Here's Why so Many People Like Bernie

I've seen people confused by the fact that Sanders is a self-identifying Socialist and yet the "young voters" don't care. I've seen the theory posited that it's because young people didn't live through the Cold War and the ugliness older people saw committed in the name of Socialism. I've seen it posited that millennials are spoiled and want "something for nothing" and what not. I have a different theory: It's the Tea Party's fault.

For the last 8 years the far right has been flinging accusations that Obama is a Socialist, when that's obviously baseless to anyone who understands political movements or history in general. For example, Obamacare is about as far from a Socialist program as you can get, otherwise it wouldn't be backed by Big Pharma, Big Medicine, and every medical lobbyist. Also, it wouldn't mirror so closely the Health Care plans of prominent Republicans for the last 20 years. When the far right decided to label Obama a "Socialist" they redefined what the term meant. So, the young people are presented with the following:

1) Obama is a socialist
2) The world hasn't ended in global tyranny in the past 8 years.

i.e.... Socialism must not be that scary.

Its my opinion, the Tea Party paved the way for an official Socialist making a run for President.

a reply to: macman

No. We're collectively drawing the line for what is a good CEO and bad CEO. There are more CEOS popping up all the time declaring their support for living wages. The rest will be dealt with via the way tyrants always are. VIA elections or revolution in the end.

a reply to: Malynn

Agreed!

What people don't understand is we do not live in the same circumstances as we used to. Really big businesses actually were started by humble, good people.

Sam Walton - a family man, grateful for all of his employees, a hard worker, he even went as far as to buy out local liquor stores to ensure his own place felt more friendly for the average conservative family at the time. He had a way with people and a dream of how to serve them. He was loved and respected by his employees from what I've heard.

Come modern times, I've worked at different Walmarts and no one respects anyone. Profits are number one, nothing else matters.

I'm sure Sam would be horrified at what his business became. Not personal, friendly, nor caring. Not inspired, just forceful. Not passionate, just overwhelming

a reply to: SKMDC1

Why the hell do people keep using that word?

Get a dictionary.

Not one candidate. Not one of them! Are advocating for government ownership of land and business. Not one candidate is advocating for 100 percent taxes to everyone, and split them up evenly. Not one candidate is coming even close to socialism nor it's cousin communism.

a reply to: Malynn

See I do know history. Favourite subject in school actually. And there is that willful dishonesty you're so adept at. Pure socialism has never been attempted. The totalitarian forms of socialism that have been attempted haven't gone well at all. But the SOCIAL DEMOCRACIES, which is what YOU KNOW everyone in this thread is supporting are doing very well. I already asked you to name one social democracy that has failed and you can't.

Hey I couldn't agree more. I'm arguing FOR socialism up in here. Perhaps you should read my posts.

Willful dishonesty? Perhaps you should read your posts.

So which is it, socialism or social democracy?

Social Democracy is a political position, a political party, a political ideology, not a country. Saying a country is a social democracy would involve some sort of reference to social democracy in their constitution, like socialist countries. Of course, there is no such reference. Canada isn’t a conservative country when the conservative party is in power. The United States isn’t Republican country when the republicans are in power. The same is with the Nordic countries and Social Democratic Parties.

You live in Finland. How did the Social Democratic Party fare in the last election there? A quick look on my part seems to show they failed miserably. Why in a social democracy would the social democratic party fail, and in turn vote in a conservative one? Because the country isn’t a social democracy.

Granted, the Nordic countries have been fairing very well, and they should be used as a an example of prosperity. But to argue it is because of “socialist programs” or social democracy, while excluding culture, work ethic, natural resources, is naive.

That’s what Bernie and his supporter are: naive.

a reply to: deadlyhope

WOW. You do realize that what you want, is the basis over every corrupt Govt in history.

Hitler would be very impressed. Along with Mao and every other deranged dictator.

a reply to: Malynn

Collectively???? By what order or power do you draw this "collective" line?

a reply to: TheTory

LMFAO! More semantics? Here I'll try to explain this in terms you can understand:

Pure socialism, communism (totalitarian socialism), social democracies all contain facets of socialism but are all different. Socialism in its pure form is the workers owning the means of production. NO ONE HAS DONE THAT. What this planet has that IS done and IS working is democracies which use capitalism as their economic system but also include social programs where the collective contributes for the betterment of all.

The USA is also like this, however progress has been stalled and reversed in some cases by the ownership class.

But you know these things. And are being deliberately obtuse so you can argue semamtics to further the illusion that you're...winning I guess? Let me assure you're not. And I'll repeat the tactic is willfully dishonest.

Furthermore I now live in the US. And what does the Finnish election have to do with anything? Just because a party with socialism in the title didn't form the government does not remove their socialized medicine or free college tuition, or free school lunches, paid family leave or child care.

a reply to: Malynn

Just wondering......why is it that people opine for such crap, like Socialism and Communism here in the US?

There are soooo many fine countries that have these Govt types already operational. I mean, Cuba, Venezuela, China, N. Korea and so on I am sure would love to have you and the others with them.

a reply to: macman

I'm not drawing anything. If you're not noticing the outrage going around right now and has been going on for some time by millions and millions of people you're not paying attention. When the majority of people feel a certain way about something that is collectively deciding.

a reply to: Malynn

Ahhh, so MOB rule.

How very..........Constitutional Republic of you to offer such things.

a reply to: Malynn

Pure socialism, communism (totalitarian socialism), social democracies all contain facets of socialism but are all different. Socialism in its pure form is the workers owning the means of production. NO ONE HAS DONE THAT. What this planet has that IS done and IS working is democracies which use capitalism as their economic system but also include social programs where the collective contributes for the betterment of all.

Yes. Democracy, a welfare-states and a capitalist economy can work well given certain conditions. Welfare-states, as I stated earlier, did not originate from socialist principles, nor were they first implemented by socialists.

Furthermore I now live in the US. And what does the Finnish election have to do with anything? Just because a party with socialism in the title didn't form the government does not remove their socialized medicine or free college tuition, or free school lunches, paid family leave or child care.

You mentioned Finland earlier. I assumed you still lived there. The point was exactly the point I made. It is not a social democracy.

Once again, universal healthcare, paid family leave, free education, are not "socialist programs", and nor do they exist solely in the part of the world you're talking about, nor do they exist solely in "social democracies".

Remember your post:

"Hey I couldn't agree more. I'm arguing FOR socialism up in here. Perhaps you should read my posts."

Does anyone know the difference between Social Democracy and Democratic Socialism?

Which one is Bernie Sanders?

originally posted by: TheTory
Does anyone know the difference between Social Democracy and Democratic Socialism?

Which one is Bernie Sanders?

One is a system of government. The other is a political ideology.

Sanders fits in to the latter.

originally posted by: macman
a reply to: Malynn

Just wondering......why is it that people opine for such crap, like Socialism and Communism here in the US?

There are soooo many fine countries that have these Govt types already operational. I mean, Cuba, Venezuela, China, N. Korea and so on I am sure would love to have you and the others with them.

I'm not gonna argue semantics with you either sweetheart. If you think I'm going to treat such a ridiculous question seriously you're wrong.

If you and Tory want honest debate you know where to find me.

a reply to: Malynn

Oh there ain't semantics in what I asked.

As customary here on ATS. Once Progressives don't like the direction of the argument, they refuse to answer simple questions.


I expect nothing less from you, nor any other Bernie backer.

a reply to: macman

se·man·tics
səˈman(t)iks/
noun
the branch of linguistics and logic concerned with meaning. There are a number of branches and subbranches of semantics, including formal semantics, which studies the logical aspects of meaning, such as sense, reference, implication, and logical form, lexical semantics, which studies word meanings and word relations, and conceptual semantics, which studies the cognitive structure of meaning.

And like most conservatives when your argument makes 0 sense you start making # up. You know Damn well we don't want what those countries have.

a reply to: Malynn

Well thanks so much for providing me with a definition of the word.

Now, why don't you want what those countries have? How about Sweden?? Why not Denmark....oh, how about Greece?

What's wrong with them?

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: TheTory
Does anyone know the difference between Social Democracy and Democratic Socialism?

Which one is Bernie Sanders?

One is a system of government. The other is a political ideology.

Sanders fits in to the latter.

The main difference is that democratic socialism advocates a socialist economy, while social democracy uses the capitalist economy.

Sanders is a democratic socialist.

a reply to: macman

How about Denmark? That's the main model of Sanders platform.

Even those who live in Denmark, don't consider their country Socialist. They consider it a Free Market/Capatilist society with some really good social welfare programs.

Also keep in mind that Free Education and Free this and that, don't really mean free, they come from Taxes and better spending from our governemnt.

Denmark has a very high quality of life and most inhabitants there are very happy.

They do have very high taxes, but that is offset by good free education and healthcare, robust retirement and other things.

Tell me what's bad about Denmark.