
you are so delusional the technocrats probably love you. believe it or not income inequality is so severe in this country that the average person would not have to pay more taxes at all, and will find it cheaper to live and afford necessities. look at any actual platform of a demsoc instead of assuming negative shit all the time because you’re inclined to do so. yes the wealth gap is so severe that it would only affect the top 1%, and that’s why the do everything to avoid paying via propaganda
What you’re describing is the American definition of socialism, which was created as propaganda that favors a market capitalist society and was created by and used by the rich as a way to protect their money while the lower classes are the ones having to take the actual consequences for it. I study political science and philosophy with economics… what Americans think socialism is, is in fact not what it is.
I never said I favored socialism honey. I am independent and don’t actively favor most things. I was stating an objective definition. What Americans think socialism is, it in fact is not. That definition comes from propaganda against socialism. We already have socialist policies in place. You might claim you’re educated but you get defensive when in fact not everything warrants defensiveness. As a person who studies philosophy, one of the main things that I can see you need is the ability
To conduct civil discourse without automatically becoming defensive and trying to attack the views of others over something you get upset about. Everything in life needs to be examined without forming personal attachments to ideology. In reality the world is chaos, everybody thinks they know right, when in fact none of us do. The universe doesn’t give us answers and the ultimate goal that mankind has put in place is to gain and exert power over others
That’s fair I will give you that. I did assume the way you were answering, that you did but I apologize for jumping to that conclusion. I think it also depends on which definition of socialism you go with. I would say mamdani more closely aligns with Marxist ideals. However, there are many other voices of political thought that have defined it in a different context, as I’m sure you know and I’m telling you nothing new in that sense.
See, this is how this topic needs to be discussed. Everybody has different beliefs, but in a world where there is no inherent order, the ability to place one’s beliefs over another’s is just impossible and leads to conflict. While you might disagree with something completely, somebody else might agree with it and that’s okay. No sense in getting aggressive(I mean this a whole for mankind). I will say however, since this is my area of studies, communism isn’t actually an awful thing (on paper),
It’s never been practiced correctly and it’s something that makes more sense in theory than in practice. Communism is far different than socialism though, socialism is a blend of some small parts of communist ideals but in a democratic way that helps others benefit in certain situations that help society benefit as a whole, while communism is a strict ideology that prohibits individual wealth.
On paper, it’s beautiful I can also agree with that it is a lovely concept, it just doesn’t work and ends up with the majority of a nation impoverished. I know people will try to say that about the US but look at Cuba, Venezuela, etc. but I also agree w you on being able to talk through disagreements through discourse. Not many people on the left (I know you said you’re center so I’m not speaking of you) will even let people on the right get a sentence out and listen.
I agree to some extent, but if you look at European economic systems, which are heavily socialist, the people as a whole benefit from different services put in place, but with a small tax increase that ensures universal education, which increases college application rates and improves success rate, or healthcare that doesn’t make people go into severe debt to the point that people avoid getting help.
That goes on the opposite spectrum too though. What America’s political system’s main issue is a two party system that enables extremists due to major political polarization, which has gotten significantly worse due to Nixon and has only become more of a major decline in political and economic progress. Middle ground can always be found to some extent.
This is where you kind of lose me though. European taxes are still WAYYY too high. I make 110k a year. Very average salary, solid, but FAR from rich. After taxes, I bring home about 80k a year. In Paris, I would take home less than 69k a year. I’m single and don’t have kids, so life is pretty good but if you even have one…. I’m just using it as an example but I’d rather not have universal healthcare (which typically also isn’t as good) and not pay 11k more a year in taxes
Okay, fair point though, yes taxes are higher in European countries, but then we also have to take into consideration the currency equivalence from the euro to USD and the other way around mostly because the euro is worth more than the American dollar. But I respect your claim wholeheartedly. The thing that makes me laugh though is not anything you said, but a personal experience I had where my aunt(hard right) always demonizes socialism and liberals, but then she said we need things like
Haha, it may appear that way, but it actually highlights a highly documented phenomenon in political systems, especially the US. People often support individual policies, while also rejecting the label attached to those policies. Labels complicate things in so many ways, but people find them easier to understand. Labels often lead to assumptions instead of productive dialogue and delving into and understanding individual views to find common threads
I used to just say abortion should be illegal solely because it aligns with republican ideology (in high school and early college). Now I honestly wish republicans would take a more middle of the line approach. Third trimester abortions 1000% should be illegal except for when the mother’s life is at risk but I think you should be able to get genetic diagnostics (if you desire) and then make the decision if you want to proceed w the pregnancy. Unfortunately no republicans take this position
This is another good point, views change in some ways frequently because of civil discussion. That’s something that’s a requirement and some people don’t change at all and that’s perfectly reasonable and valid too. That’s the thing I love about humanity. I also want to apologize for some things early on in our discussion. The way I said things at first might have come off as condescending in a couple of ways. I’m sorry if they did as that was not my intent, I’ve enjoyed the discussion so far:)
No shit, and guess who breaks constitution almost everyday? Trump! Rules never apply to white men apparently, If Obama did 1% of what trump did he’d be impeached instantly and jailed with ties to Epstein. I believe in the constitution, what I’m getting at is there is a heavy double standard rooted in racism and sexism and until this country addresses it, history will repeat.