But you never cited the bulk of Bernie’s plans relevant to the issues you’re describing: https://berniesanders.com/issues/criminal-justice-reform/?fbclid=IwAR0VnZsuFPeyb9TXpoCO7hklqJoo7gweexfpfvhO_W86b7MQSNl9seqL1BU
But you never cited the bulk of Bernie’s plans relevant to the issues you’re describing: https://berniesanders.com/issues/criminal-justice-reform/?fbclid=IwAR0VnZsuFPeyb9TXpoCO7hklqJoo7gweexfpfvhO_W86b7MQSNl9seqL1BU
Counterpoint: anyone who goes to Harvard, works for McKinsey, and joins the military during the “War on Terror” is a bad perso
“Justice. Fairness. Equality. Opportunity. Uhhh, Love for Mankind” are not any easier to define than socialism, and no more likely to produce shared understandings or shared political projects.
I don’t oppose a workers’ state! The reason I made the distinction in my initial post was because “control by the government” does not mean “control by the working class” if the working class does not control the government, as is the case in bourgeois democracies like the US.
And I’ve been a communist and Marxist for about the same length of time and have a PhD in social theory with an emphasis on Chinese Marxism. I think you are misreading my comments, for example I never said anything about “workers directly controlling the enterprises they worked in.” You’re trying to well actually me…
We’re agreeing, just using different terminology. I’m using the standard Marxist terminology.
Unemployed workers, kids, retirees and full time caregivers would not be left out, because those people *are also workers.* That’s the point you’re missing: “worker” is not an employment category, it’s a social class.
In Marxist theory, “workers” refers to all people who do not own the means of production and are therefore compelled to work to survive. That applies to people who are currently working, and people who are unemployed. It applies to people who are dependent on family members who are workers (i.e. children) and people…
Socialism means *the workers* collectively own the means of production, not the government. That’s not necessarily the same thing, depending on the situation.
Thought this might be interesting to people, from Miriam Markowitz:
Or, he could keep his promise and not have his fundraising affected by any significant amount.
You keep saying “people want this” “people want that,” and yet when I linked an article showing you that “people” don’t want centrism, you ignore it completely and provide no counter evidence at all. What you actually mean when you say “people in this country want” is “I want.”
Wrong.
Remember when Musk was going to help Flint get clean water? And then couldn't turn it into self promotion and never talked about it again?
True story: two-thirds of white men did not vote for Trump. Trump got more votes from women and people of color than from white men. Many, many white men have shitty politics, but identity is not politics.
From the sister of one of my oldest friends:
“Picture this: I’m a young MN Senate Staffer. My MN senator is meeting a famous U.S. Senate candidate and I’m excited to meet a potential future U.S. Senator. I arrange the appointment. His staffer, Andy, is professional and kind. The candidate comes flying into our office…
Certainly King did not uncritically embrace “all people.” But he did write this:
Here is a real discussion of democratic socialism, if you’re interested: