Jump to content
Required Reading for any Longhorn ×

Democratic Socialism VS Progressivism

Hugo Stiglitz

By Hugo Stiglitz
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23367

Posted
Posted

These two ideologies are often conflated, mostly by right wing media, but they are not the same.  They’re not necessarily mutually exclusive but they are not identical. 

The only similarities of substance I see are the egalitarian values behind the policy and administrative approaches to government and society.  

Discuss...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest Lobo

Guest Lobo

Posted
Posted

Socialism is mainly an economic doctrine.  Progressivism tends to envelop more societal ills like minority rights, the environment, and regulatory oversight of industry.  

I'm sure you'll me that's wrong and that I've been spoonfed lies by FoxNews, but I'm mainly going off alt.right sources like the Dictionary.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13225

Posted
Posted
11 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Nah, that’s pretty good.  

I’d argue progressivism allows for more breathing room for fiscal conservatism, smaller reliance on the welfare state, and decentralization of power within the Federal Government.  

Agreed, which is why progressivism is inferior.

986.jpg

Progressivism doesn't have firm priors. There isn't really a goal beyond, "Let's improve this situation somewhat" with a vision that extends maybe 30 minutes beyond the present. It doesn't have set explanations for events and, as a result, can't be anything but mostly reactive (but not necessarily reactionary).

Socialism attempts to diagnose the problems in the world and offer a solution to those problems. While not actually utopian, it does have a longer-range vision of better/desirable futures. Socialism tells a story about human civilization and socialization, and it reveals historical trends that tie to the present and show the future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zavala

Zavala 1384

Posted
Posted (edited)

Democratic Socialism is a scam.

 “An economic system in which the production and distribution of goods are controlled substantially by the government rather than by private enterprise, and in which cooperation rather than competition guides economic activities.”

So you get a simple majority of brainwashed fuckheads who think the government knows best and will "give away" the resources of the worker to the non-worker. It all collapses every time it's tried.

Millennials have no idea what socialism, capitalism, or fascism is. 

The only fucked part about Capitalism is croney capitalism. Get rid of the croneys,  the market will handle the distribution of goods.

Edited by Zavala
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TexArcher

TexArcher 38076

Posted
Posted
28 minutes ago, Zavala said:

The only fucked part about Capitalism is croney capitalism. Get rid of the croneys,  the market will handle the distribution of goods.

Capitalism has always resulted in oligarchies who control most of the power and most of the money, then work together to keep it that way.  Crony capitalism is the end goal of all capitalists.  It's only a bad deal if you're one of the 99% who aren't born rich enough or willing/able to crush enough competitors to get a seat at the table.

The part I've always found ironic is that the whole point of social contracts was to get us away from the Hobbesian state of man.  Now people try to tell us that pure, unregulated capitalism is somehow noble and American, putting us right back in the same cut-throat, eat-or-be-eaten dilemma.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SmokeyTheBear

SmokeyTheBear 5568

Posted
Posted
27 minutes ago, Zavala said:

Democratic Socialism is a scam.

 “An economic system in which the production and distribution of goods are controlled substantially by the government rather than by private enterprise, and in which cooperation rather than competition guides economic activities.”

So you get a simple majority of brainwashed fuckheads who think the government knows best and will "give away" the resources of the worker to the non-worker. It all collapses every time it's tried.

Millennials have no idea what socialism, capitalism, or fascism is. 

The only fucked part about Capitalism is croney capitalism. Get rid of the croneys,  the market will handle the distribution of goods.

But what about Social Democracy? Few want Democratic Socialism or communism or whatever box the Right tries to put around the progressive Left. Unchecked capitalism simply does not produce socially healthy results. It may drive innovation faster than other systems, but not in ways that provide long term stability for society as a whole (see: healthcare, food/ag, oil/gas,...just about any industry). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31554

Posted
Posted

I am, politically, a stateless person.  The description of TRs Progressive, aka Bull Moose, Party seems to fit where I find myself.

But in the end, they're all just words.

I like the fact that Warren says she's a fan of the markets, just not the completely un- and underregulated markets.  Being a fan of markets seems to preclude being labeled a "Socialist" of any stripe.

Of course, any particular piece of legislation can be slotted as "more socialistic" or "less socialistic," but being a proponent of more socialistic laws doesn't make one a Socialist.  To my mind, that means someone who favors government ownership and control of capital and the means of production, and that's no bueno.

My father in law is Hungarian, born right before WWII and fled on foot during the 56 Revolution.The Social Democrats of the time, who were definitely on the "more socialistic" end of things, joined up with the Soviet backed communo-socialist party to create the Hungarian Workers Party, and everything went to shit.   So he absolutely loathes Social Democrats and sees them as a one-way ticket down a slippery slope into Soviet communism.  I can't argue with his experiences, but I don't think it's likely to happen here. obviously.  Those words have power for some people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DixonHur

DixonHur 11394

Posted
Posted
11 hours ago, EuroHorn said:

Meanwhile the DOW closes at an all time high...

Giving free money to corporations so they can buy back their stock moves the price higher, both by creating the illusion of demand, and by increasing scarcity.

Trump's economy is a house of cards and it won't be pretty when it comes tumbling down.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fozzz

Fozzz 152

Posted
Posted (edited)

"Progressive" and "progressivism" when not used to refer to the progressive era is a fairly nebulous term.  Maybe a better term would be Brandeisian capitalist.  I would also be hesitant to fit Warren into that mold given that she was a straight up market fundamentalist until relatively recently.  

Edited by Fozzz
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DixonHur

DixonHur 11394

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Fozzz said:

"Progressive" and "progressivism" when not used to refer to the progressive era is a fairly nebulous term.  Maybe a better term would be Brandeisian capitalist.  I would also be hesitant to fit Warren into that mold given that she was a straight up market fundamentalist until relatively recently.  

I don't know enough about her history to call bullshit, but can you please cite some examples of her support for an unregulated economy?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fozzz

Fozzz 152

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, DixonHur said:

I don't know enough about her history to call bullshit, but can you please cite some examples of her support for an unregulated economy?

""I was a Republican because I thought that those were the people who best supported markets. I think that is not true anymore," Warren said. "I was a Republican at a time when I felt like there was a problem that the markets were under a lot more strain. It worried me whether or not the government played too activist a role."

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zavala

Zavala 1384

Posted
Posted
30 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Magical thinking.

 

Right, it's better to think an all powerful government controlling the economic system will have less croneyism. It's DEMOCRATIC! 

38 minutes ago, TexArcher said:

Capitalism has always resulted in oligarchies who control most of the power and most of the money, then work together to keep it that way.  Crony capitalism is the end goal of all capitalists.  It's only a bad deal if you're one of the 99% who aren't born rich enough or willing/able to crush enough competitors to get a seat at the table.

The part I've always found ironic is that the whole point of social contracts was to get us away from the Hobbesian state of man.  Now people try to tell us that pure, unregulated capitalism is somehow noble and American, putting us right back in the same cut-throat, eat-or-be-eaten dilemma.

Capitalism has caused a ton of innovation though competition. Somebody getting rich with high prices on a product that has good demand? People are free to find a way to make a superior product at less cost and get rich.

Capitalism and technological innovation has caused the entire human species to be pulled out of poverty.  

I don't understand what the motivating factor would be to improve technologically if the government runs the economy and the prices are all controlled. Or the motivating factor to work harder if it doesn't mean you will get rewarded. 

To me, I think the financial sector needs to be regulated more heavily. The spending power of the dollar is killed by so much fractional reserve lending putting so much more $$ into the economy. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fozzz

Fozzz 152

Posted
Posted

Another point, I agree with Chomsky that the Soviet Union was a state capitalist society.  Socialism, at its core, is the subordination of markets to democratic society.  While the means of production were not privately owned in the Soviet Union, they were subject to party - not democratic - control.  To argue that the Soviet Union is a failure of socialism would be also to argue that the Soviet Union was a democratic society.  The soviets merely exchanged one master for another.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DixonHur

DixonHur 11394

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, Fozzz said:

""I was a Republican because I thought that those were the people who best supported markets. I think that is not true anymore," Warren said. "I was a Republican at a time when I felt like there was a problem that the markets were under a lot more strain. It worried me whether or not the government played too activist a role."

That was 30 years ago.  Not sure I'd categorize that as "relatively recent".  Also not sure just admitting to being a Republican, and thinking there was over-regulation qualifies as Ayn Rand level market fundamentalism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Turkleton

Turkleton 145

Posted
Posted
28 minutes ago, DixonHur said:

Giving free money to corporations so they can buy back their stock moves the price higher, both by creating the illusion of demand, and by increasing scarcity.

Trump's economy is a house of cards and it won't be pretty when it comes tumbling down.

 

When you say "Giving free money to corporations" do you actually mean not taken money away from corporations?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
HtownHorn

HtownHorn 14786

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, DixonHur said:

Giving free money to corporations so they can buy back their stock moves the price higher, both by creating the illusion of demand, and by increasing scarcity.

Trump's economy is a house of cards and it won't be pretty when it comes tumbling down.

 

I thought this was still Obama's economy. He says so in every speech he gives.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Crusher

Crusher 127

Posted
Posted
28 minutes ago, F250 said:

Socialism is evil because the government becomes tyrannical when it interferes in the market. Except when Trump does it, that's different.

 

 

The US Government has always interfered with the market.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_United_States_antitrust_law

https://www.justice.gov/atr/antitrust-case-filings-alpha

Antitrust law is all about keeping wanna be Oligarchs from completely dominating the free market and killing the little guys who may have a better way of doing things.

The USA has never been a pure 100% capitalistic society. It has for 243 years tried to combine the very best of Socialism and Capitalism. We just can't allow it to get too far out of wack to one side or the other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...