Not2BSubjugated
Callous Individualist
You're missing my point. When I say that Sanders calls himself a socialist, I'm not trying to throw shade on his use of the term. I'm saying OF COURSE everybody calls him a socialist. Whether he's amended the term or not, he's still largely responsible for creating the situation where most politically aware people in our culture associate Bernie with some version of the word, "socialist".Sanders calls HIMSELF a socialist.TV pundits call that socialism, just like Rush Limbaugh calls leftists liberals like we're still having the same conversations we were in the '90's. Personally, I'm a firm believer in maintaining the precise definitions of our words and terms. Tools should be kept clean and optimally functional.Business bailouts aren't socialism. Social safety nets aren't socialism. You could argue that public education is socialistic, but as long as private educators are legally allowed to operate, it's still not socialism. Nationalizing industries is socialism.Well that the US is largely Socialist she would be right that Puerto Rico being a part of the US would be also.
When they say REALLY IDIOTIC garbage like this.....is there really any room for discussion ?
Again, unable to dispute. Where in capitalism do we find the government bailing out business? We already have programs that cover a large portion of people's health care. Universal health care would only expand on that.
We already have public education. Expanding that to higher education would only expand on that.
SHould I continue?
When a politician wants to "bail out" the poor it's call socialism. If we can agree that it is not, great.
Business bail outs are NOT capitalism though in any form.
That's all well and fine but classroom ideas rarely match up to reality. It wasn't just TV pundits calling Sanders a Socialist for arguing for safety nets for the poor. It was many doing that.
Business bail outs don't negate capitalism. Capitalism is just a derogatory term that Marxists came up with in the 20th century to describe economies of private ownership.
It may not "negate" capitalism but it is NOT capitalism.
Sorry, weren't we supposed to be using exact definitions? He calls himself a Democratic Socialist. Something basically the majority of people are in practice.
Here's the difference between a 'socialist' and a 'democratic socialist'
Democratic socialism is related, but what politicians like Sanders are pushing for is not akin to the authoritarian-style socialism in places like Venezuela.
Now are we to use actual definitions or not?
But yeah, if you're making the point that all sorts of people shit all over the proper usage of that term, I won't disagree. However, I will disagree with you conflating a word's common usage with "reality". The commonly held misconceptions of ignoramuses and simpletons does not reality make.
I say it doesn't negate capitalism because a system that bails out businesses, impoverished individuals, or anything in between can still be called capitalism. It just depends on whether or not their economy is privately owned. In the same way that taxing citizens to provide services doesn't qualify a nation as socialist, it also doesn't disqualify them from being capitalist.
Capitalism is specific about how when a business fails it fails and the vacuum gets filled by others.
If you really wanna get into it, add to that the fact that a lot of people on the right are dubious about whether or not Sanders is showing all of his ideological cards, given his affinity for the Soviet Union back in the day. Aside from the brand recognition, careless common usage of terms by the people labeling him, and potential ignorance of this new Democratic Socialist movement's comparisons to traditional socialism, you've also got a fair number of people who aren't convinced that dude isn't just a closet Marxist.
Capitalism isn't specific about anything. Again, capitalism is a derogatory term for private market economies, it's not a specific ideology.