• @cosmicrookie@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    1502 months ago

    European here.

    This seems to mainly only be an issue in the US. Socialism = Communism = Enemy

    If at all anything, the opposite seems to be the case here. We’re looking at the US as a “this is how bad it will get if we let go” example

    • BarqsHasBite
      link
      fedilink
      56
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      In addition: government programs that help everyone = helping black people = no.

      I think this is the fundamental reason why the US never went to public/universal anything, be it healthcare, education, whatever.

      • @AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        3
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Yep. We should have told the colonies of Georgia and Carolina to fuck off, and we’ll get around to conquering them, after we kicked The King out of the other 11 colonies.

        If one person had voted differently during The Continental Congress, we would have started abolishing slavery

    • PorkRoll
      link
      fedilink
      372 months ago

      Yeah y’all really don’t want to end up like us. We’re not the land of the free. The streets are most definitely not paved with gold. We’re just a giant ponzi scheme.

        • @bobs_monkey@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          82 months ago

          No kidding. Their “fix” every year is to either fill all the potholes with asphalt, which the spring rains promptly loosen and get kicked out, or a thin “repaving” layer, which gets destroyed by the summer monsoons. I’m convinced Caltrans is a jobs program for people that can’t get a job otherwise, because those guys can’t seem to get anything done correctly.

      • @Krauerking@lemy.lol
        link
        fedilink
        72 months ago

        It’s actually insane how many of our institutions are actually based on pyramid schemes. No wonder we all use it as the symbol for conspiracy because it is a huge portion of how anything runs in the US. Cover the costs by convincing more people to join in at a less beneficial or profitable step down the pyramid and hope someone else will be coming behind you for you to take from as well.

      • Scrubbles
        link
        fedilink
        English
        42 months ago

        I have a pothole literally 2 feet wide and at least 10 inches deep on my street that our city just can’t find the funds to fix…

    • @bouh@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      22 months ago

      Well, French president and several of its ministers are saying that socialist left, or radical left, is extremist. So no, it’s not an America problem. It’s very much a Europe problem too.

    • Neuromancer
      link
      fedilink
      02 months ago

      Europe uses the word socialism differently. It’s a difference in how the words are used and the time they are used. If we consider socialism shared responsibility, we have it America in many ways but we are hesitant to expand it. That’s because of our fear of large government power.

      If we me socialism as the workers owning the means of production. Well no country does that. Normally it’s the government owning everything and the workers being abused such as the Soviet Union or Cuba. That’s the large governments Americans dislike.

      • @Valmond@lemmy.mindoki.com
        link
        fedilink
        02 months ago

        Yeah, socialism isn’t taxing the rich, it is or at least have always led to brutal dictatorships because the real one is just communism with extra steps.

        Social-democracy on the other hand is wonder for the people (see Sweden etc) in real life.

        • Neuromancer
          link
          fedilink
          -32 months ago

          I’m a conservative and read a wonderful article on why conservatives should be leading the charge to a social democracy like Sweden. It really changed my views on why we should be skippering certain endeavors. Just neither party here has really embraced the basic concept.

          An example was national health care allowed people to be more entrepreneurial since that is a large risk to not have insurance here.

      • @Revan343@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        172 months ago

        Russia isn’t socialist anymore. It’s a fascist capitalist hellscape, which is why Republicans like it

      • @Cowbee
        link
        102 months ago

        The USSR collapsed several decades ago. Russia now is fascist, over a Capitalist economy.

        • @merc@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          -82 months ago

          There are elements of capitalism there, but I wouldn’t call it a capitalist economy. Capitalism requires that private individuals own the means of production. But, in Russia does anybody outside Putin’s inner circle really own anything?

          • @Cowbee
            link
            92 months ago

            Yes, absolutely. The Russian Federation is the direct result of a collapsing Socialist system in the hands of Capitalists, just because fewer and fewer people own things doesn’t mean it isn’t a direct result of Capitalization of the economy.

            • @Revan343@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              22 months ago

              just because fewer and fewer people own things doesn’t mean it isn’t a direct result of Capitalization of the economy

              In fact that’s the natural progression of a Capitalist economy

            • @merc@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              -52 months ago

              The USSR wasn’t really socialist at its core, and the new Russia really isn’t capitalist at its core.

              In the former system, the theory was that the people / workers owned the means of production. The reality was that it was the leader and those close to him who really “owned” them in the sense that they had power over them. It was all about who you knew in that system. In a true socialist system, it should have been up to the people to make decisions, but in the USSR it was up to the party’s elites, and the people just had to live with it.

              In the current system, it’s Putin and his close circle who own everything. While they allow capitalist type activities to happen, the capitalists don’t really own anything. If they displease Putin anything they have can be taken away on a whim. If you stay on Putin’s good side, or at least stay beneath his notice, you can operate as a capitalist. But, become too successful and you’ll be reminded who’s in charge.

              Both true socialism and true capitalism require that the rule of law apply to everyone, even the leaders. If the leader can just ignore the laws and seize the “means of production” without facing consequences, it’s authoritarianism, not capitalism or communism / socialism.

              • @Cowbee
                link
                42 months ago

                The USSR was a flawed form of Socialism, but was fundamentally Socialist. The majority of the economy was run by Worker Soviets, in a process called Soviet Democracy. The Politburo, ie the highest Soviet, had a massive amount of influence and power, but day to day decisions were made locally. I would agree, I don’t think it was a particularly good form of Socialism, but I would still consider it Socialist.

                Modern Russia is absolutely Capitalist at its core, that’s the entire foundation of the Russian Federation. The Capitalists are the Oligarchs! The Inner Circle are Capitalists! just because it’s a higher stage of Capitalism doesn’t mean it ceases to be Capitalism.

                • @merc@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  -12 months ago

                  The USSR was a flawed form of Socialism, but was fundamentally Socialist

                  Was the rule of law strong enough that decisions were being made by the people, or were they being made by authoritarians? Because if key decisions weren’t being made by the people, it wasn’t socialist.

                  The Capitalists are the Oligarchs!

                  The Oligarchs are feudalists, not capitalists.

  • @Deestan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    792 months ago

    As a european it’s always been fucking WERID how americans panic and reach for their guns at the mention of socialism.

    • @AdmiralShat@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      29
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      I mean

      There was this whole thing called the Soviet Union then there was like a missile crisis

      And there was like a group that called themselves National Socialists and they did a genocide and tried to take over a bunch of land by force

      We also had to fight a bunch of talking trees that dug tunnels because military industrial complex and heroin

      It’s definitely many layers of propaganda but as an American I definitely understand WHERE it comes from, I understand why most people here flinch at the word.

      You also gotta understand we had multiple generations in a row huffing lead gasoline so while younger millennials aren’t impacted as bad, MOST Americans are legitimately lead brained.

      • @Got_Bent@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        82 months ago

        It wasn’t just leaded gasoline. I was busy getting hot boxed with cigarettes in my grandparent’s leaded gasoline car before burning some asbestos, plastic cutlery, and batteries in the living room fireplace.

        Forget no seatbelts or bicycle helmets. Our chemical exposure would probably send a younger person without a built up tolerance into instant seizure.

        I also remember crimping down lead shot sinkers on my fishing line with my teeth. Good times. Good times indeed.

      • @azertyfun@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        02 months ago

        Bruh

        The Nazis were literally IN Europe. The USSR literally built a WALL here splitting the continent. And you’re saying that explains why America is the one with socialism PTSD???

        Ain’t nothing more American than making everything about you I guess.

          • @azertyfun@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            -22 months ago

            But European don’t panic at the mention of socialism (what the comment you’re replying to was talking about) yet the Europeans have suffered FAR MORE from your examples of “socialism” than Americans. You can’t explain away how American politics differ from European politics by appropriating European tragedies.

              • @azertyfun@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                1
                edit-2
                2 months ago

                But it DOES NOT explain the origins. The USSR and the Nazis are not CAUSES. They CAN’T BE because otherwise Europe would never integrated elements of socialism!

                I think we actually agree on that, it’s just semantics at this point. Whatever.

                Also watch your aggressiveness. I didn’t call you names and I expect the same in return.

    • Scrubbles
      link
      fedilink
      English
      82 months ago

      As an American I wish it was easier to pack up and move to Europe :(

        • @DrWeevilJammer
          link
          102 months ago

          Several things keep Americans from moving to Europe.

          First, immigration laws of the country one is moving to. If one is not able to get a passport from an EU or EEA county based on ancestry, you basically need to be sponsored for a work visa by a company in the country you want to move to, which can be quite difficult. And even then, you have to be employed in that country for long enough to qualify for permanent residency, then citizenship, which can take up to 7 or 8 years in some countries.

          If one is lucky enough to have parents or grandparents who emigrated to the US from a European country and can claim citizenship based on that, it’s a lot of work to get all of the paperwork together and verified and accepted by that government’s consulate (at least it is for Germany, but German bureaucracy is … special).

          Second, the US is one of the only countries in the world that double taxes its citizens. If someone was born in the United States, they will have to file taxes reporting income to the US government every single year until they die, and PAY taxes to the US government on any income over a certain amount every year until they die, regardless of the source of that income, and regardless of the fact that taxes on the same income need to be paid to the host country.

          While I have zero respect for the snivelling shitgibbon name Boris Johnson, he was born in New York and had to renounce his US citizenship to escape the IRS. You also have to PAY the US government $2350 (in cash) for the privilege of giving up your citizenship, which is also…unique.

          Sometimes there are tax treaties that can take most of the sting out of the double taxation issue (Norway’s is decent for US citizens), but it depends on the country.

          Finally, it just never occurs to many Americans that leaving is even a possibility.

        • @Efwis@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          62 months ago

          Money for the most part for a lot of people.

          Passports are $400+ USD, then there are the plane tickets, which are hundreds of dollars. Then to top it off you need to have room and board while looking for a job and someplace to live.

          Another thing I’ve heard is fear of leaving the known and family.

            • @jollyrogue
              link
              6
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              No. Most don’t leave the US, so there isn’t a need. Plus, until recently, Canada and Mexico only needed an ID card like a drivers license.

            • @Efwis@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              32 months ago

              Pretty much the only time we need passports is if we travel outside the U.S. and territories. Those that take cruises or cross borders to other countries would, but generally speaking a majority of Americans don’t have passports.

        • @SimpleMachine@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          32 months ago

          Maybe I just suck at the research, but from what I can tell getting a permanent residence visa is not easy for Americans. If I’m wrong I would absolutely love to know.

          • @frezik@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            32 months ago

            France seems to be relatively easy to gain permanent residence and even citizenship, but they do expect you to learn fluent French. Most of the EU requires birthright citizenship. A few will grant it to the decedents of immigrants, like Ireland, though they only do it for two generations out.

        • Scrubbles
          link
          fedilink
          English
          22 months ago

          Eh for me it’s a lot of things. For one just roots, family and friends. Then next is work, I’d have to find a new job over there (doubtful my current one would let me work abroad), and I’d need to see if visas would let me work over there, and for how long. I would probably make less over there, but cost of living is lower too, so I’d have to do finances. Most countries don’t let you own property unless you’re a citizen, and I wouldn’t be, so I’d have to rent for a while. Path to citizenship would then be difficult, and I would have to pay taxes for both countries. Then just pure logistics of what do I do with everything here, would have to basically start all over. It’d be much easier if I was in my early 20s, but I’m nearing 40 which makes it much more difficult.

        • @jollyrogue
          link
          12 months ago

          Money mostly.

          There is usually something like needing $250K in the bank to be considered for permanent residency. Then the paperwork costs money, so most Americans will have to wait until they get refugee status.

    • TacoButtPlug
      link
      fedilink
      English
      52 months ago

      It’s the boomers who do this primarily. I guess they were spoon fed this shit as babies.

    • @Got_Bent@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      22 months ago

      In all fairness, we panic and reach for our guns at the mention of just about anything. Right this very moment, I’m pooping on company time, scared out of my wits, a nine millimeter at the ready atop my presently ankle adorning boxers.

  • TimeSquirrel
    link
    fedilink
    67
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    By “socialism”, are we talking:

    A. Worker-controlled economic system, or

    B. What American liberals think is socialism, which is just a capitalist system with welfare.

        • @Cowbee
          link
          182 months ago

          Today I learned that Socialism is when you do Capitalism in a nice way.

          Oh wait, no I didn’t, because Capitalism and Socialism are completely different modes of Production.

          • @Dasus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            -102 months ago

            No, they’re not.

            They’re economic systems, not modes of production.

            Today, you’re still refusing to accept reality.

            It’s right there before your eyes. You’re too brainwashed to see it.

            • @Cowbee
              link
              112 months ago

              In your own words, they are economic systems. What do you call a system built on Capitalism, but with a slightly larger welfare net? Socialism? No, you call it Capitalism.

              You’re calling me brainwashed for correctly pointing out that Capitalism is Capitalism, even if you dress it up nicely?

                • @Cowbee
                  link
                  122 months ago

                  Believe me, I’m not conflating Capitalism with markets. Capitalism is a specific form of market economy by which individual Capitalists buy and sell Means of Production, or Capital, by which they can pay Workers to use and create commodities via wage labor.

                  Examples of Socialist market economies include Market Socialism, a form of Socialism built on competing worker-owned co-operatives.

                  Examples of Socialist Market Economies do not include Capitalist Social Democracies, because the primary defining feature of Social Democracies is Capitalism with generous social safety nets, a kind of “human-centric” Capitalism.

                  You on the other hand are making the misconception that Socialism is simply when the government does stuff. You’re wrong, of course, as countless people here have pointed put.

                  Capitalism with regulation is still Capitalism. Socialism is when Workers share ownership of the Means of Production, simple as.

        • Exocrinous
          link
          fedilink
          English
          22 months ago

          In practice, social democracy takes a form of socially managed welfare capitalism

      • @Cowbee
        link
        42 months ago

        Why? OP clearly states “worker controlled systems,” it’s not difficult to see what they’re talking about.

          • @Cowbee
            link
            02 months ago

            I agree, but nothing in this post is calling for deregulation and privatization, rather the opposite.

      • @Cowbee
        link
        302 months ago

        Nope.

        Socialism is Worker Ownership of the Means of Production.

        The Nordic Countries are in fact Social Democracies, not Socialist Democracies. Social Democracy is Capitalist in nature.

          • @Cowbee
            link
            102 months ago

            Your greatest source is misinterpreting a line in Wikipedia? You think that means your Capitalism is actually Socialism despite relying on Capitalism, because the welfare net is larger? Lmao

              • @Cowbee
                link
                92 months ago

                Your data is Wikipedia. That’s it. Read perhaps any Socialist literature and you’re immediately debunked.

                If Social Democracy was truly under Socialism, then the Workers of your country would own the Means of Production.

                A more accurate reading of what you are claiming is that Social Democracy takes influence from Marxism while rejecting the conclusions and thus the necessity for Socialism, instead relying on Capitalism.

                Tell me, plainly, how you can have Socialism with Capitalists and Capitalism. Or, does Nestlé not exist in the Nordic Countries?

                • @Dasus@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  -82 months ago

                  “yOuR dAtA iS wIkIPeDiA”

                  No, it isn’t.

                  Here’s my source: Eatwell & Wright 1999, pp. 80–103; Newman 2005, p. 5; Heywood 2007, pp. 101, 134–136, 139; Ypi 2018; Watson 2019.

                  Want to go and read those books? No? I’m schocked.

                  The information from those books is listed on Wikipedia, yes. Are you so childish that you’ll now pretend “you can’t find real information on wikipedia”?

                  Weirdly enough, you don’t have ANY sources for the things you pull out of your arse. Almost as if you didn’t know what you were talking about and didn’t HAVE any sources for your faulty claims, because like I said, you’ve conflated market economies and capitalism and think socialism equals communism, because you don’t understand communism is just one form of socialism.

                  “How can you have socialism with capitalism”

                  Since I’ve already explained you keep conflating “capitalism” with “market economies”, the question is then translated into “tell me, plainly, how can you have socialism and market economies”, for which the answer is really quite simple for anyone literate. However, since you also conflate “socialism” with “communism”, then the question becomes “how can you have communism with market economies”, to which the answer is “you can’t, since communism relies on planned economies instead of market economies”.

                  That’s where your confusion comes from.

                  Due to our good regulations because of our social demoractic, well governed economies, capitalist companies can participate, but they can’t do the shenanigans they can do in less regulated markets. The degree of regulation is the question. Even the US doesn’t have “pure” capitalism. Things like the antitrust laws are by definition socialist policies, but this doesn’t mean the US is socialist in any way. It just means even they understand the necessity of regulation over “pure” capitalism, because “pure” capitalism is unsustainable as it leads to monopolies which then kill the economy.

                  This is why for example I can actually drink my tapwater and eat raw eggs that don’t even have to be refrigerated. This is why the quality of all products here is higher, and why it’s more expensive for companies like Nestle to try their bullshit here, which is why they mostly aim for developing countries. To avoid the regulation that comes with properly functioning social democracy.

      • TimeSquirrel
        link
        fedilink
        11
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        There are specific definitions and I’m sticking to them. If your economy has capitalists controlling companies with workers trading their labor for a wage underneath them, then it is capitalist, full stop.

        Unless your economy is full of co-ops or something. I don’t know the common typical structure for a nordic company.

        • @Dasus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          -6
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          You haven’t even read a single “basic definition” my man.

          Here’s one :

          Socialism

          Dictionary

          Definitions from Oxford Languages

          socialism

          noun a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned OR REGULATED by the community as a whole.

          If your economy has capitalists controlling companies with workers trading their labor for a wage underneath them, then it is capitalist, full stop.

          Youre refusing (or unable, lol) to understand that “capitalism” does not equal market economies.

          Selling things doesn’t mean capitalism. Trading goods doesn’t mean capitalism. Owning a company doesn’t mean capitalism. Having companies with workers doesn’t mean capitalism.

          Jesus fucking God I’m tired of explaining concepts that my 8 year old niece could google and learn by her self in five minutes

          “unless you have a planned economy you’re not socialist”

          Yeah, exactly the point I’m making. Brainwashed morons think socialism means full planked economy, when it’s no such thing.

          Fucking spend 2 min on Google, is it so much to ask?

          https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Market_socialism

          Fucking perpetuating shitty 70’s red scare propaganda mf sides are hurting.

          • TimeSquirrel
            link
            fedilink
            4
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            I said nothing about a planned economy, now you’re putting words in my mouth.

            Ever hear of libertarian socialism?

            Edit: I get the feeling we are talking about the same thing using different terms…

              • TimeSquirrel
                link
                fedilink
                42 months ago

                If you’re going to continue to insult me and gaslight me, we are done here. Have a good day.

                • @Dasus@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  -22 months ago

                  How am I “gaslighting” you?

                  You literally said “Unless your economy is full of co-ops or something [it’s not socialist]”.

                  You’re referring to the collectives of the Soviet union. A distinct feature of PLANNED ECONOMIES.

                  “I never anything about a planned economy.”

                  Yes, you did. And now you’re pretending you didn’t. Like pretending reality isn’t what it actually is. Trying to convince me something that happened didn’t happen. Is there a word for behaving like that…?

  • @z00s@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    28
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    “Most powerful empire the world has ever known”

    Lol Americans

    The Romans conquered the known world with pointy sticks and diplomacy.

    The US hasn’t been on the winning side since ww2 despite having nukes and spyplanes.

    Even the British Empire spanned the globe, and all they had was cannons, rum, and syphilis.

  • GrayoxOP
    link
    272 months ago

    Lol at the person who said Lemmy doesn’t have many comments.

  • BarqsHasBite
    link
    fedilink
    222 months ago

    Oh time for my link

    Frame Canada

    Wendell Potter spent decades scaring Americans. About Canada. He worked for the health insurance industry, and he knew that if Americans understood Canadian-style health care, they might… like it. So he helped deploy an industry playbook for protecting the health insurance agency.

    https://www.npr.org/2020/10/19/925354134/frame-canada