A new New Deal alliance would bode well for the liberal-Left, but playing a role in rejuvenating American liberalism will only be a means to an end. That’s where Michael Harrington and his co-conspirators, many of whom were leaders of the labor movement, erred. Their folly wasn’t a hostility to engagement with liberals, like that of today’s anarchist youth, but that their political strategy by design played second fiddle to, and eventually became indistinguishable from, that of their liberal counterparts. Given the chance during the high-water mark of American liberalism, they were unable to build their own institutions and struggle for dominance within the broader progressive coalition.
Through outreach and agitprop, today’s democratic socialists will need to push popular analysis and display organizational talents more dynamic than liberalism can offer. This will mean working openly under the socialist banner, identifying capitalism as a social system that benefits a tiny minority at the expense of everyone else, and organizing within our communities, schools and workplaces to challenge the structures and relationships that dominate our lives. It’ll mean creating parties and organizations distinct from those on the American political scene today, but not remote from ordinary people’s lived realities.
The only way back to political relevance for socialists lies through realistic engagement with politics as it exists today. And that involves messiness and compromise—reaching out to liberals as friends and allies—while not losing sight of the need to decisively transform a political framework built on a self-destructive and morally intolerable mode of production.
So share your opinions here, but first... your definition.
Got to love Raynd.From each according to their ability (to pay taxes), to each according to their need (for free stuff) - is my basic definition of socialism. The more progressive the system of taxation becomes and the more direct income redistribution, using gov't social "safety net" programs, that we create then the closer we get to socialism.
From each according to their ability (to pay taxes), to each according to their need (for free stuff) - is my basic definition of socialism. The more progressive the system of taxation becomes and the more direct income redistribution, using gov't social "safety net" programs, that we create then the closer we get to socialism.
Lean Socialist - In These Times
Socialism, over the past centuries, has meant a lot of things - brutal repression, democratic workers' states, experimental communities, even anarchism. But no matter what was said about it, we couldn't shake it. It's remained a powerful force, taking part in crucial global revolutions and countless domestic initiatives.
So share your opinions here, but first... your definition.
Are you suggesting co-ops are better than what we primarily use today in the U.S.?It's the democratic (co-op, or state) ownership of production
Are you suggesting co-ops are better than what we primarily use today in the U.S.?
The only problem is the word co-opClearly.
I saw your tag line a d let me address it jesus was for charity as an expression of ones faith not as a response to the end of a roman spear there is a big difference.I think Democratic Socialism is the best form of a government we have come up with. I believe that we as a society have a responsibility to provide for the needs as all, and together we can build something much greater than what we have now in America, which is essentially a country ran by the absolute richest of Americans who keep taking a larger and larger share of wealth. I believe the middle and lower class Americans are victims of the capitalist system we are born into, and the game has been rigged against us, and that public and cooperative means of production is a far better system than private ownership of production for individual profit.
I saw your tag line a d let me address it jesus was for charity as an expression of ones faith not as a response to the end of a roman spear there is a big difference.
The only problem is the word co-op
stems from cooperation and in socialism there is no cooperation only government force.
I think Democratic Socialism is the best form of a government we have come up with. I believe that we as a society have a responsibility to provide for the needs as all, and together we can build something much greater than what we have now in America, which is essentially a country ran by the absolute richest of Americans who keep taking a larger and larger share of wealth. I believe the middle and lower class Americans are victims of the capitalist system we are born into, and the game has been rigged against us, and that public and cooperative means of production is a far better system than private ownership of production for individual profit.
The only problem is the word co-op
stems from cooperation and in socialism there is no cooperation only government force.
Don't trust anything that calls itself socialist. That is my opinion. Why? United Soviet Socialist Republic. National Socialism.
Okay, that's nonsense. I've already defined socialism. But if you plan on challenging that definition, go ahead. Until then, posts like yours will counted as invalid.
No it's not you used co-op in your definition of socialism and the definition of co-op is" an autonomous association of persons who voluntarily cooperate for their mutual, social, economic, and cultural benefit". This means your definition is invalid as you can not have cooperation with governt running as government is force.
Trust that which calls itself socialist, but only if it defends your interests. Why? Cuba. Hungary. Venezuela. Spain. Israel.
Side note: Soviet Russia was an authoritarian collectivism. Nazi Germany was a fascism. Neither of those countries implemented reforms according to a socialist programme.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?