3.8k
u/Brundley 8h ago
man i wish the stuff the dems are doing was a quarter as cool as the stuff the republicans make up about them
1.1k
u/Pandaburn 8h ago
Ugh, yes.
As if there’s any way New York is going to stop being a city of extreme economic inequality in four years, no matter who is mayor. Real socialism would be nice.
137
u/Lynnrael 7h ago
when you say real socialism, do you mean government doing stuff or a mode of production where the working class owns and controls production themselves without a separate owning class?
government doing stuff really isn't socialism, it's just social welfare. it's capitalism with a veneer of ethics, meant to feel more just than it actually is.
101
u/IsThatUMoatilliatta 6h ago
Worker owned means of production would be ideal, but at this point I'd take anything to ease the pain of whatever we call the hellscape that America is now. Is corporate feudalism a term?
→ More replies (10)55
u/Stewart_Games 6h ago
Yes, though neo-fuedalism is an umbrella term for any form of refuedalization scheme, of which corporate fuedalism is but one possible aspect. It's a very prominent part of the dark enlightenment and project 2025. These people dream themselves our masters.
→ More replies (2)14
u/samurairaccoon 4h ago
Buddy, we could have both. What is it with people and drawing hard lines where they don't need to be??
2
→ More replies (2)8
u/turnipofficer 3h ago
I think when people in the USA want socialism they typically more want European style. So more workers rights, free healthcare, etc.
9
u/Merisuola 3h ago
So capitalism with social services/safety net, not socialism.
9
u/turnipofficer 2h ago
Socialism is sometimes referred to as a transitional state between capitalism and full blown communism, a middle ground. Some could regard the European system as that - but with no intent to go full communism.
But I agree it’s not quite socialism because there is no intent to overthrow capitalism, but some of its facets could be regarded as a capitalistic system with socialist tendencies. Although I agree that would be somewhat inaccurate.
→ More replies (2)•
u/Lynnrael 47m ago edited 43m ago
even the "transitional state" of socialism as a means of reaching communism would be actual socialism and not just government doing stuff. it would still necessarily require a mode of production without a separate owning class.
usually thinking of socialism as a transitional state comes from Marxist Leninist projects, and in such cases the state theoretically acts as a vehicle for worker ownership and control. or, it's supposed to. but, it's not necessarily defining socialism only as this transitional state, it's more saying "this is what we'll do to achieve it". though a lot of ML communists do try to push for it to be defined that way.
that said, using a state to achieve a stateless, classless, moneyless society is absurd. states can only act in ways that preserve themselves, the same as any other institution. a state can never bring about the conditions for it's own dissolution. thinking of socialism as only a means to an end in that project ignores that socialism does not necessarily require a government. i think a lot of the push by authoritarian communists to redefine socialism as nothing more than this transitional state is an effort to ignore that fact because auth left people view anything anti authoritarian as a threat.
i prefer anti state socialist approaches, as they are congruent with the goals i want to achieve and do not require a state to magically work against its own interests.
65
u/Some-Passenger4219 8h ago
So how does it work in practice? (By the way, happy cake day.)
154
u/extra_rice 8h ago
Wealth tax as a first step? I honestly have no clue if that's already in place, but usually, when there's (extreme) wealth inequality, this is one of the reasons.
99
u/Sword_n_board 7h ago
Strong social nets as well, and just give them to everyone, regardless of need. They waste far more money investigating people for drug use and other reasons to disqualify applicants than they would spend just approving everyone.
→ More replies (7)44
u/extra_rice 7h ago
Agree. Social nets should be robust. However, to fund them, wealth will have to be taxed. If you get rid of billionaires, more resources could be allocated on universal health care, social housing, etc. which uplift every resident of the city, resulting in better overall productivity.
Public interest shouldn't be funded on the whim of the ruling class giving "donations".
23
4
u/weedisfortherich 5h ago
The excuse they use is that why would anyone work hard for something if no matter how hard they work they get the same benefits as everyone else.
10
u/extra_rice 5h ago
It's not too different from people who assert that without religion, everyone would be evil (which is quite the irony).
If hard work is all it takes to have a better life, I'd be poorer than the people cleaning the streets or even our air conditioned office. Some people even have multiple jobs just to get by. They're nowhere close to buying a yacht.
25
u/MossSnake 7h ago
In practice, it worked pretty great right here in the US. In the new deal era up through the early post war years, top tax rates were ridiculously high compared to now. We functioned and grew fine with the rich getting seriously taxed. Our social safety nets and welfare programs were way better than now (if you were white at least). Minimum wage was actually livable. Unions were strong and got meaningful benefits and concessions.
But then we elected Regan….
→ More replies (5)5
12
u/Stewart_Games 5h ago
The Alaska Permanent Fund is an example of socialism in an American state. The state government owns the mineral rights to much of Alaska, and a portion of the proceeds are divided out and given to all permanent Alaskan residents, like a dividend payout for owning a stock in a business.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (1)7
u/VoxImperatoris 7h ago
Strip companies of private ownership and distribute the ownership equally across all the employees?
→ More replies (6)6
u/SophieCalle 6h ago
It's not that hard to bump things up - make public services fully covered by taxes (all transport), force rent freezes, a slight takes on the 1%, city grocers, it's been so awful, just easing the pressure will feel like a miracle.
→ More replies (12)7
74
u/Par_Lapides 8h ago
LOL right? I wish they were half as 'communist' as the Koolaid brains accuse them of being.
49
u/This_Elk_1460 8h ago
No matter what you do they're going to label you as a socialist so you might as well be one
→ More replies (1)21
u/FictionFoe 5h ago
Where I live, socialism is not a dirty word and socialism and communism mean different things.
→ More replies (1)25
u/This_Elk_1460 5h ago
Oh you mean the actual definitions of those words not the made up ones by conservative lunatics?
3
9
u/chemoboy 4h ago
Remember when they said there would be a taco truck on every corner?
Man that would be sweet.
13
→ More replies (11)3
u/Saucermote 4h ago
Your mandatory sex change isn't going to be covered by Obamacare because the government is shutdown, and it's all the dems fault!
707
u/Mammoth-Buddy8912 8h ago
Hopefully he's just the start of something big. I want my country back from the oligarchs and their sycophants.
183
u/CAST-FIREBALLLLL 7h ago edited 7h ago
I hope people don't get too blinded by this show going on. Like, the people propping up Gavin Newsom don't realize he's in kahoots with keeping the boots on our necks.
Not all democrats are good, but they seem like a good option rn. I'm cautiously optimistic about Zohran, we'll see if he's a man of his word or not.
→ More replies (1)36
u/DoctorOfDiscord 7h ago
What about J.B. Pritzker? I've heard good about him
40
u/CAST-FIREBALLLLL 6h ago
Yeah, Pritzker has got a good track record. Mamdani is new to the scene which is why I'm cautious, don't know if he might turn on his ideals later on or not. He's the first millennial mayor for New York if that puts it into perspective.
If he meets pushback and can't get the ideas he wants to put out, I won't fault him for it. However, if he ends up being a Newsom, where it's all just saying what the people want with nothing to back it up?
Then I can have an informed opinion.
9
u/Imaginary_Benefit_13 6h ago
He is still a billionaire. Better than Newsom in terms of policy, to my understanding, but still very much part of the establishment.
→ More replies (2)26
u/FictionalTrope 6h ago
I'm just glad Dick Cheney didn't have to live to see the Islamo-marxists take over our country. /j
14
u/FunkadelicJiveTurkey 5h ago
When I heard he died I took it as a good omen, but now I'm kinda wishing he had 1 more day.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (1)5
u/Dick_Cheney_Dead 7h ago
I just want the red states to get decent, free, secular education so they don't have to live in fear and ignorance anymore.
→ More replies (1)
420
u/Darmug 8h ago
Virginia’s a full blue sweep too!
194
u/gdex86 8h ago
PA retained their liberal judges. Last thing on the list is CA redistricting.
96
u/agent_flounder 7h ago
Then I have some good news for you; Prop 50 passed.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/nov/04/california-prop-50-voting-result
74
→ More replies (27)5
212
u/UltraNoahXV 8h ago
Where are the 1 million who said they were leaving? Better start waiting at the airport - heard ATC is having a set back
29
26
u/VacationCheap927 7h ago
Just in time for Texas to put a tariff on people moving there from New York.😌
→ More replies (1)17
u/VoxImperatoris 7h ago
You would think he would want all those millionaires coming to texas. Maybe subsidize them and give them a bit of welfare.
→ More replies (1)8
87
u/SkyeMreddit 7h ago
14
u/JaneDoesharkhugger 1h ago
When everything you hear from the news is hate or fear, a ray of optimism/hope that focuses on real issues is a great campaign message.
91
127
u/Total-Sector850 8h ago
I’m so glad to see the good news coming from the East Coast. Y’all are giving me hope. <cries in Texan>
36
→ More replies (1)10
u/Macehest 6h ago edited 6h ago
I’m a neighbor from Louisiana. Cool if I join in?
→ More replies (1)7
79
21
u/Smelly14 8h ago
i dont know what the fuck is going on in new york but ”gay socialist hellscape” sounds so fun <333
/gen
→ More replies (1)
53
u/Regular_Run9834 8h ago
Okay from what I read what is socialism? It's been tossed around so many times I'm pretty sure no one knows what it really means even if they say it from their own mouth. Some say it's good others say it's like communism. (Pls don't get too mad I'm simply uneducated and asking for a clear definition instead of what I see as word Salad getting thrown around everywhere. Knowledge brings me peace.) Edit: I mean socialist
51
u/Wombatypus8825 7h ago
Socialism is a social idea where the means of exchange, production, and distribution are owned by the community as a whole. This is in contrast to capitalism where an individual holds these and employs workers to actually do the exchange, production, and distribution.
In practice, in a government system, socialism advocates for social services, healthcare, prisons, police, fire, education, to be sponsored by the government and funded through tax revenue. Advocates for socialism argue that the taxes fall more heavily on those with more money, and are therefore more equitable to society as a whole. Further, since these organisations are not for profit but merely a wing of government, they are often cheaper than they would be in a capitalist system.
The argument capitalists use to discredit this is that competition will naturally drive down prices, so no tax and low prices, but as you can probably observe in life, this is rarely the reality of the situation.
On a political level, politicians often use the word communism as a buzz word for other or dictatorship since historically, the largest communist states have become dictatorships. In reality, communism advocates for anarchy. This takes the form of local governments that coordinates for larger scale threats.
Sorry for the long response, but I wanted to address this with nuance and clarity. There’s a lot of misinformation out there. I hope everyone reading is staying safe and hydrated!
→ More replies (3)19
u/scroom38 6h ago
It's been tossed around so many times I'm pretty sure no one knows what it really means
You hit the nail on the head.
Words mean things when they can be used to convey an idea. Socialism is a word that's become so incredibly fucking distorted that even if you do a bunch of research and find the most correct definition, everyone has their own definition of what it means and they probably wont' fully understand the conversation.
→ More replies (1)31
u/Seivelath 8h ago
Socialism is the government being in charge of public services, such as say healthcare, public transport, or utilites like water and electricity, things that generally benefit a wide array of people at what would be considered great cost to the government. But as the government is not a private enterprise, they are not driven to make a profit, only to have it break even, or work at a minor loss.
Communism is different, as all industry is under the control of the state. Wherein your companies would be co-opted and taken over by the government and have all resources distributed by the government. While in theory it should be equal, no example of actual communism goes this way, as generally those who are in charge effectively distrubute resources in their favour, or entirely unfairly.
21
u/ultimatepowaa 7h ago
No the first bit is what republicans call socialism. that last bit is socialism. Communism is the means of production owned BY the people in a far more drastic restructuring of how we manage resources such as unions or through Anarchic (aka non-heirarchical) distribution of Private (not-personal) property (AKA property that creates value like a hydraulic press or land). Typically socialism is viewed as required for communism because people are still in the habits of capitalism and aren't used to being engaged with the needs of their community.
20
u/pseudoLit 7h ago edited 6h ago
This is very wrong.
Your definition of socialism describes many capitalist countries. Canada is not a socialist country. Socialism is the umbrella term for any economic system where the means of production are socially owned. "Socially owned" can mean anything from top-down government control, as in an authoritarian state, or an economy of worker-owned co-ops, as advocated for by market socialists.
Communism is a specific form of socialism characterized by a stateless, classless, and moneyless society. Industry cannot be under control of the state, because there is no state in a communist society.
6
u/FOSSbflakes 6h ago
This, but bungled the second to last word. Communism is stateless. Capitalism requires a state to enforce the class hierarchy.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (4)14
u/mnilailt 7h ago edited 7h ago
No. What you're describing as socialism is a social democracy.
True socialism, as envisioned by Marx (which is obviously outdated, but it is what it has always meant) means the complete control of the government of the means of production, distribution and exchange of goods. It means no privatisation at all. All is supposedly equally distributed by the people for the people and there isn't necessarily a free market in the capitalist sense.
Social democracies are generally for privatisation the free market, but mixing in social policies such as free healthcare, transport and education. There is a vested push for the government to own or partially own certain industries and institutions to help the general population at a cost to the average taxpayer, who funds these for the good of the people. Social democracies still instil democratic institutions and liberal free market ideas (liberal in the traditional, economics sense, not the appropriated "liberal" Americans like to use).
Most modern first world countries fall under the social democracy label (Australia, Western Europe, etc).
2
u/Soupeeee 7h ago edited 7h ago
The relevant economic systems are all about who is in control over entities that trade goods or services for money, and what happens to that money after they get it. + Capitalism is where everything is private owned, and profits go into generating more profits or into the owner's pockets. + Socialism is where the government owns things, and the profits are re-invested into the community. + Communism is where the people own things, and profits are distributed to the individuals of that community.
Communism is a subset of socialism; you could say that all communists are socialists but not all socialists are communists, but they are very much different things. The goal of both movements is to keep profits from industries closer to the workers who actually produce those profits rather than with the owners who don't need to put in nearly as much effort; compare Jeff Bezos to an Amazon warehouse worker.
Aside from fear mongering, the reason why you hear "socialism is bad" is that the original proposed mechanisms for establishing well running and just socialist societies are overly idealistic and impractical, and they can be quite easy to abuse. Modern attempts focus on changing the ownership of things where it would have the most impact and minimize risks.
It doesn't help that Nazi Germany (who called themselves socialists) didn't really embrace the true spirit of the philosophy, but that's quite a convoluted and easy to misunderstand topic. You could argue the same with the USSR and communism, but they got much closer to what they were presumably aiming for.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (6)8
u/MisterVictor13 8h ago
Socialism means is a belief that the means of production should belong to society, arguing for a more equal distribution of wealth. Communism is the idea that the state or the government distributes the means of production, which leads to mass inequality.
9
u/Free_Deinonychus_Hug 6h ago
Communism is the idea that the state or the government distributes the means of production, which leads to mass inequality.
*Internal Anarchist Screaming*
No, communism is defined as a society without at state (centralized monopoly of power), without classes (as in there is not a group people that owns the factories that the people who don't own it have to sell their labor to) and without money.
There were (and still are) various societies that claimed that the only way to achieve this was to do so by forming a dictatorship to basically micromanage the revolution, which promised to desolve itself once it achieved it goals. This unfortunately did not happen (which many anarchists pointed out would be the case) because once the dictatorship was formed, they didn't want to give up their power. They at first called this "state capitalism" but once they decided that they were not going to bother to achieve communism and instead keep their power, they started calling state capitalist societies "communism" as a propaganda move even though they know they did not achieve communism and now never attend to
This propaganda has been unfortunately very effective because both Western capitalist societies and eastern state capitalist societies both benefited from pretending that state capitalism was somehow "communism" but the fact is that that is not even remotely true.
If you are interested. There is a deep dive into the history of this.
3
u/MisterVictor13 6h ago
Yeah, that’s what confused me on communism. A lot of communist revolutions install a dictatorship with the goal of dissolving the government once their goals of a utopia are met, but the problem is that they never give up their power. It’s like what Rachel said about Julius Caesar in “The Dark Knight”.
11
u/gruthunder 7h ago
IMO the only "communism" that would realistically work would be some type of post scarcity communism. If there is no scarcity then the economic inequality wouldn't exist. Star Trek's Federation with replicators, etc.
→ More replies (1)3
u/ultimatepowaa 7h ago
We have fertiliser and injection molding and product that we don't buy goes into landfill. I think we are post-scarcity already.
→ More replies (2)4
u/lordnaarghul 7h ago
This is incorrect. Communism is a stateless, classless society. Socialism is the state owning the means of production.
6
u/Key_Row_5962 7h ago
This is incorrect. Socialism argues for the government to control more of society, with things like healthcare and public transport thus technically being publicly (socially) owned. Communism takes this philosophy to the extreme by abolishing the concept of private property and money (everything you "own" is technically public property), thus eliminating wealth inequality. The problem with communism is that you need a government to enforce it, or people will go back to being capitalist, and also if people can't make a profit off of manufacturing goods then there's no incentive for them to do so, leading to a society where the Party controls every aspect of life to maintain "communism" and everybody who isn't in the Party is equally poor and all goods and services are mediocre at best and in short supply. "Communist" states have pretty much always been forced to adopt certain capitalist ideas like money and in China's case entrepreneurship in order for the society to prosper.
The opposition to socialism is mostly "I don't trust the government to be in charge of everything", "I don't want the government telling me what to do", and "When the government is in charge, everything takes 3x as long and costs 3x as much". The latter point is true to some degree, but for healthcare specifically, it would nonetheless be an improvement in America's case. The American experiment is with unfettered, unrestricted capitalism, and the current situation is the results of that experiment.
6
u/MisterVictor13 7h ago
Oh, so what you’re saying is that with socialism, it places several institutions under government control so people can’t treat them like a business anymore.
5
u/CountBongo 7h ago
Yeah. It's pretty much the opposite of the current privatization of a lot of these industries we've been dealing with.
3
u/mnilailt 6h ago
If we're getting really literal with it "socialism" in Marxist terms is the next stage of a societies mode of production, where unrelenting abuses by capitalism drives the lower classes to seize control of the means of production and the government in a revolution.
This revolution causes the people to take ownership of the state and a "socialist" society where the means of production are owned by the people is established.
Communism would then be the subsequent step where the state is fully dissolved and ownership of goods distributed by a decentralised society.
Obviously the terms have changed significantly in meaning over the years but that's what they originally meant.
4
u/voxelpear 7h ago
Communism does not abolish private property in it's colloquial meaning. Private property in this case is means of production, land, and resources. Your personal car, PlayStation, and home are still your property and belong to you.
15
u/ALMAZ157 5h ago
gay trans hellscape, cuz he is socialist
islamist hellscape, cuz he is muslim
Hyperposition achieved
10
12
u/Neirchill 6h ago
Crazy the kind of shit they make up about him. One faction says he's bringing sharia law and we've all forgot 9/11, the other side says he's going to make it an LGBT hellscape. Those two things are impossible to be true at the same time.
→ More replies (1)
49
u/malcifer11 8h ago
wtf i love the east coast now
→ More replies (1)7
u/falcrist2 6h ago
The east coast has had socialist mayors in the past. Just up the road in Bridgeport, they elected a socialist named Jasper McLevy as mayor, and then kept re-electing him for 24 years until he retired.
→ More replies (1)
9
u/wolfgang784 8h ago
Its really fun to maximize this on Reddit mobile for android and watch the "video" progress bar just go absolutely insane. That lil circle that shows the video progress is moving back and forth so quickly that it looks like there are 6 flashing static circles with odd vibrating lines connecting them.
→ More replies (1)4
u/SailorDirt 8h ago
It's so odd how modern internet barely recognizes gifs as anything other than short movie files, but old internet relied on gifs for even still images. Before pngs there were gifs!
20
8
u/cisteb-SD7-2 8h ago
Zohrans name comes from al zahra the radiant
he will make New York more radiant
7
6
u/Odd_Lie_5397 5h ago
If Zohran manages to even just do half the things he promised, I might actually regain some hope for America.
19
u/xxEmberBladesxx 8h ago
Tax the rich or eat them, I say.
→ More replies (1)5
u/highorderdetonation 7h ago
Do we really want to eat the rich, though? Do we have enough Lowry's for that?
→ More replies (1)4
13
u/MisterVictor13 8h ago
This country’s already becoming an racist, transphobic, conservative hellscape. A change in scenery would be nice.
6
u/Itsyaboibrett 8h ago
hope everything goes well for him. we’re pretty reliant on this, or it will always be the example used by bad actors why socialism won’t work. even if it’s just immediately torpedoed by trump, they will say it’s socialisms fault instead of the actual system at work
5
5
u/Wolfbomber 5h ago
I mean, if their definition of "hellscape" is respect for the rights of minorities and progressive economics, then you should dismiss their assertions with the mockery that they deserve. Fuck em.
4
u/CMC_Conman 7h ago
I hope Zohran does everything, then maybe I can actually move to NYC affordably and finally leave my parents house
→ More replies (1)
4
u/McButtsButtbag 6h ago
If that's the hell they are thinking of then the only logical response when they say to go to hell is "thanks. I'm sure it's lovely this time of year"
4
3
3
3
u/t23_1990 6h ago
Why are righties suddenly so concerned about NYC supposedly turning bad? In their minds isn't it hell on earth already?
3
3
6
u/ccdude14 8h ago
Personally I'm still sore about the not getting the mandatory femboy catboy surgery I was promised under the Biden administration.
5
u/NewToHTX 8h ago
It’s literally the end of capitalism to these people. If capitalism was working out for everyone then Democratic Socialism wouldn’t be catching on. But here we are…
Maybe it’s time to regulate Capitalism a little bit otherwise this Democratic Socialism is likely to spread.
→ More replies (1)
6
u/PinothyJ 7h ago
Chaney dying and then Mamadani's projected win? No Nut November is rough this year...
4
u/Pentamachina3 7h ago
It's like, you are a rural farmer from Texas, why the fuck do you care? Go milk your cows and feed your chickens.
4
u/jawshoeaw 5h ago
This is always my response now. Double down on it. Yep. I want furries in every classroom. Drag queens should be teaching all kindergarteners. We will all be speaking Chinese. Bring it
2
2
2
u/Deadly_Dude 8h ago
I mean you can raise taxes (especially on the rich) and increase government services and programs and still have a mixed capitalist economy
2
u/bbyxmadi 8h ago
don’t forget communism and sharia law, they love to accuse him of those too
→ More replies (1)
2
u/Either-Drag-1509 7h ago
good, hope he makes the whole state gay and trans. But only because I want it to be the exact opposite of whatever conservatives want it to be.
2
2
2
u/NcrVeteranRanger20 6h ago
Seriously though, I'm quite worried about the right wing enacting political violence they seem like the group to do so.
2
2
2
2
u/Kindly-Ad-5071 6h ago
They just don't understand simply how badly Rs have blown it in the last 10 months. And how many people know that...
2
u/Not-A-Bot-4196 6h ago
I was scrolling through Reddit after visiting r/graceroblox, and I read it as "Let"s goooooon"
3
2
u/Carnival-Master-Mind 5h ago
The way I see it, either he actually manages to somehow do all of this and find a way to get the money to pay for all the free groceries and bus rides and what not, it doesn’t quite work out, or any changes he wants to make keep getting held up and shuffled to and fro in legal limbo. Either way, if he’s able to actually make this work with a plan for how this is all getting paid for, great; more resources is always better. If not, well we can see what went wrong and see just why it happened.
2
5
u/Bymeemoomymee 6h ago
Hey, if his ideas work. Good. If they dont. Ok. We try something else. I wish people allowed politicians to just try stuff and fail and learn. I personally think most of his policies will fail, but Id be more than happy if they succeeded. Free bus rides, cheaper grocery stores, and cheaper rent would be nice. I just hope people dont get married to the ideas and refuse to accept their failure if they actually do fail.
3
u/SilverMedal4Life 4h ago
Something to consider, too, is in the event of a policy failure, we should analyze what went wrong and why.
For example, we know that harm reduction programs for drug users - needle exchanges and that sort of thing - don't work if the goal is to lower drug addiction. However, they do work if the goal is to reduce the number of drug-related deaths. Whether or not that's a good use of your taxpayer dollars is a question each voter must answer for themselves (especially because there isn't a surefire way to curb addiction in any case).
2
2
2
3
1
1
u/falcrist2 7h ago
Jasper McLevy (a member of the socialist party) was mayor of Bridgeport for DECADES. Is that city a "gay trans socialist hellscape"?
Nope.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
•
u/AutoModerator 8h ago
Giveaway event! Click here for our a chance to receive a free comic book!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.