I tell people that Bernie is a centrist and his policies are the bare minimum of acceptable compromises that should accept, but what we really should do is abolish billionaires and turn every company into a worker’s co-op
least socialist post on lemmy
Sorry to bring the news but…the rest of the world have been calling US Democrats right-wing and Republicans far-right for decades.
My dad used to joke that the US is the country of freedom, where you can choose between the right and the right.
The right does this and it seems to work for them.
“I’m not a Republican, I’m a centralist.” (Proceeds to list pro-republican things, bash Democrats, then talk about how weed is okay.)
Thinking gay people have human rights cancels out thinking black people don’t!
That’s what I’m doing for a long time now, but I just learned about the Overton Window haha.
Top tier username btw
I’m not just a centrist, I’m a conservative! I agree with Adam Smith, the father of Capitalism.
For instance, I agree with him that monopolies must be regulated or they will corrupt the government:
It is to sell the one as dear, and to buy the other as cheap as possible, and consequently to exclude, as much as possible, all rivals from the particular market where they keep their shop. The genius of the administration, therefore, so far as concerns the trade of the company, is the same as that of the direc- tion. It tends to make government subservient to the interest of monopoly, and consequently to stunt the natural growth of some parts, at least, of the surplus produce of the country, to what is barely sufficient for answering the demand of the company
…
They will employ the whole authority of government, and pervert the administration of Justice, in order to harass and ruin those who interfere with them in any branch of commerce, which by means of agents, either concealed, or at least not pub- licly avowed, they may choose to carry on.
–
I also agree with him that landlords are parasites and need to be heavily taxed:
As soon as the land of any country has all become private property, the landlords, like all other men, love to reap where they never sowed and demand a rent even for its natural produce.
A tax upon ground-rents would not raise the rents of houses. It would fall altogether upon the owner of the ground-rent, who acts always as a monopolist, and exacts the greatest rent which can be got for the use of his ground.
If you call yourself a captalist but don’t even believe in what Adam Smith said, are you really even a capitalist?
Nooooo, you’re supposed to quote something about “the invisible hand of the market” without context!
If you call yourself a captalist but don’t even believe in what Adam Smith said, are you really even a capitalist?
i’m a capitalist, but only to the extent that capitalism is the most effective mechanism of meeting the needs of a market. I think it’s fundamentally impossible to run an economic system in any way that is more optimized to the needs of it’s consumers than you can under capitalism, and that’s what i like about it.
It’s also true that there are some self regulating effects on the market. But that’s more complicated.
Though, just because i believe the market handles itself in most cases, doesn’t mean i believe it requires no regulation. That would be preposterous. I don’t want pure unregulated capitalism, but i don’t want socialism/communism either, i want both. Both is good.
So a mixed economy?
That didn’t stop the Christians
Sure, but people are a lot more fervent in their support of capitalism than christianity.
As a moderate conservative, I would like to see the end of private land ownership in a stateless, moneyless society.
As a moderate conservative, I believe in ownership and democracy. Therefore the people who work at a company should own it and have an equal vote in how it is run.
We may not agree on everything, but I support you. Let us seize the means of production together first. Afterward, we can sort out the details of our views on moderate conservatism.
As a moderate conservative, I believe in conserving natural, finite resources like oil and gas. I believe in making large investments into clean and renewable energy for all, so we can conserve the natural beauty of our land, just like God intended.
This one went past satire and is actually a good talking point
Wait… You don’t think the others are real good points?
What kind of terrible RINO are you?
So true
So I know a guy who has this as a core belief. He voted Republican until 2016 and bitched every day and pretty frequently wrote our Congress critters about how part of conservatism is being a good steward of the environment. He refused to vote for Trump. I’m not sure who he did vote for (my guess is no one) but he said he wouldn’t support that fucking moron who wants to allow toxic waste in our rivers.
He loves clean energy and is big on environmentalism (God gave us the earth to take care of and the science to do so). He’s also in a borderline cult church. I’m surprised there aren’t more church people who think they should take care of Earth. At least then we’d agree on one thing.
tell that guy that i, a staunch liberal, appreciate him, and wish more people were like him.
I’m a far right fringe militia extremist who was there on J6 (but I did not go inside) and I’d do it all again to shift the tax burden to those most able to pay it.
Same demographic here, strongly believe a free country means free healthcare.
Why were you there on Jan 6th. Did you really believe the election had been stolen?
Yes, from the people’s candidate, Bernie Sanders.
You weren’t there supporting Trump? Did you have a Bernie sign or something? That must have been popular with the Trump supporters.
I’m either being wooshed, or you need to read the thread and look for context cues…
Lol these are the kinda conservatives we need.
“I dream of society where I will be guillotined for being a conservative.”
~ Pierre-Joseph Proudhon
As a moderate conservative I believe an economic system that benefits few at the expense of the many is inherently unstable and radical.
Nice
As a hard line right winger I believe we should aim for a world where all forms of work can provide a dignified living
this is basically what everybody believes, and what everybody should unite on, the problem is that the right is currently enraptured by what can only be described as the “most elaborate con in history” as opposed to actual politics. The left is a complete clusterfuck of bullshit and idiots, but that’s another story for another day.
This is what would be considered a “traditionally right view of politics” and if that’s where your politics align, great for you. Take advantage of that as much as possible, however, avoid the modern american right as much as you physically can. They are a bastardized version of that flavor of right wing politics. They offer nothing, and don’t even espouse traditional right wing views.
That’s a great start! I’m curious how you reconcile that with other right wing views like free-market capitalism, smaller government, and deregulation? Also curious about those who either temporarily or permanently can’t work.
Yes exactly right! I love oil and I think we really need to make sure that everyone gets enough food and medicine so that they can learn about why it’s so great. If we get more money into schools and research we will be the best drillers on the planet. Right makes right!
I’m curious how you reconcile that with other right wing views like free-market capitalism, smaller government, and deregulation?
Read the OP again…
Yeah I realised this afterwards, but discussion is discussion I guess
Those are certainly some words on my screen, yes
Well obviously smaller government needs to get its ass out of people’s private health decisions and bedrooms, and stop helping other countries invade their neighbors or abuse their populace. Big waste of money! Then it should pull back funds from enforcing ridiculous outdated regulations like zoning and trespassing that restrict the American freedom to live where you want. Also, churches should participate in free-market capitalism like every other business, openly showing their books and chipping in exactly the same percentage of taxes, as should businesses of all sizes, with a clear and simple tax code. Loopholes are sneaky communist bullshit! And we need to get the tax brackets back to Reagan levels!
All those things are important yes of course, but as someone on the far right, I believe we need to focus on making sure the fundamental freedom and dignity of all people is guaranteed, before we fix those other things.
Under the “free market” a kid can make thousands of dollars unboxing or reviewing toys, sounds like someone slaving away at a minimum wage job should also be able to support themselves
I’m a centrist. I think we should have a maximum wealth cap set at 1000x the median household income. I am willing to do this via tax policy instead of the guillotine.
I was curious what the number would be. That’s $80,000,000 (fixed) in wealth. Seems pretty reasonable tbh.
The median household income is about $80k in the US. 1000x is $80 million.
I like this ratio because it both indexes things to inflation but also ties the allowable wealth of the wealthiest to the well being of the average family. Also, it’s still a very high amount. $80 million is still a ton of money.
Consider the highest paid salary workers, not CEOs, but actual workers. Think the most well paid doctors, lawyers, and other professional classes. Even if the best paid doctor in the country kept living like a college student their whole career. They make $1 million a year but live like a monk, saving and investing everything they can. And they do this from the time they graduate until they die of old age.
They would still struggle to hit a $80 million net worth by the time they die.
It is impossible to make that level of wealth by your own work alone. The only way you accrue a fortune greater than this is if you’re in the business of labor arbitrage - you are hiring people and siphoning off a large portion of the wealth they generate for yourself. A “doctor” who works a practice with 30 doctors underneath them isn’t really a doctor, they’re a business owner just like any other.
A major problem, if not THE major problem, with vast accumulations of wealth in the hands of a few is the vast political power such wealth gives.
In my defense, I went to an American public school
So did I!
There really should be a wealth cap. If you have more then 1000x the median income to your personal net worth then you don’t need it. Sorry not sorry.
They would likely find loops holes like they already do though…… le sigh…
They would likely find loops holes like they already do though…… le sigh…
there’s two big problems, either you find loopholes, or you just leave the country.
None the less, we need to do something about wealth hoarding if we want to have even a semblance of a democracy.
It might be too late for that. I hope not and if it is not, I don’t think we have long to turn it around before there is no way out.
Gonna build banks and, since corpos are people, they’ll have a net worth. When they reach the cap build another.
2 propositions. 1, making lawmakers job a minimum wage job so they have an incentive to raise it and feel the effect their policies have on the population. 2, capping a
PDGCEO salary to ~20x the lowest salary of his company.1 makes lawmakers more susceptible to corruption.
I see where you’re coming from, but it’s not as though refusing to implement #1 has done much for us so far. Trump and Elon are running around doing whatever they please already, and nobody who is actually capable of holding them accountable is willing to do it.
Sure, but you don’t want to make things even worse.
High salary (and as lawmaker you have a fairly high degree of responsibility so I think it’s fair) + very tight rules on accepting any kind of money, services, favours, etc… seems to work best.
Well if we’re talking about shit that will never pass… Then we should ban most instances of lawmakers who have business interests, ban working as a lobbyist, ban insider trading.
Then we could make their salary a multiple of the median wage of whatever district or state they represent.
and tie their retirement to social security instead of a separate fund.
1 means only the wealthy can become politicians.
congressional appointment should be handled like jury duty. “Dammit, I pulled congressional duty again.” the certainty of having to return to your old life would encourage you to make it better for non-politicians as well.
I disagree on that. Part of our problem is that those in government don’t really understand governance and the sustem is complex. That takes time and mentorship, a jury duty like system might make bribing harder, but it would make a functional government next to impossible. Age limits, I’m all for that - give em until they’re 70 (or something close) then no more government offices - congress, senate, pres, judgeships, etc. That and have fully publicly-funded elections with limited campaigning windows. No more 2-year presidential runs or congresspeople needing to fundraise and run for their entire term.
How would you go about enforcing it? What happens to the ceo whose wealth ticks about your 1000x threshold due to a good day on the stock market?
Those are policy details. A common fatal flaw among the left is obsessing over details and trying to pick apart any good idea. The wealth cap is philosophy statement. Obviously any policy needs rules to implement it. But that’s for legislators, not people discussing the idea itself. You shouldn’t attack a broad policy by getting lost in the minutia.
This happened in the 2020 Democratic Primary. All the candidates had these pointlessly elaborate policy documents and white papers that were immediately forgotten after the election.
Politics is not about obsessing over minutia. It’s unproductive to engage in such nit picking of something that is simply a broad policy vision.
I’m sure if you wanted to, you could answer your own question. How would YOU implement this wealth cap while addressing asset swings?
Hah, my question isn’t because I’m a fatally flawed leftist, it’s because I’m a programmer and weekly I get requests from executives that simply aren’t possible or at least feasible to implement.
Your entire comment sounds exactly like one of these hand wavy requests from the heavens where details don’t matter. The cherry on top was you flipping it back at me so that I’d attempt to expand on your ill thought through plan and make it work. I’m sure you do well in the corporate landscape.
Sounds reasonable to me.
“I don’t care what everyone else says, there’s no need to execute the wealthy en masse. Workers just need to seize the means of production.”
there is no means of production in services based economy, so unless you’re willing to go through total economic collapse, and rebuilding through all of that, to some extent globally, that’ll be quite the journey. And you’ll find it to be the answer to the question of “why hasn’t anything happened yet”
It’s because people like being able to buy things lmao. Maybe if this admin causes a depression of sorts, but i’m not confident on that being the case, it’s certainly a realistic possibility, but it doesn’t seem to be imminent right now.
Landlords don’t need to be drawn and quartered, that’s just going too far.
Drawn and thirded.
Drawn and halved.
Or maybe just dismembered without the drawing… They’ve been through enough…
I’m not into that hippie dippie bullshit, I’ve heard great arguments from both sides. But I suppose if forced to pick a flavor of Fully Automated Gay Space Communism, I’d probably pick the “Luxury” variety, like anyone.
Except, the wealthy will likely resist the recovery of what they stole from workers. SO executing at least the very worst of them should stay an option if necessary.
I’ve been doing that for years. I’ve been claiming to be a conservative and supporting things like universal healthcare. I even give it capitalist flair by saying that ensuring everyone has more money means I can then take that money by selling them shit they don’t need. How the hell am I supposed to sell my useless crap if everyone’s spending their money on rent?!
Ditto with stuff like housing the unhoused. I don’t want filthy drug addicts strewn about the streets taking up my park benches and constantly asking me for ‘bus money’! Get them houses so I don’t have to see them anymore! Also god I hate kids, especially when they’re just hanging around on the street being annoying and intimidating. Build some youth centres so they have somewhere to go and get them away from me!
Altruism through selfishness etc etc etc.
Conservatives should be the biggest supporters of the LGBTQIA+ community due to their record low use of abortion services.
It was never about being “pro life” with them, it was always about control over women’s bodies. The pro life thing is just an excuse. If you need proof then look at how they treat people after they’re no longer in utero.
i’d argue “control” is not a good in itself; who would seek that?
i’ve assumed these “pro-lifers” are actually trying to increase the birth-rate in a perverse desire to feed more wage-slaves to the capitalist machine.
If only they had coherent thoughts.
Universal healthcare is good, naturally, because it would reduce payroll expenses for businesses, letting them create more jobs, and be more competitive in the global market with lower prices. Universal healthcare is how we bring manufacturing back to the United States.
All that lowers crime, too. And a better educated population is a more proficient workforce, who can build more impressive stuff, do better science, and better cure and treat the diseases you or your family might eventually suffer from.
Yup, some people can only think in selfish terms so making your argument from that perspective will make it more attractive
You are on to something there, my friend.
“There’s no place for the state in the bedrooms of the nation”
When Pierre Trudeau said that in the 1960s, it was a thing that many conservatives believed. Who’d think it was possible that in 2025 we’d be wanting the conservatives to be like the conservatives from the 1960s.
I’ve noticed women on bumble do this. Put moderate as their political affiliation, and list black lives matter and LGBTQ+ and such as their causes. Before this post I would think “elected moderates aren’t doing anything for your causes at best,” but my perspective as I swipe left on them anyway is a little different now
My friend in her 30s avoids dating apps because on those apps, either the guy calls himself a centralist and then wants a trad wife and a woman to know her place, or he calls himself not politically active and only listens to Joe Rogan for the discussions nobody else talks about.
Where my single male friends who are good dudes are afraid every woman is just a OF influencer.
I feel sorry for the dating scene.
that’s a left leaning moderate position. A far left position would be some shit like straight communism/socialism
The moderate left is more liberal in essence.
Or abandon the political labeling system entirely and make it socially outdated by learning to confront someone labeling themselves by responding to them with something along the lines of: “Why would you allow someone else to tell you what it is you believe in? You don’t get to decide what being a conservative/liberal means. Someone else decides that. You aren’t part of it. So why would you let whoever that is tell you what you should think?”
Change the meaning of what it means to even use the labels and the weapon of using the labels to divide us no longer functions.
It has been dismantled, and they will have to come up with something else.
And just because they will eventually invent a new weapon, does not make it pointless. This is just the never ending metaphorical arms race we are all living in, but it gets easier once you see it for what it is.
Because the labels are used for a shortcut to understanding. I really don’t want to spend ten minutes laying the ground work to have a discussion only to find out i am talking to a neocon.
Seems like a waste of time.
You are not that person. You are you and this would be a decision you make, not some other person. The question is, do you feel like a simple label, controlled by someone else, able to shift from under your feet without your input, is capable of succinctly summing you up to another person? Is your life, your thoughts, your experiences, so capable of being put into such a box, to your satisfaction?
Or are you more dynamic, storied, multi-faceted, vibrant, and in charge of your own thoughts, than a single word defined by a perfect stranger, could possibly describe? And I don’t mean your external self (visual appearance), I mean the person you are inside your own head.
I don’t know you, but I’d prefer to think you’re probably the latter…
But that’s for you to decide.
The label may be formulated by someone else with what ever agenda. But it’s up to you to accept the label as is. If you want to use the label, but explain exceptions, then you are expected to provide that context. I don’t see why that should be a problem
If someone else attaches a label to you, then you’re going to have to explain why you differ.
The use of the label is too short cut to understanding, so if after you lay out your beliefs if someone calls you a nazi, and you counter that you don’t argue for the supremacy of germany, understanding using the label is still acheived, and may still be warranted
In essence, all language is labels on understanding. You start with the simple and dig into the minutia only when needed.
Why big word when small word do?
Nothing you ever do will allow you to escape labels. Your gender is a box you’re put in by society. Your skin color is, too. It’s all made up bs. You’ll never escape it.
Sorry but this is dumb. I am the one who decides if a label applies to me or not. I won’t call myself an anarchist because my beliefs are not described by this word. I will call myself a communist because it describes what I think is true, even if I need to specify (“I’m a communist but…”).
There’s no one telling me what I believe in, and if a label changes meaning over time or my views change and it no longer applies to my thinking I will just stop using it.
It’s the same when you use any other word to describe yourself. “I’m a musician” until I stop playing. “I’m not a painter” until I pick up a brush. “I’m long haired” until I cut my hair.
It is gonna be very hard unbrainwash everyone. I was even taught that shit in school, so one dimensional
“Why would you allow someone else to tell you what it is you believe in? You don’t get to decide what being a conservative/liberal means. Someone else decides that. You aren’t part of it. So why would you let whoever that is tell you what you should think?”
the short answer is because the agree with it.
The better question is asking them whether they want to agree with something someone else said once, or whether or not they want to have their own belief foundation, their own principle system, and their own way to derive an answer to a problem.
The problem with modern day politics is that nobody, almost nobody is willing to engage critically with the problems at hand, to determine a real, functional solution to the problem, or at least, the best possible solution they can come up with. Everybody is perfectly fine and content with saying whatever the funny man on the screen tells them, and that’s the end of the story.
This is literally what I’ve done my whole life. I have never identified as a leftist, always as a centrist, it’s not my fault other people don’t understand where the center is.
A lot of „leftist“ beliefs are really just basic human decency and that’s already too much for some people
It’s less a sneaky trick and more a condition imposed on us by political circumstance. “I can’t really tell you my ideological affiliation because I’m afraid you’re allergic to it” isn’t a good sign for your chances at persuasion.
Even then, words are wind.
I’m much less concerned with the professed views of this or that terminally online trillionaire gooner internet celebrity than I am with what said gooner is currently ordering his gooner gang to do to the US Treasury system. If he was running around in a Che Guevera T-shirt while he ripped the copper wiring out of the federal government, it wouldn’t make me feel any different.
Maybe hes a different kind of socialist, the not very socialist but very national kind.
Or maybe he’s just a carny, who’ll say anything to separate a fool from their money.
That comparison is insulting to carnies.
if only there was a simple way he could clarify, say, while making a speech, and do it twice just to be very very clear.
deleted by creator
I like the method of pushing the left further left through extreme demands.
Legalize abortions until age 5!
Mandatory puberty suppressors for all teens!
Reparations for anyone except white straight abled males!
Make Israel a world culture site whose government is run by the UN!
Behead all billionaires!
100% inheritance tax!
No religious education for those under 18!
Socialized medicine for all people and their pets!
I’m for 2 through
68. Though I would have liked #1 to use as incentive to get my kids to listen.“Just remember we can still abort you, so this room better be cleaned up.”
Edit oops miscounted
“I brought you into this world, I can take you out”
But 7 and 8 are the most reasonable
Doh, miscounted
the government will finally give me a state mandated fursona (p.s. i am a tea party republican)
Make Israel a world culture site whose government is run by the UN!
Are you Tom Clancy?
The last three are just plain sensible, though! Okay, maybe not socialize veterinary medicine, although we could probably afford it if we beheaded the billionaires…
Arm the homeless
Legalize meth
I think you’re too extreme. We need to be reasonable if we’re to be taken seriously. 17 for religious educated is better suited.
