I know, but that’s slowly changing. And I think that’s more true among the most politically engaged people. But that’s true of every group, if you go to in person conservative groups you’ll only find the worst of the worst on the farthest right. I’m not convinced it’s not the same phenomenon with socialists. But idk, I’m just talking out of my ass at this point honestly.
But that inherently means liberal, no? I was under the impression that social democrats supported private ownership of the means of production. If you believe that should be illegal doesn’t that mean you can’t be a social Democrat?
Sure but if you are a cooperativist you don’t think that’s illegal. You think private groups should be able to own the means of production. Shareholder capitalism just where workers are the shareholders.
The end of private property means there is only public property. It means the entire circle of all groups which call themselves socialists collectively vote on how work and distribution are accomplished. Note I didn’t say state, because “true socialism” is international.
It’s a big big BIG philosophy, not a minute change in how things are done relative to the status quo. If you believe in reformism, where you make one change to the status quo, like replacing companies with cooperatives, you likely have more in common with social democrats than socialists.
My only reason for doing all this debating is to try and tell all the “market socialists” on this page, who I used to agree with, to stop using the socialist label, BECAUSE you will go out in the world to socialist groups and find yourself in very radical spaces, not reformist spaces. You will be hanging out with people who want to violently upend the global economic order, not collaborating with others in an attempt to politically change nations.
Instead you want to go hang out with unionists and socdems and cooperativists.
Fair enough, I guess I find myself in an awkward place between socdem and socialist then, but the more radical end of the reformist spectrum fits. Not sure what to call that, other than reformism vaguely inspired by more libertarian socialism and sub-municipalism.
Personally I don’t think cooperativists would have any push back at all in socdem circles. Germany and France are socdem and they are basically national-unionist as it is, basically having labor boards which act as unions in all companies everywhere, and which guarentee co-determination.
From my study of history the only problem that socdems actually have is they tend to get lazy, and don’t defend their gains or keep pushing reform. Socialists do this too they just wont admit it, look at Cuba and the USSR and how many children wanted to emmigrate to capitalist countries.
I know, but that’s slowly changing. And I think that’s more true among the most politically engaged people. But that’s true of every group, if you go to in person conservative groups you’ll only find the worst of the worst on the farthest right. I’m not convinced it’s not the same phenomenon with socialists. But idk, I’m just talking out of my ass at this point honestly.
We need a new word for non Marxist socialists. Social democrats is that word.
But that inherently means liberal, no? I was under the impression that social democrats supported private ownership of the means of production. If you believe that should be illegal doesn’t that mean you can’t be a social Democrat?
Sure but if you are a cooperativist you don’t think that’s illegal. You think private groups should be able to own the means of production. Shareholder capitalism just where workers are the shareholders.
The end of private property means there is only public property. It means the entire circle of all groups which call themselves socialists collectively vote on how work and distribution are accomplished. Note I didn’t say state, because “true socialism” is international.
It’s a big big BIG philosophy, not a minute change in how things are done relative to the status quo. If you believe in reformism, where you make one change to the status quo, like replacing companies with cooperatives, you likely have more in common with social democrats than socialists.
My only reason for doing all this debating is to try and tell all the “market socialists” on this page, who I used to agree with, to stop using the socialist label, BECAUSE you will go out in the world to socialist groups and find yourself in very radical spaces, not reformist spaces. You will be hanging out with people who want to violently upend the global economic order, not collaborating with others in an attempt to politically change nations.
Instead you want to go hang out with unionists and socdems and cooperativists.
Fair enough, I guess I find myself in an awkward place between socdem and socialist then, but the more radical end of the reformist spectrum fits. Not sure what to call that, other than reformism vaguely inspired by more libertarian socialism and sub-municipalism.
Personally I don’t think cooperativists would have any push back at all in socdem circles. Germany and France are socdem and they are basically national-unionist as it is, basically having labor boards which act as unions in all companies everywhere, and which guarentee co-determination.
From my study of history the only problem that socdems actually have is they tend to get lazy, and don’t defend their gains or keep pushing reform. Socialists do this too they just wont admit it, look at Cuba and the USSR and how many children wanted to emmigrate to capitalist countries.