What is socialism?

America has had a long and contentious history with the word ‘socialism’. For conservatives, most often it’s a dirty word – even unpatriotic. For many liberals, it’s about social justice and compassion. However, for better or worse, it remains a red line within the electorate.

[rt.com]

Other than when I began this group as I was advocating for Jill Stein of the Green Party, although still Marxism, the majority of my time here has been spent on advocating for you members to take a hard look at educating yourselves on Socialism and begin to support it. More preciously, at Marx's theory of democratic socialism. I've made various attempts at this with the WSWS new source, their related party, (Socialist Equality Party) and post from Professor Wolff who can break down the 3 basic types of socialism in simple terms. [democracyatwork.info]

Socialism, like capitalism, mean different things to most people and countries. You simply can't argue against this fact, other than which would be more beneficial to society, which political side is right or wrong, only who is actually better educated on the 2 issues. Here in the US, republicans have their view, democrats their view on capitalism. Then theirs everyone in the middle who are mostly left out of the discussion. They tend to be forced into one of those sides to have an opinion.

Most of these people share the same views but are divided by propaganda that condition them into separation falling into one of the divided sides. Those views that we commonly share are mostly related to the aspect of socialism. We are at a point where we need to separate ourselves from the managed perceptions being forced onto us and pick a side. Currently our population in the US is beginning to lean towards socialism. Quite frankly, rightfully so, finally. Only that same propaganda is turning people towards the wrong type of socialist groups and parties, in my opinion.

Both capitalism and socialism have been experiments in our society. Capitalism with a substantial amount of more time. But also with a long history of failures that have entailed keeping it alive coming off the backs of the working class. Quite frankly, parts of the upper middle class and small businesses also. When ever tax cuts are made and austerity measures are heightened, these parts of society also, seemingly, blissfully join the middle class in supporting the benefits that go to corporations and the ruling class capitalist. Blissfully? Well, they tend to always support the very people taking advantage of them the most. And as Wolff would describe to us, capitalism isn't much different at all compared to the centuries of 2 other systems before that have reeked havoc on our societies. While socialism has always been confronted by the global capitalist propaganda to ensure a false perception of failures.

Which Peter Lavelle attempts to do right after Caleb Maupin represents Marxism. Maupin does a great job of pointing out some of the main aspects of socialism, short of explaining the democratic nature of the working class Marx's theory represents. Such as democracy in the workforce where employees have a say on how products are made, what type. For an example, during the first year of this virus. With a genuine socialist government (more on that right after this) workers could have drastically curved the hospital crowding by voting on changing production towards breathing machines and many other supplies in various sections of the country with honest information on what we were facing. I shouldn't need to detail how we wasted weeks if not months on being justly informed. I'll argue we still haven't been.

Then Lavelle chimes in with a deceptive statement that everything is essentially centralized by the state. Well, only to a conservative planting a false narrative wanting to scare you as though were talking about China. Who did a better job of managing the virus? But my point is, he took the democracy of Marxism out of the discussion and Maupin never followed with a rebuttal afterwards to explain that. Where if you have a well functioning electoral system such as Venezuela, a democracy votes in a government they trust for a system that works for them. The problem with us in the US is that a vast amount of the voters don't recognize we don't have that here. We're limited to 2 parties who both control their candidate outcome, which some 80% of the population don't trust, but keep voting within their structure. Nearly 5 decades of the very same policies reeking havoc around the world and our country falls apart under our feet while we're firing at each other from rabbit holes they created for us.

He, Lavelle, again later leaves you only 2 choices, state or oligarchs. I'll argue we in the US are already looking at an oligarchy with a state they works for them. They sure the hell aren't working for us, our foreign bothers and sisters, or the planet. We are kept basically at bare minimum while more and more people fall through the cracks each year. Democracy as a society benefit is purposely left out again.

Jones finally gets to chime in a make the point missing.

Lavelle makes the most important statement though as he backs up what I found during the 2016 primary cycle. There's a lot of republicans willing to go with socialism. I don't know if Lavelle was as negative towards trump and republicans as he is liberals here, but he doesn't seem to be the normal conservative here.

All in all it's a great discussion to get us thinking.