clearly that it is NOT semantics. I ask you the same question. Do you believe that Bernie is ignorant of the actual definition of socialism? Or is he being disingenuous in conflating 'socialism' and 'social democracy?'
Do you believe that any politician would actually try to sell the idea that Cuba, Venezuela, and the Soviet Union are places that should be emulated? Have you ever heard anyone say that we should be more like the Soviet Union?
Do you believe that any politician would actually try to sell the idea that Cuba, Venezuela, and the Soviet Union are places that should be emulated? Have you ever heard anyone say that we should be more like the Soviet Union?
Sure!
Bernie Sanders 2011:
"The American dream is more apt to be realized in South America, , in places like Ecuador, Venezuala, and Argentina."
Bernie was also big on the USSR, and liked to go there when they were still the Soviet Union.
We already covered their views. They promote the nordic model.
They promote the Nordic model out of one side of their mouths, and the socialist model out of the other. AOC is a dues-paying member of Democratic Socialists of America. Bernie is, at the least, a former member, and in any case has often described himself as a 'socialist.'
I’m a staff writer at the socialist magazine Jacobin and a member of DSA, and here’s the truth: In the long run, democratic socialists want to end capitalism. Many observers see groups like DSA pushing for policies like Medicare-for-all and decide that we must actually be something like New Deal liberals who are simply confused about the meaning of socialism. That’s not true. Our goal is not to rein in the excesses of capitalism for a few decades at a time — we want to end our society’s subservience to the market.(emphasis added)
Note that, as has been established, the 'Nordic model,' in particular Sweden and Denmark, are capitialist in nature. So AOC's DSA is fundamentally at odds with the Nordic model.
All of this prompts the question--why the seeming need to deny the links of Bernie & AOC to socialism? Why the incorrigible, bull-headed denial in the face of repeatedly presented facts??? Any theories out there?
I don't think he even cares about any nuances or differences between "democratic socialism" and "social democrat" any more than people who write "could of" care that the correct phrase is "could have."
Based on what? You have some means of climbing into Bernie's head? I take him at his word. Bernie is not a dummy who is careless with words. He's a US senator, major presidential candidate, and author of several books.
Quote:
The only reason you're insisting he should know and care about the differences between "democratic socialism" and "social democrat" is because you think you're scoring some sort of point by making him sound like a communist, or think you're being clever, or something dumb like that.
I doubt that you have a means to climb inside Bernie's head, but I know with certitude that you don't have a means to climb into my head. You proved it with the above quote.
The reason for making a distinction between 'socialism' and 'social democracy' is that these are two entirely different approaches. It should be self-evident, almost a tautology. But I guess not....
If you're going to take him at his word, you should believe him that his model is Scandinavian nations like Denmark and Sweden. Because that's what he said.
Quote:
You have some means of climbing into Bernie's head?
No, and neither do you. You're claiming to "know" that when Bernie says "socialist" he means collective ownership of the means of production, in spite of the fact he held up Denmark and Sweden as his models - two nations which DON'T have collective ownership of the means of production. So which are you going to believe? His use of the word "socialist?" Or his citation of Denmark and Sweden as his models?
Since it is extremely unlikely he would be holding up Denmark and Sweden as his role models if he really meant collective ownership of the means of production, I presume he's simply being a bit lazy with definitions or doesn't really care about definitions. As do many people.
After all, many intelligent people who should know better still are lazy and say "could of" instead of the correct "could have."
I don't get how you socialists don't get basic math or simple facts about this country.
USA is full of scumbags, criminals, and people who don't contribute jack to society. On top of that we have people who already are on some form of government assistance, and also a huge amount of people who abuse it all.
45% of Americans pay no income tax.
So, it the 55%'s job to pay for free healthcare, college, debt forgiveness, housing, etc.? How many trillions would all of this cost?
The USA has a large amount of dregs that drag society down. The socialist utopias with 10 million people don't.
Just look at prison statistics.
In 25 states more than 50% of births are Medicaid babies, and the national average is about 45%
Socialism would never work here, civil war would break out first. Half of the country already basically takes care of the other.
If you're going to take him at his word, you should believe him that his model is Scandinavian nations like Denmark and Sweden. Because that's what he said.
Yes, and he also has said that he is a persuaded socialist. So we have to decide which word to take. You've decided to take one and ignore the other. Based on, as far as I can tell, nothing.
I find this take as persuasive, and certainly more nuanced than your arbitrary decision to accept one statement and ignore another. I've posted this a bunch of times, but one more won't hurt. Please tell me your response to this post:
OP quick question for you, since you are knowledgeable. Bernie is a self-described 'socialist,' although I've seen some say that he is really more of a social democrat (a la Scandinavia). The Danish PM once chided Bernie for referring to Denmark as socialist, which the PM said it is definitely not. Do you consider Bernie to be a real socialist? And if not, why do you think he uses that term?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winterfall8324
His policies are of a social democrat, but deep down he is a socialist.
This isn't me theorizing, this is from his past affiliations and work (he is very old of course) with socialist groups.
He decided around the time he became Mayor to promote social democratic policies to make himself a viable politician, but in terms of end goal he still sees himself as a socialist.
That is why he plays fast and loose with the two terms.
I don't mean to speak for 'Winterfall' but from his/her posting history it appears to me he/she is a strong Bernie supporter. And also a very intelligent, well-informed poster.
I'm still wondering why the apparent deep need to go into denial over this topic.
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.
