But those aren’t socialism. They’re rich people jerking each other off while laughing in the face of us low socioeconomic peasants.
But wages aren’t socialism either.
And health care and food programs also aren’t socialism, they’re social programs, which are very different things from socialism.
🤣
Don’t be poor - problem solved!
No lie detected.
deleted by creator
Socialism is when the government provides all the jobs, healthcare, benefits, and basically owns the important industries glances over at the defense budget
The US military is one if the most socialist organizations.
deleted by creator
Rename Social benefits as subsidiaries it should then pass though the budget.
Funny his socialism seems to sound like a negative word in the us, while capitalism has the sale bad connotation in the mind of many Europeans !
He who controls the narrative…
If it is available to all it is socialism. If it is only available to the wealthy then it is theft of national resources or graft.
Rightists: “Socialism is when the poors get any manner of social benefit.”
Never mind that the poors are the primary source of the funds for said benefit. We live in a system where the rich control a system that allows them to plunder from the poor and funnel those funds to themselves.
Capitalism is theft, and theft is capitalism. Capitalism is good.
But pooling our collective resources for the general benefit of all us… that’s bad. That’s socialism.
How DARE the plebes be allowed to spend their money on themselves when some multimillionaires that destroyed their billion dollar businesses need a bigger yacht and a fourth European vacation home!?
🎶 The global network of capital essentially functions To separate the worker from the means of production! 🎶
https://youtu.be/oDQXFNWuZj8?si=zBHjeAQ_TK88HCIj (stay tuned for the second half)
But the workers literally control the means of production. We could decide not to turn on the machines until those with the capital give us more of it. That’s called a strike. There’s a couple in the U.S. that appear to be going well. I’m hopeful that other executives will figure out that they must help the workers or that more strikes occur to help them learn that lesson.
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/biden-signs-bill-block-us-railroad-strike-2022-12-02/
Lets see how long we the peasants are permitted to use that privilege, now that the people are emboldened to utilize it again. If history is any guide, the government step in to kneecap them if they come to meaningfully effect shareholder profit.
Oh this is so unfair. We have had an expansion of labor rights this year, after the rail strike was blocked. Also the rail strike did have some wins despote being blocked.
I mean you can make it illegal, but the more people realize they have no incentive to work themselves ragged for next to nothing, the angrier they get and fight back. That’s what we’re seeing now with the highest level of union support in decades.
It’s just my opinion, but I think the damn is officially broken in the US now that we’ve had so many major strikes. I don’t think you can really turn things back to how they were. Not immediately.
Unfortunately things will only escalate if there isn’t some compromise here. The greedy will continue to fight it. However I’m sure many realize that if workers’ don’t see some improvements in our current environment, it will require a much more openly violent state than we currently have to keep workers in line.
I’m not sure the majority of those in government are willing move towards that yet as it’s inherently unstable. Hopefully they’ll be smart about it.
Only a matter of time before striking becomes illegal. Nothing is going to happen unless a general strike happens among all industries.
How exactly do you force people to work? I mean you could make striking Illegal and force me into work but I’m not going to. I’ll just fuck everything up…
What do you think for-profit prisons and state penitentiary are for? Look up the exemptions from the slavery amendment.
The same way Texas did its abortion bounty scheme or Florida made it ok to run protestors over. Empower the chuds to enact violence, maybe lock one or two up for going too far and call it a day, while nothing is actually done to stop the violence.
Well, it’s not wrong. But for the wrong reasons.
some people called it back them, but politicians still did their thing
And then you have the capitalism sycophants that come and intentionally muddy the waters in bad faith by being pedants and demanding the term only apply to the oldest, largely outdated definition of socialism, in order to derail the conversation in exactly the same way the gun nuts intentionally derail gun control conversations in bad faith by being pedents about the term “assault rifle.”
Because language, definitions, and terms don’t evolve constantly. A living language is static.
Yond’s wherefore we continueth to talketh to one anoth’r liketh this.
(That’s why we still talk to each other like this.)
There’s being pedantic and then there’s insisting people use terms precisely. “Socialism” has multiple established meanings which can conflict with each other and sabotage communication when there’s ambiguity about which you’re trying to use. I personally try to avoid terms like that entirely for that reason, it’s a waste of time to sit around clarifying misunderstandings like that.
Socialism is when free money.
When poor people get free money.
I mean, they’re kinda right. Taking money out of society to give to the rich isn’t socialism.
When the government does stuff, it’s socialism. And if the government does more stuff, its more socialism. And if the government does a whole lot of stuff? Its communism.
None of those statements are socialism
Fund the property, not the citizen. /s
