Americans may not like the word "socialism", but they love socialist programs like Medicare, Social Security, the VA, public schools and universities just to name a few.
Americans may not like the word "socialism", but they love socialist programs like Medicare, Social Security, the VA, public schools and universities just to name a few.
I think Bernie Sanders owes the near success of his presidential campaign to the Republican party. When the Republican's started calling every social program they didn't like socialist, a lot of young people said "okay, socialism sounds cool".
You could probably make an argument that a lot of the modern progressive/socialist movement's appeal among young people can be traced back to the Obama era Republicans calling everything socialist, knee-caping the recovery from the 2009 crash, and shutting the government down repeatedly for funsies.
As always, the problem isn't the programs, it is the messaging. Progressives are horrible at messaging and some think socialism is a good word to use. I was at a national chain restaurant recently and the server was telling us that they took the word "Fried" off the menu because people don't want to be reminded the food will make them fat. "Crispy" is the new word.
That only really works in conjunction with motivated reasoning. Anyone looking knows Fried = Crispy = Lots of Calories. They'll accept the linguistic slight of hand if they want an excuse to go for it. If they don't they'll get angry at you for attempting to trick them and for thinking they are dumb enough to fall for something so transparent.
Progressives can't just rebrand they actually have to improve the underlying support/desire for the programs involved. Unfortunately that seems to either require nuanced discussion or trying the programs out so people can see, neither of which are particularly likely in the current environment. Part of the frustration from the progressive side is that those things aren't possible because the moderates are never willing to take any risks in the face of Republican bad faith which only encourages more bad faith. As such there is no path forward even if the ideas have merit. The socialism article is a nice encapsulation of all of that.
Medicare is not a socialist program - socialist healthcare would mean the government is directly providing healthcare (like the NHS in the UK, or the VA).
No, I don't think it does. It might be a social program. It might be considered social welfare, or it might be any of a dozen other terms that might apply to government programs. But it isn't Socialist (note the capital). Socialism is the government controlling the means of production. Government simply paying for something isn't that.
Americans may not like the word "socialism", but they love socialist programs like Medicare, Social Security, the VA, public schools and universities just to name a few.
I think Bernie Sanders owes the near success of his presidential campaign to the Republican party. When the Republican's started calling every social program they didn't like socialist, a lot of young people said "okay, socialism sounds cool".
You could probably make an argument that a lot of the modern progressive/socialist movement's appeal among young people can be traced back to the Obama era Republicans calling everything socialist, knee-caping the recovery from the 2009 crash, and shutting the government down repeatedly for funsies.
I've often thought this.
And their local police & fire departments & local libraries. Bad, bad socialism!
I mean, Republicans do really hate local libraries right now.
Excepting the police, which other of these are Republicans not trying to gut or cast as evil?
As always, the problem isn't the programs, it is the messaging. Progressives are horrible at messaging and some think socialism is a good word to use. I was at a national chain restaurant recently and the server was telling us that they took the word "Fried" off the menu because people don't want to be reminded the food will make them fat. "Crispy" is the new word.
That only really works in conjunction with motivated reasoning. Anyone looking knows Fried = Crispy = Lots of Calories. They'll accept the linguistic slight of hand if they want an excuse to go for it. If they don't they'll get angry at you for attempting to trick them and for thinking they are dumb enough to fall for something so transparent.
Progressives can't just rebrand they actually have to improve the underlying support/desire for the programs involved. Unfortunately that seems to either require nuanced discussion or trying the programs out so people can see, neither of which are particularly likely in the current environment. Part of the frustration from the progressive side is that those things aren't possible because the moderates are never willing to take any risks in the face of Republican bad faith which only encourages more bad faith. As such there is no path forward even if the ideas have merit. The socialism article is a nice encapsulation of all of that.
Medicare is not a socialist program - socialist healthcare would mean the government is directly providing healthcare (like the NHS in the UK, or the VA).
You're spitting hairs. Medicare is paid for by the government, which makes it socialist.
No it is not socialist.
A primer:
https://newsletters.theatlantic.com/peacefield/6206c37b9d9e380022bed32f/is-it-fascism-is-it-socialism/
No, I don't think it does. It might be a social program. It might be considered social welfare, or it might be any of a dozen other terms that might apply to government programs. But it isn't Socialist (note the capital). Socialism is the government controlling the means of production. Government simply paying for something isn't that.
We provide the taxes for the government to pay. I do so every paycheck.
So, in your definition, socialism = everything paid for by the government?
That's the RW definition, except for the military of course. Though I suspect Bannon, et al would love a mercenary army composed of Flynns.