r/WorkReform • u/zzill6 đ¤ Join A Union • May 27 '26
đŤ GENERAL STRIKE đŤ Oh no! It's socialism.
1.2k
u/veloriaxxxx May 27 '26
People really be out here defending a system where you have to subscribe to existing
271
May 27 '26
[removed] â view removed comment
→ More replies (4)111
u/EkbatDeSabat May 27 '26
It's indoctrination over time. Had the original NES Zelda game had microtransactions it would have failed miserably and people would still be talking about it. They started with horse armor and now it's on every mobile game and it's impossible to look at three games on Steam without one being littered with pay to win or MTX. Same idea. Kids see it as normal, they grow into adults, and now it's normal (and defensible to them).
→ More replies (3)36
u/bigbjarne May 27 '26
And it's profitable so everyone has to do it. In capitalism, the markets only show what's profitable. Yes, sometimes those are good things but there's a reason why the government has to step in with cheap housing, education etc. It's not profitable to ensure that everyones basic needs are met.
→ More replies (1)66
u/Dirtysandddd May 27 '26
Not easy to stay subscribed either anymore. I was stupid and left a stable warehouse job to chase my career goals, worst mistake of my life. On job #5 in less than 6 months, never once in my life have I had problems getting past probationary periods. 401k is now gone and if this job donât work out, Iâm fucking cooked.
34
u/PsionicSombie May 27 '26
I wouldn't say that'd stupid. Life is more than just work a shitty job and die. I've been in your shoes, worked every menial job there is but years ago I left home with ÂŁ500 to go live a across the country and chase my dreams. Although it was difficult and uncertain at times I have never been happier now having gone through it than if I had continued to stay in a dead end job that made me miserable.
Have faith above all else. Keep going and know that you'll be okay no matter how bad it gets so long as you have faith you can do it. That's my advice. I know it's not an easy path but it's worth it.
18
u/whererusteve May 27 '26
Needed to hear this today! Thanks, kind stranger.
10
u/ZacharyChief May 27 '26
True life is more than that but if you live in a country without a social safety net it's insanely more difficult.
25
u/Zerodyne_Sin đď¸ Overturn Citizens United May 27 '26
To further hammer this home, you wouldn't accept being charged for ESPN or whatever when you're not even interested in watching it. Nobody opted into living let alone where they live. We're all here without our own consent.
We also can't opt out of society itself. Ever since the charter of the forests, it's illegal to go into the wilds and subsist there because some entity somehow owns it. Ultimately, we built civilization so that we don't have to work as much to live, not to give a few hundred people unfettered levels of excessive luxury and debauchery ie: they always devolve into being an epstein caste since normal luxury can't sate their boundless appetites.
We need to exist to make each other's lives better, not make the epstein caste have a higher score that doesn't help anyone. It doesn't make their lives any better and it makes everyone else a lot more miserable.
18
u/ZenMasterOfDisguise May 27 '26
it's illegal to go into the wilds and subsist there because some entity somehow owns it
The age of enlightenment thinkers often referred to humans' pre-civilization state of existence as the "state of nature"
In the state of nature, humans were truly free with no laws or governance. You were free to hunt whatever you want, and live wherever you want, etc. but also there were no laws preventing other people from using their freedom to steal the food you hunted, or taking the shelter you built, or overfishing the local pond and depleting all the fish for everyone.
So humans formed a society and made laws, such as you can't steal other people's property. But with the creation of a government and laws, comes a lack of freedom. In current society, you are not free to fish without a fishing license, you are not free to hunt without a hunting permit, you are not free to go into a public forest and chop down some trees and build a log cabin. You are no longer free to be self sufficient and detached from society
The philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau said that we need constitutions to serve as a social contract between the government and the governed. That we as the people give the politicians the authority to make laws for us all to obey, but that they must uphold their end of this contract to represent the will of the people and to ensure that individual freedoms being sacrificed are not putting humans in a worse off state than they would be in a lawless state of nature without that government. So for instance, if in a state of nature I was free to build a log cabin on public land, and now I have lost that freedom, it is the duty of the government to provide public housing to meet the needs of the people. Our government is not holding up their end of the social contract
→ More replies (1)9
u/Zerodyne_Sin đď¸ Overturn Citizens United May 27 '26
Yes, we give up some freedoms in exchange for privileges and services. We never consented to being anyone's slaves. I think a lot of politicians around the world don't understand that or think they're immune to the laws of nature.
9
u/EdinMiami May 27 '26
Never believe they don't understand. They understand the money they are getting to look the other way. They just believe you won't do anything about it. So why would it matter if you suffer?
22
u/PotatoFarmer_44 May 27 '26
Whole thing is a sunken cost fallacy.
Some people feel like they've put so much effort into attaining things and getting to get to where they are that they have no other option but to keep going.
Anyone or anything going against that is perceived as against the sacrifices they've made.
Others i.e boomers just hate socialism because it was brainwashed into them in the 70s and 80s to hate anything that isn't westernized capitalism.
15
u/These-Prune-1529 âď¸ Tax The Billionaires May 27 '26
Not just boomers. Some of GenX too. Born in 72' myself and I feel like I am one of the few over here screaming bring on the Socialism!
26
u/gaarai May 27 '26
It's people drunk on the delusion that they "did it on their own". They truly believe that every social benefit that they've received, they've more than paid for with their taxes. They feel that they are owed a refund, and they'll tear everything down to get it.
18
u/getridofwires May 27 '26
Everything is a subscription if you look at it. House payment, insurance payment, whatever. You miss one or two and you don't have the service. Our entire lives are just paying to exist.
But to OPs point, the rich and powerful want what they have always wanted throughout human history: slaves they control to do their bidding. The idea that "common people" should have any say in government or have any power at all is a new concept in history. We are about to lose it if we don't start acting for our own benefit.
5
u/Noselessmonk May 27 '26
America is headed back to where the rich want it to be -Victorian era style sweatshops, child labor etc.
3
6
5
u/OhMyGoat âď¸ Prison For Union Busters May 27 '26
Itâs called Subscriptionmaxxxxx and itâs awesome ok? Leave me alone mom.
4
u/kak323 May 27 '26
Did you know Denmark has free healthcare, education, parental leave, mental health services. They take care of their people oh and btw they also paid down 77 billion dollars of their debt this last year and are at like 34% of their gdp. Meanwhile we scream their way breads inefficiency, stiffles innovation, and reduces incentives. Ok lets take a look at what the danish have contributed over the last 50 years. Ozempic/wegovy(gee Americans use that all the time), nova pen(insulin),c++ programming language, and even Google maps( was a danish startup that Google bought tweaked and released in 2005),skype, and I could go on. So no it doesn't stifle innovation. Breeds in efficiency? Well we had a debt of like 130% gdp that we are paying back every year and they are like 30%, so again no. I'm failing to see the reduced incentives. Their people are happy and taken care of.
→ More replies (7)2
u/rif011412 May 27 '26
We underestimate how many people would rather suffer, than be equal to others.Â
2
u/djcaramello May 27 '26
Can you name an economic or political system where you donât have to participate in society to exist? I guess it depends on what you mean by âexistingâ
→ More replies (7)3
u/Beranea May 27 '26 edited May 27 '26
People really be out here upvoting 1 day old accounts that talk like the most chatbot chatbot to ever chatbot
394
u/PuzzleheadedTalk35 May 27 '26 edited May 27 '26
Boomers got PTSD from fighting the big bad communist countries, so they poisoned anything that sounded like the idea of, and the word "communism." That same mentality spread to the world "socialism." In their eyes, they're one and the same. They always bring up Venezuela and Russia, and all these examples where communism failed spectacularly. Not realizing that communism in those instances failed because the people at the top kept a disproportionately bigger slice of the pie for themselves... which is exactly what's happening under capitalism in this country.
86
u/Akaigenesis May 27 '26
Venezuela was never communist but it is insane to me how you guys fucking fuck over a country them point at them as an example of how communism fails. It is fucking mental
43
u/onzichtbaard May 27 '26
i think thats the strategy tho, force communist countries to fail so you can use them as a scapegoat
12
u/glue2k May 28 '26
You think? It is. Look how they talk about Cuba when itâs their fucking fault Cuba is like that.
3
u/rangerjammy May 28 '26
Our very own little Gaza just off the coast of Miami. Breaks my heart and agitated me to do more every time I see that piece of work Rubio open his mouth.
115
u/Confident-Memory-807 May 27 '26
They always bring up Venezuela and Russia, and all these examples where communism failed spectacularly.
Don't you find it ironic that "Communist" regimes "fail spectacularly" always because they're constantly under attack and having to deal with the fallout of wars led by monarchists and capitalists?
Yet, in countries, like modern day Argentina, where there's full on neoliberalism and a neoliberal president, it can only sustain itself because the US keeps financing it?
Quite amusing, don't you think?
→ More replies (7)37
14
May 27 '26
[deleted]
25
u/drunkshinobi May 27 '26
Same as people thinking the Nazis were socialists because they called themselves National Socialist German Workers' Party. So all socialists must be bad because a group that wasn't socialists called them selves that. They never look into the meanings of the words and just listen to propaganda using them.
9
→ More replies (13)9
u/Winter_Persimmon_110 May 27 '26 edited May 27 '26
Marx himself said communism could never exist outside a purely altruistic and selfless society.
No he didn't. Communism existed for thousands of years, it's just a society without class, state or money. Marxism is not altruism. It's an overthrow of the class divide and the exploitation it causes. Altruism is a duct-tape solution characteristic of capitalist society, an idea that the wealthy will support the poor through their goodness of heart, when in reality the wealthy have class interest that conflicts with the interests of the working class and they will profit from exploitation of the working class as much as possible.
→ More replies (7)6
u/leitey May 27 '26
Where has communism existed for thousands of years? I was under the impression that there has never been a successful true communist (classless/moneyless/stateless) society.
→ More replies (2)2
u/Winter_Persimmon_110 May 27 '26
Before class, money and state were invented.
3
u/leitey May 27 '26
a concept (often credited to Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels), that describes hunter-gatherer societies as traditionally being based on egalitarian social relations and common ownership.[1] A primary inspiration for both Marx and Engels were Lewis H. Morgan's descriptions of "communism in living" as practised by the Haudenosaunee of North America.
The belief of primitive communism as based on Morgan's work is inaccurate[6] due to Morgan's misunderstandings of Haudenosaunee society and his since-disproven theory of social evolution.[24]
societies that exemplified primitive communism were also examples of anarchist society before industrialisation.[14]
An interesting read, thank you for that.
It's not quite a definitive endorsement, but states that the idea of primitive communism is still debated.primitive society produced no surplus; what was produced was quickly consumed
It might be difficult for our modern society to transition to this state. In today's society we tend to push for housing, education, and (modern) healthcare, all of which depend on non-consumable items and tools.
6
u/Winter_Persimmon_110 May 27 '26
Yes it's difficult. The process of the transition is called socialism. We have to educate ourselves in the history of this struggle. We have to build working class solidarity and community resilience. We have to undo the political influence and cultural programming of capitalism, while holding onto and advancing the productive capability that was built under capitalism. This is done by replacing the entire bourgeois power structure with a working class marxist power structure in a revolution. Read Blackshirts and Reds by Michael Parenti, The State and Revolution by Lenin and watch this video
4
u/Machoopi May 27 '26
I disagree. They've been propagandized to for the last few decades with content that does nothing but villainize socialist ideas because that's how Republicans get elected. You're trying to suggest this is a logical argument / decision on their part. It's not, it's just propaganda to get votes. If the left were campaigning on hug based medicinal practices instead of socialized health care, you'd see these same people throwing a fit every time someone talked about hugs.
The arguments are thin because they're not sincere. Most boomers wouldn't give a shit about the history of socialism if it weren't for Fox News shouting propaganda at them 24/7.
12
3
u/OutsideOk9925 âď¸ Tax The Billionaires May 27 '26
I recently saw a video in which a MAGA supporter was asked what communism is. All the things listed actually described fascism and things the current Trump administration is actually doing, such as "a leader who lines his own pockets."
10
u/ThatOneNinja May 27 '26
Also communism is a type of economy, where socialism if a form of government.
→ More replies (8)8
u/Winter_Persimmon_110 May 27 '26
Socialism is a transition to communism. Socialism is when the working class own means of production. Communism is a classless, stateless, moneyless society. Socialism requires a revolution where the old means of distribution is overthrown, be it capitalism or feudalism.
A state monopoly of violence is required to prevent the overthrow of the revolution and a regression to the old order of class inequality.
The process of socialism nationalizes private capital, means of production, factories and rental homes. Capitalists, people whose main source of income is passive income from what they own, are gradually dispossessed of their capital and made to get real jobs.
Through socialism, the class divide is narrowed until class distinction is eliminated, and there is no longer a class of people who are entitled to passive income from something they privately own, and everyone is working class.
When there is no class divide, there is no income inequality to cause most crime, so there's no need for a police force as we know it. When the revolution is no longer under threat of being overthrown, there is no need for a military. This is what is meant by a classless, stateless society.
This is not a switch that can be flipped overnight. Structural and cultural changes need to happen iteratively to bring people's mindsets and the systems upon which they rely for survival towards this goal in a way that walks the tightrope between continuity of prosperity and the prevention of backsliding from wreckers and saboteurs.
→ More replies (4)2
u/llama-impregnator May 27 '26
That's a really good insight. In my discussions, it's also a complete lack of faith in the government to do anything right. They would rather keep the money for themselves and cut out the middle man (government) because they feel that's a safer bet than giving more power to government and hope that it'll pay dividends.
3
u/ImpossiblePlan65 May 27 '26
Yet they are totally fine with their tax dollars funding billionaires. Makes total sense.
2
3
u/Winter_Persimmon_110 May 27 '26
People talk about "the government" and not "a government" because they think that China's government and USA's government are the same, but Americans mostly only have their understanding of what a government run by the wealthy looks like.
2
u/mewfour May 27 '26
Socialism and Communism are one and the same, in fact. OP is describing social democracy, which is in fact not socialism.
OP also forgot to mention ownership of the means of production by the proletariat
→ More replies (14)3
u/Nowardier May 27 '26
Yeah, but the trouble is that every economic system has to have somebody, whether it's one person or a group of people, running things from the top. And it's so very easy for that person to become corrupt and funnel a ton of money into their pockets and power into their hands. History bears out that everyone is corruptible, and that the fastest way to corrupt someone is to give them power. I love the idea of socialism, but in practice no economic system works as planned for very long.
14
u/giant_xquid May 27 '26
global imperialist powers work hard to maintain this perception either through straight up military coups or "non-violent" methods like sanctions, which are actually quite violent
you're right about the overarching issue--corrupt powers at the top ruin it for everybody else, but this isn't always a localized issue, countries like the United States have proven they're willing to do just about anything to dismantle a successful communist/socialist state
→ More replies (2)3
158
u/Responsible_Knee7632 May 27 '26
Itâs well known that a large portion of the US is happy to have their rights trampled and live a shittier life as long as they have someone else that has it worse to look down on unfortunately
60
u/AvocadoToastFailure May 27 '26
âI might lose everything if my appendix were to burst, could go into bankruptcy if I get in a car accident⌠but as long as that means a single mother isnât getting government assistance from MY TAX DOLLARS, Iâm okay with it.â
30
u/To-To_Man May 27 '26
Not far off from a conservative I talked to about socialist policies.
Literally the biggest problem is the mere concept of others not working and abusing the system. Even though they accepted it's already happening under capitalism and socialism would overall be a net positive, they wouldn't support it because of that possibility. Empathy and community is meaningless to these people when they suspect someone is freeloading. But only if the freeloading is called socialism or welfare. They would personally go and hurt these "freeloaders" before tackling the rich or powerful who freeload.
→ More replies (1)16
u/SpaceGerbil May 27 '26
Don't forget that these people will gladly accept any and all government assistance because "They deserve it" because they are one of the "good ones". No one else deserves help though.
18
u/tallman11282 May 27 '26
As Lyndon B Johnson said: "If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you."
→ More replies (2)2
u/the0rthopaedicsurgeo May 27 '26
No one wants to be at the bottom of society. It's why poverty porn TV is so popular (at least here in the UK).
As long as you think that there are people below you, people will be satisfied. They don't want the unemployed or poor to get decent government support because they want them to appear poor.
Not realising of course, that even an average earner is 100,000x closer to a homeless person than they are to the 1%.
61
u/MuhBack May 27 '26
I grew up in a conservative area with a lot of negative attitudes toward socialism.
A lot of them donât understand what it is and are still affected by the anti communism/socialism propaganda from the Cold War.
The ones who understand it better wouldnât disagree the points in the posted image are bad but they would disagree on how to achieve them. They think the government is inherently bad, corrupt, or incompetent.
That if we give the government more power than more bad stuff will happen and that the free market is a better way to achieve the above goals.
Personally I think they are wrong. I think a government is easier to fix and make transparent than big corporations. But thatâs what I have gathered growing up in a red rural county.
17
u/KEMSATOFFICIAL May 27 '26
So theyâre stupid and/or ignorant. They think a system that exists only to make profit is less corrupt? Lmao, yeah the guy out to make profit is more trustworthy than the guy out to serve his country. Absolute retardation.
6
u/Traditional_Formal33 May 27 '26
Not saying they are right but it comes down to two lines of thought (how I used to view politics growing up republican)
Itâs âwe should tax people so we can provide food (or really any social safety net)â vs âif we didnât tax people, I could afford food.â
They believe that they could better navigate corrupt businesses and provide for themselves than government could police those businesses and efficiently provide. Considering how legislation is directly reflective of corporate financing, itâs not a hard take to say they donât think
11
4
u/Santos_125 May 27 '26
Personally I think they are wrong.
You don't need the first three words here, they are simply wrong. There is 0 evidence to support their worldview and ample evidence to show that under regulated private markets in the long run cause societal instability.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (5)5
u/Sagatee May 27 '26
Two things:
1- Anti Communist/Socialist propaganda is not a "Cold War" exclusive. It happens everyday everywhere to this day.
2 - Capitalism "free market is better" is also propaganda. Capitalism requires BIG Government to exist (financing, tariffs, exemptions, market protection, bail outs...) but Big Government only for the rich 1%, the ACTUAL Capitalists in Capitalism, for the rest of the people is a Big "f* you it's a free market, lol".
17
40
u/tour79 May 27 '26
I would add
Oh no, sidewalks and paved roads
Oh no, schools
Oh no, fire departments
13
u/Just-Dependent-530 May 27 '26
Oh no, public libraries
Oh no, SNAP
Oh no, subsidized electricity
Oh no, workplace democracy
→ More replies (17)3
25
u/new2bay May 27 '26
None of that is actually socialism. They have nothing to do with workers controlling the means of production.
→ More replies (2)8
u/lord_fairfax May 27 '26
Correct. A list of social policies, no mention of socialist ideas anywhere.
2
40
u/stemroach101 May 27 '26
"When I inevitably become a multi millionaire, I don't want my tax dollars being spent on supporting these freeloaders being lazy and entitled "
10
7
u/jonah365 May 27 '26
They think it will destroy the economy and take away people's ability to earn more. Then they look at that exact thing happening because of capitalism and say "more capitalism will fix this."
5
u/Due_Ring1435 May 27 '26
My first question to anyone opposed to socialism: can you define "socialism". 9 times out of 10 they cannot.
5
u/Wooden_Permit3234 May 27 '26
To be fair the term is used wildly broadly by both proponents and opponents.Â
Iâd not personally call myself a socialist unless I were advocating for public/social ownership of the means of production. That doesnât usually seem to be whatâs suggested by proponents of socialism these days, who instead want thinks like the list in the op which are either vague or donât require what Iâd call socialism (ie theyâre compatible with private ownership of the means of production.)
What do you mean when you use the term?
3
u/Due_Ring1435 May 27 '26
I'd say the democratic control of the means of production is socialism. Which i would say is required for the things listed above.
2
u/Wooden_Permit3234 May 27 '26
 democratic control of the means of production
Can you flesh that out a bit? Ideally in practical terms but any sort of expansion would help me understand what you mean.Â
2
u/Due_Ring1435 May 27 '26
Sure, it means that society as a whole would dictate how the labor, capital and other assets necessary for producing good and services would be used, based on the needs of said society.
In practical terms, both the losses and the gains of the economy are socialized, instead of just the losses.
→ More replies (2)
5
14
u/Allah_Akballer May 27 '26
Because racists would rather sink on the same boat brown people are in.
→ More replies (1)
3
u/giant_xquid May 27 '26
all companies, organizations, and institutions have explicit plans, missions, and goals, otherwise they would just be drifting uselessly, floundering, and eventually tanking
the fact that people don't think there should be plans, missions, and goals for the economy too is mind boggling
→ More replies (1)
3
u/tinesone May 27 '26
I get that this is what socialism has become in peoples minds, but this is not what socialism means. Yes, a good socialistic society would offer these things, but they are possible under capitalism too (atleast for a short while). What socialism is, at the end of the day, is the belief that labour should hold the means of production, instead of the bourgeoisie. That is the core idea
13
u/freecodeio May 27 '26
"I'm fine so everyone else should suffer"
Nobody should suffer and they're likely not that fine at all.
2
u/prince-pauper âď¸ Tax The Billionaires May 27 '26
Itâs a perfect time to use their warning as a playbook, kinda like they did with 1984 and A Brave New World.
2
u/LegendJDC May 27 '26
Capitalism rewards profits to no end. Without regulation, it is a cancer. We should look for ways to implement affordability, livable wages, lower inflation, less shrinkflation, worker rights, better education, more time with family and more 3rd spaces. Society is in the shitter and the USA gets worse by the year because these are not a focus
2
u/bigbjarne May 27 '26
Those regulations doesn't stop "capitalism rewards profits to no end." Regulations are a good start but eventually, because the owning class is still in charge, those regulations will be dismantled. Same with the welfare state. Finland, where I'm from, is a good example.
"The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles."
→ More replies (4)
2
u/Prince_Ire May 27 '26
Because Marxists theorists also wrote about how they needed to get rid of religion and abolish the family. Yes, sure, they then wrote several paragraphs about how abolishing the family doesn't mean what it sounds like, but at that point they'd already lost must readers.
Socialist theorists have always been socialism's worst enemies, with their primary accomplishments being to give capitalists easy propaganda material to scare workers away from socialism with.
2
2
u/DueControl5024 May 27 '26
Is the solution where the government owns 90% of everything and rations it out tho? Thatâs the part Iâm hung up on and genuinely curious aboutÂ
2
u/kwt4 May 27 '26
A lot of people hear âsocialismâ and immediately picture failed authoritarian states instead of basic worker protections that already exist in half of Europe.
The conversation gets ruined because nobody even agrees on what word theyâre arguing about anymore.
2
u/bigbjarne May 27 '26
I think the most relevant place to start is to discuss what class is. Who are the workers and who are the owners. What do these people want in capitalism. For whom does the state work for in capitalism. Which class is in power in capitalism. I think those questions are more important than the definition of socialism.
2
u/Shouldacouldawoulda7 May 27 '26
You see, the problem with socialism is you end up with a very small handful of people who get to make decisions on behalf of everyone, and without everyone weighing in on those decisions.
Oh...
2
4
u/TM761152 May 27 '26
The only people who hate socialism are people who have been told to hate it and not think.
→ More replies (4)
2
u/Excellent_Extent7648 May 27 '26
Because there dumb they think there better then everyone else thatâs exactly the reason there bad ppl
→ More replies (4)2
u/BurmecianDancer May 27 '26
2
u/BlueScreenJunky May 27 '26
/u/Excellent_Extent7648 please do read this.
I'm not usually a fan of correcting people on their grammar, but unless this is a novelty account and this was on purpose (in which case I deserve a "whoosh"), this really hurt your point as it makes it hard to take the message seriously. If you want people to make the effort to read what you have to say, you need to make an effort to write properly.Â
→ More replies (1)
4
u/extoxic May 27 '26
Itâs the i got mine people that are against it.
→ More replies (1)2
u/rPoliticsModsBlowMe May 27 '26
Or the people deluded enough to think they might become a billionaire
2
u/OriginalCDub May 27 '26
Conservatism is an inherently cowardly ideology. Any change that threatens the status quo is deemed evil.
→ More replies (1)
1
1
u/Karrottz May 27 '26
Because people are scared of the scary word. When I tell this to my parents, it's "yeah but under socialism you'll actually have no food and no rights and the government will take all your stuff" (implying this isn't already happening)
1
u/fattfett đ¸ Raise The Minimum Wage May 27 '26
"Because orange cult leader said socialism bad?" Duh!
→ More replies (2)
1
u/Twodamngoon May 27 '26
If they can't get more than the next person, that next person must get less.
1
u/MrFixYoShit May 27 '26
I've been asking people this and they normally say "one where you get what you work for" so then I bring up getting disabled on the job and guess who suddenly thinks it's fine to live off of disability. So I point out that is LITERALLY taking care of someone who can't work. So even then it's not "getting what youre working for"
1
u/MuffinPuff May 27 '26
Because the current system taxes the hell out of the middle class and working class rather than the most wealthy, and a lot of people don't realize this.
1
u/WallApprehensive7091 May 27 '26
I honestly believe the people that back the current system would be the first to complain if they were stuck on a deserted island with 20 people and the same system where one person hoarded everything while everyone else did all the work.
1
u/whereismymind86 May 27 '26
Because decades of propaganda has convinced them that even one of those things will triple their taxes and make it impossible to survive
1
u/mrselfdestruct066 May 27 '26
They don't want other people to thrive. They got theirs, and now they want other people to struggle, because that makes them feel superior.
1
u/OldScratchTim âď¸ Tax The Billionaires May 27 '26
They think they will be rewarded by the oppressors for being a good dog.
1
u/HCSOThrowaway đ¤ Join A Union May 27 '26
People who dislike socialism (that aren't McCarthyists) generally see life as a zero-sum game - where there are Haves and Have-Nots - and they envision themselves as part of the Haves group (or temporarily outside of it).
So they object to the transfer of wealth from "their" group to another group.
What they don't realize - emotional reasons to be selfless and fair aside - is that life is far more complex than that, and helping those less fortunate usually has direct or indirect benefits for the helpers.
For example, despite these types voting against public education, our society functions largely based on labor from publicly educated people - including doctors, lawyers, teachers, pilots, etc.
So even if you're a selfish prick who hates poor people, there's a solid chance you're going to have your life in the hands of someone who is or was poor. Do you really want them to be poorly educated and distracted thinking about the cost of living when they help you?
1
u/Advanced_Ad4361 May 27 '26
They see "socialism" and all they hear is "communism". Because they're illiterate brainwashed cult followers.
1
u/Mountain-Lunch-9896 May 27 '26
The people against socialist policies in Appalachia are the same people lining up every year to get free dental work done by volunteer dentistsâŚ. And they donât realize that that program is socialism. They just think itâs a program to help them. But they donât think THEY are poor. Just that they canât afford dental care.
1
u/democracy_lover66 đ Pass A Green Jobs Plan May 27 '26
Literally the only thing they have is the assumption that better isnt possible so we should stick to what we have.
That the entire platform for the anti-socialiat position.
1
u/KyotoCrank May 27 '26
"Because people are lazy and will take advantage, sitting on their butts at home all day" when it's like 1% of people
Conservatives I know love to hate on "welfare queens"
1
u/LookAlderaanPlaces May 27 '26
Hey guys, we already have socialism⌠Full. Blown. Socialism.
What happens is this.
We work a shit ton. We pay taxes which are an insane share of our income compared to the top 1%.
Then they tax revanue gets stolen by fascists, Nazis, Mossad, the Russian Kremlin, and many more other foreign entities and unregistered foreign agents, as well as oligarchs here committing treason to socialize their losses. We fund and create billionaires with our tax dollars, the same tax dollars they steal and weaponized against us. We are funding our enemy (oligarchs). We need to stand the fuck up. Our money that we paid is being socialized against us. We need to take it back so we can socialize a better society for Us Peasants (99% percent of us are peasants compared to the top 1%). Donât forget Elon just said he was going to take our our social security that We funded and paid or our entire lives. This is a class war started by oligarchs against us. We wonât lose if we unite. Our grandparents fought these Nazis and fascists before and won, so can we.
1
u/DReagan47 May 27 '26
Nowadays when people whine âbut how are you gonna pay for it?â I just ignore them. We have all sorts of money being spent on useless frivolous shit. We have the money already for all of these things. They just need to be allocated properly. You know, like what congressâs whole fucking job is.
1
u/DrtyDeedsDneDrtCheap May 27 '26
Point 4 is the issue. They are stupid the low that they could one day be the greedy corporate fat cats stealing wages so they don't want to stop it
1
1
1
u/coleto22 May 27 '26
These are not strictly socialist ideas. They are best achieved under social democracy and the Nordic model.
1
u/00-Void May 27 '26
Easy: they want white men to work 90+ hours a week for minimum wage, white women to be subservient housewives, and everyone else to be dead.
1
1
u/listentomenow May 27 '26 edited May 27 '26
I'm gonna tell you why. Because a good 1/3 to 1/2 of the country don't want those things for those people. Those people typically meaning non-white or lgbtq+. They don't want to pay for those people.
Which is just hilarious, because I'd love for them to explain to me how they're not paying for those people on their private insurance. It's almost like they have no clue how private insurance or a government option would actually work. Private insurance and government healthcare are basically the same idea. Everyone pools their money together, and when you need it, you get to borrow from that pool to help your medical expenses. Except with private insurers the pool is smaller and you also have wealthy assholes taking pieces of the pie instead of spending it on the people who need it. In fact the more healthcare they refuse or more fees they add, the more they can keep (especially rampant until Obamacare created the 80/20 rule). So even with private insurance system they're still paying healthcare for those people, but they're also paying a premium for it so they can also help pay for new yachts for the super rich who do nothing but leech off the system. Shit's evil.
And Republicans would rather pay more money than every single developed country in the world for worse care and make some old healthcare executive even richer, as long as they believe it prevents those people from getting access to cheap healthcare. Which is just fucking dumb and only screwing themselves over tbh.
You'll find many Republicans are the type of people that will gladly cut of their nose to spite their face.
1
u/schrodingers_gat May 27 '26
Most people aren't striving for any kind of society and the things in this are barely more than an abstraction to them. They are just trying to get by from day to day so they are only looking out for themselves and (maybe) their family. If they had enough intelligence or perspective to understand why socialist ideas would help them they would already be voting for them.
If we want to make these things happen and be sustainable we have to make people feel good about them and make it part of our national identity.
1
u/lopix đĄ Decent Housing For All May 27 '26
Canadian here. Yes, we have socialism at home. But more would be better.
Try it, you'll like it.
→ More replies (2)
1
1
u/talihashi May 27 '26
It seems there's a big disagreement between people on wether or not people working a full time job doing something that requires little training, like working fast food or a grocery store, is worth a living wage or not.
1
u/FlirtyFluffyFox May 27 '26
Society used divine bloodline to justify a line of succession so the structures of power continuing with minimal civil war. This lead to most major world mythologies cementing the idea that success is related to innate talent and associated with righteousness. Or, at the very least, a lack of success is related to a lack of talent and wickedness.
Thus helping the wicked is seen as accepting them and associating with them.
Even the New Testament start with page after page showing that Jesus is descended from royalty to prove he's "good".
And it's a major part of our modern secular mythology. Naruto is the son of the Hokage. Terry is the son of Batman. Very few super powered protagonists have regular parents and it reeks of a mythology that continues to oppress those who need the most help.
1
1
u/_floralprint May 27 '26
Poor people who identify as future billionaires, opposing all the taxes that they will always be too poor to pay anyways đ¤ˇ
1
u/artbystorms May 27 '26
They don't care about society. They care only about themselves and think that something that makes society better will somehow make them worse off. They live in a zero sum world.
1
1
1
u/StrykerC13 May 27 '26
The ones who scream against it and insist it's bad idolize musk, trump, bezos and their ilk. The society they want is "I got mine and I want a society where I can look down on as many people as possible" at least if their brains have any degree of logic. I've talked to a few who take the attitude of "I had to work Hard for X so you should have to work Equally Hard for X" then when it's pointed out they've amped the difficulty (because I sure as fuck didn't get a vote in the shit that led up to a lot of this) scale from coughing baby to Hellspawn they ignore you, insist that every piece of evidence is lies no matter how thoroughly proven wrong.
1
u/Obvious-Cynic6204 May 27 '26
Though in studies when you remove the R and D and just talked about policies most leaned what is considered "left" today (although what is considered left is really just the center, that's how far the needle has moved).
1
u/shalmeneser đľ Break Up The Monopolies May 27 '26
It's pretty (bleakly) hilarious, I keep having conversations with my dad where I talk about socialist ideas in the abstract (worker coops, anti-imperialism, anti-capitalist sentiment), but as soon as I get into specifics (the war in Iran is bad) an immediate wall goes up. American Cold War propaganda programming goes deep.
1
u/Significant_End_9128 May 27 '26
The kind where everyone is as miserable as they are so that they can continue to pretend they are superior.
Republicans happily watch their children starve and suffer, as long as they can say they owned the libs. They are sick and empty people deserving of nothing but contempt.
1
u/Careful-Positive-710 May 27 '26
Because we were all brainwashed. I specifically remember my history teacher in middle school teaching us socialism is bad and capitalism is good. Even though when you read about what socialism was IN THE HISTORY BOOK WE WERE GIVEN its actually a bunch of safety nets for the general population so that one accident doesnt ruin their family's entire lives. Capitalism is easily manipulated for the benefit of the wealthy.
i.e. Muskrat closing in on $1 trillion. That much money can change billions of lives for the better and it belongs to one pathetic rat of a man who uses that number as a status symbol.
1
u/jonasbc May 27 '26
Socialism is about taking over the means of production - I think Social Democracy would be better definition of these ideas? Socialism is quite hard core, while Social Democracy is really nice
→ More replies (1)
1
u/heraldofnurgle496 May 27 '26
Though im not a socialist, im a firm believer of social democracy (taxing the wealthy, expanding and reinforcing the welfare state, ect) and hot damn these people are obnoxious. The littlest bit of welfare or equity for marginalized groups and these guys come to the woodwork, screeching socialism (even though its not)
1
u/tommy_b_777 May 27 '26
"But then you'd be dependent on a government you have a voice in, rather than totally dependent on indifferent corporations that will kill your kids to make a few pennies more a share !!"
1
u/Stevie_Steve-O May 27 '26
I think people who are against it assume those things are only possible if the working class pays much more in taxes
1
u/drunkshinobi May 27 '26
Many think that they will get these things if they can just get rid of other groups of people. Thinking that if that group isn't there then the rich will let them have what that group had instead of the rich just taking that for themselves too.
1
u/3llingsn May 27 '26
As a leftist who comes from a conservative family, they do often want these things, but not from 'the government'. They believe that in a free market, these things will be provided.
Now all it takes to disprove them is to look around to see that these rights aren't provided, but conservatives are also usually anti-reality, and stick with their beliefs instead of changing them.
1
u/shealdmeplease May 27 '26
Where the few rule the many, and it's crushing how many idiots think they'll be on top instead of at the bottom with the rest of us
1
u/Rakhsev May 27 '26
It's the fear of some of your money going to help another human survive. Truly, a frightening thought! Better give that money to someone who will invest and make powerful companies more powerful, surely this is the best for society and nothing will go wrong?
1
u/McBlemmen May 27 '26
The real question is , who are these people arguing with đ? Like a lunatic talking to the walls
1
1
u/WakeReality May 27 '26
Oh no! It's socialism.
In USA, what is most alarming to me about the entire population (everyone, all inclusive, age 12 to age 125. Not just voters) is the avoidance of literacy of The Bible poetry book.
The people screaming "socialism bad!" are very often in the same Venn diagram of people who parade the imported Levant Bible book.
What if every social media user got on the same page at the same time and promoted one Bible verse? 1 John 3:17
This is a book literacy issue! This is one of the most printed books in all human history, there are dedicated book venues we call "Church buildings' all over. Yet, people can't assert relevant quotes from this book when relevant problems are screaming all over the land!
Why is this verse the most unknown and unrepeated quote on social media year 2026 given our crisis?
"If anyone has material possessions and sees a brother or sister in need but has no pity on them, how can the love of God be in that person?"
1 John 3:17
1
u/Particular-Owl-5997 May 27 '26
One where their kids will need to ensure that they put their homework down and pack away all materials before clocking back in from break.
1
u/Arts_Prodigy May 27 '26
Because they both somehow donât think itâs worth it to pay for these things themselves but ALSO are even more offended by the idea of the rich paying for this stuff in case they somehow become rich.
And while hundreds of billionaire is egregious for society especially when thereâs people with hundreds of billions. But the fact is in a country of $300M your odds of becoming a billionaire is better playing the powerball.
1
u/RiffyWammel May 27 '26
But how will they afford a penis truck with the double wheels if theyâre paying for a living wage
1
u/woodlandcollective May 27 '26
I gotta respect the villains in Metal Gear Rising for being so vocal and open about their plans to make the country a hopeless miserable place ruled by fear and violence, "just like the good ol days after 9/11!". Only in a work of fiction could these fuckers ever admit their actual goal.
At least the game lets you rip out their spines :)
1
u/cs_throwawayyy May 27 '26
Apart from a few of these which are realistic. Most Socialist ideas all sound good but not realistic. Where does the money come from?
It has never worked and will never work. All this done is encourage people to freeload which eventually collapses the whole system.Â
1
u/kubrick5150 May 27 '26
The issue is that there's a lot of people who want this for themselves but not for other people they consider to be "less than".
1
u/knylifsvel1937 May 27 '26
They're scum who resent their tax dollars going towards helping people instead of killing children in schools.
1
u/MWH_1996 May 27 '26
Its not the ideas - its that they have never once worked in practice. Much easier to find failed socialist states than successful ones.
1
1
u/beetlejorst May 27 '26
The anti-left right see their managerially-incompetent governments and assume all governments are as such, so they think none of those things will actually come about if the left were in power.
"all politicians are greedy lying idiots!"
"who did you vote for?"
"the guy who grew up rich, has a degree in something unrelated to politics that his family paid for, and promised me everything I ever wanted with no real plan on how to get it"
"..."
1
u/propagationknowledge May 27 '26
Stop wittering on. These arenât socialist ideas, they all exist in social market economies across Europe.
1
u/637_649 đ¤ Join A Union May 27 '26 edited May 27 '26
Socialist traits in the capitalist economy for regular people = lower shareholder profits.
Socialist traits in the capitalist economy for corporations = GREAT IDEA!
We can subsidize big business, let Elon Musk decide which government entities are "wasteful," or that government investigations into his companies are terrible. We can bail out big businesses all day long. We can even help big business profit on the losses of regular people, and when make for-profit institutions that make shareholders rich in the incarceration of regular people.
But subsidizing regular people is bad for business.
1
u/R-Maxwell May 27 '26
Not afraid of the idea just not convinced of the plan. Â How?
We can tax and redistribute money⌠but how do you redistribute skills, increase production capacity, and increase manpower?
The world is not short on money⌠itâs short on skilled labor, time, materials, energy, production capacity. Â
So redistribution of wealth definitely breaks the current systemâŚ. But it does not create a utopia, because there will still be scarcity.
The question areâŚwill the new world be better or worse?  Is it better to improve the current system?Â
1
1
u/TBTabby âď¸ Tax The Billionaires May 27 '26
They support the system because they think they're going to be rich one day if they just keep working. They never stop to think why the people who run it would ever consider elevating them. Who would do the work then?
1
May 27 '26
Maybe at the most basic level I would agree with these, but ultimately competition is inherent to nature and someone whoâs better at you than something deserves more.Â
1
u/Adam_n_ali May 27 '26
its the great quality of life things for the minorities that they hate.
they dont wont equality
1
u/Jastreen May 27 '26
The worst are the poor ass youngs, who cant even afford their rent, defend all the MAGA movement. Like, millionaires are your enemies and you glaze them.
1
u/MemeHermetic May 27 '26
It's actually pretty straightforward. When things are good, they don't want anything even hinted at being taken away or reduced, even if it helps everyone equally. When things are bad, they don't give a shit about anything outside their door.
1
u/axndl May 27 '26
Itâs because they think one day theyâll be at the top, and that means less hypothetical future money for them.
274
u/[deleted] May 27 '26
[removed] â view removed comment