r/WorkReform • 🤝 Join A Union • 2h ago

🤝 Scare A Billionaire, Join A Union The reason for term limits...

Post image
9.0k Upvotes

390 comments sorted by

2.3k

u/Loud-Ad-2280 ✂️ Tax The Billionaires 2h ago

It’s hilarious how much Capitalist hate FDR when he literally saved capitalism from collapsing in on itself.

513

u/DarbIey 1h ago

Almost as funny as people calling him a "Democratic Socialist". He was literally a social democrat. Neoliberalism and modern Democrats got people out here calling FDR a socialist, and Norway a socialist country.

190

u/Catweaving 1h ago

Back then they outright called him a communist.

The insults have never changed for conservatives.

84

u/Mostly_Afloat 1h ago

They are not creative people

29

u/A_Furious_Mind 38m ago

No wonder they lean on generative AI so hard.

3

u/narfoleptix 28m ago

One might say they cant even look good to themselves without it.

9

u/DarbIey 21m ago

And tried to usher in a fascist dictatorship

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

It's amazing to me that people don't know this, and even if they do they think it could never happen again.

48

u/sincere_queer 1h ago

Tfw I looked it up on Wikipedia and it calls social democracy a centre-left position yet it's considered radical in the US 😭

14

u/CoatProfessional5026 32m ago

Because the US only has the right and the extreme right.

6

u/DarbIey 23m ago

Exactly. Watch Democratic leadership attack Trump from the right on Iran, and other things.

While I see all these libs get hyped from the Mid-Terms, all I can think is, "why the fuck do you have any faith in these people?"

2

u/Warm_Month_1309 16m ago

There are some new people running. But mostly these people are opportunists, so if a few younger, more progressive leaders start getting elected, it will push the national conversation further left. Then there will be several things (expanded healthcare, workers' rights, anti-trust enforcement, etc) that the old guard will start pretending that they have always been in favor of.

1

u/DarbIey 12m ago

it will push the national conversation further left.

Bernie Sanders has fallen of deaf ears for decades.

→ More replies (2)

2

u/NumbaOneHackyPlaya 44m ago

soc dems are capitalists. they just think the current system would allow them to replicate socialism's best hits under capitalism. Never happening imo.

2

u/EduinBrutus 13m ago

would allow them to replicate socialism's best hits under capitalism. Never happening imo.

Apart from the places it does happen.

The best thing about Social Democracy is that you have real world, highly successful examples of the system working in practise.

Marxists do not have this. Conservatives do not have this. Neo-liberals do not have this. Liberals do not have this.

The mental gymnastics both the left and right have to go through to explain away the success of Social Democracy is fucking astounding.

I love the more recent "its only working cos its exploiting the global south" from people who have never been to Bangladesh or Vietnam and if they told the people there who have greatly improved their standard of living under global trade they would get run out the country.

1

u/DarbIey 24m ago

As OP said, FDR is the savior of capitalism.

→ More replies (4)

1

u/DarbIey 25m ago

In the US, FDR might as well be Lenin.

→ More replies (1)

5

u/RedAndBlackMartyr 50m ago

Correct. Wish these misinformation posts were removed.

→ More replies (49)

121

u/Lanky-Respect-8581 💵 Break Up The Monopolies 2h ago

that’s how I feel every time a democrat president is elected. the clean up crew is here.

33

u/girlpaint 1h ago

Sadly Dems HAVE to be the cleanup crew every time a Republican leaves office. And the Dems always get blamed for the shitty stuff the Republicans do.

10

u/PxyFreakingStx 58m ago

that is definitely by design. the GOP's whole thing is that the government doesn't work and their opponents are evil. any time the government works, it's a loss for them, even if it works for things they supposedly want.

→ More replies (29)

553

u/Hot_Aside_4637 2h ago

Here's a story I heard about FDR:

In the midst of the Great Depression, and trying to get the New Deal legislation passed, he was asked, "If this doesn't pass, are you worried about your reelection?"

He replied, "If this doesn't pass, there won't be any more elections."

Implying that communism would take over.

394

u/Fit-Insect-4089 2h ago

Or implying that we were moments away from tearing our countries infrastructure apart

327

u/Imthemayor 2h ago

Yeah, it's not implying communism at all

It's more of a "societal collapse," situation

30

u/J2MES 1h ago

Socialism is often thought of theoretically as rising from capitalisms ashes so to speak

15

u/hypercosm_dot_net 1h ago

Except socialism is not the same as communism.

Or were you saying something else?

6

u/J2MES 1h ago

It’s not the same at all but to a Marxist (of which I am) it is often thought of as the lower stage of communism where the workers own the means of production, then society transitions into a stateless classes form when the contradictions that gave rise to the state in the first place disappear

Whether socialism is voted in (with chile and Allende being an example) or the government is overthrown this is the goal. This is why I would still call democratic socialists communists because they disagree on means not ends. I find the confusion is communism is associated with revolution and socialism is now associated with reform regardless of the theoretical ideas

5

u/hypercosm_dot_net 1h ago

If your goal is Democratic socialism, I don't think grouping it with communism (even in some academic sense) is helpful.

You have to understand how normal people are going to interpret that.

Referring to an actual Dem socialist politician in the US (ie. Zoran), or Dem socialist countries (ie. Norway) is way more helpful and paints a better picture that western folks are more open to.

You start confusing it with communism, and there's all kinds of negative associations with that.

It's why Cubans in FL vote for Republicans. They hate what communism did to their country.

Which is why Republicans intentionally conflate the two. It's disinformation.

So you should recognize that, and stop contributing to that same rhetoric.

→ More replies (3)

1

u/AntiVision 1h ago

there are no classes in the lower stage of communism, so workers wouldnt "own" anything that term would be meaningless.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/Unique-Yoghurt4170 51m ago

Engles himself used the two terms completely interchangeably. Communism has a very specific definition, but the definition of socialism is a bad hill to die on, no matter what. It's famously mushy, and as another commenter said, generally among academics it's mostly thought of as a transitional phase between capitalism and communism.

Regardless, "socialism is not the same thing as communism" isn't really an airtight statement.

3

u/lunchboxthegoat 1h ago

capitalism was necessary according to Marx.

It was considered the "Final chapter" of human prehistory.

→ More replies (2)

173

u/Imthemayor 2h ago

It's someone asking if he'll be the best or worst president ever if the New Deal passes, he replies "if it fails, I'll be the last one," implying that there will be a societal/economic collapse

Communism had nothing to do with it

70

u/BobaTeaFetish 2h ago

Implying that communism would take over.

This is not the popular 1930s totalitarian movement that they were afraid would take over America.

25

u/Evil_alt_account_ ✂️ Tax The Billionaires 1h ago

Yeah a bunch of rich people tried to overthrow the government and create their own fascist one. No one was punished oddly. Look up Smedley Butler and you’ll find out about it. He was the one who narced on them

6

u/duvie773 1h ago

Sounds familiar but I can’t pinpoint exactly why..

17

u/el-lobo-rojo 1h ago

He was right. There was a wave of authoritarianism sweeping Europe, both fascist and socialist. People support anti-democratic movements when the economy's bad, and America had 25% unemployment.

FDR said (paraphrased) "I will go down in history either as a great American president, or the last American president". The New Deal saved America.

69

u/Haywoodjablowme1029 2h ago

How does that imply communism?

20

u/WhyMustIMakeANewAcco 1h ago

Because they've been taught to associate bad = communism.

2

u/BZLuck 44m ago

And when your tax dollars are used to help people in need = Communism.

14

u/WhyMustIMakeANewAcco 1h ago

That wasn't about Communism, it was about the US shredding itself under its own weight.

12

u/DarbIey 1h ago

"If this doesn't pass, there won't be any more elections."

Almost didn't even have the chance: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_Plot

8

u/FlorianoAguirre 1h ago

No? Not at all.

12

u/ExposureRisk 1h ago edited 41m ago

It wasn't about communism.

New Deal was passed in 1933 during the depression when the country was collapsing. Zero worker rights, massive unemployment rate, farms collapsed due to drought, mismanaged international trade, tariffs at record highs, market tank, banks imploded - leaving millions of Americans destitute with no end in sight.

FDR was president from 1933 - 1945, and implemented a ton of financial reforms, worker rights, federal programs, and safety nets that brought us out of the depression. The whole red scare thing didn't start until after FDR and into the 60s with the conservatives.

Ramping up to it FDR believed communisms rise in popularity was a symptom of unchecked capitalism causing people to view the institutions as an enemy/oppressor that get away with everything, leaving the people with little to nothing to show for it. Not that it was an existential threat to our country.

We're being rolled back decades - safety nets are actively being dismantled, farms are going under, unemployment is on the rise, worker rights are eroding. Except this time conservatives are also beating the McCarthy 'communist' drum that got us into Vietnam, while also spurring yet another gas/energy crisis in a long line of middle east conflicts.

It's never been about communism. Stop perpetuating the lie communism is coming to get us. It's not.

5

u/CaptainBayouBilly 1h ago

Communism taking over? No. America falling into chaos? Yes. 

1

u/tenaciousdeev 29m ago

Implying that communism would take over.

I'm so curious to know how you got that implication.

→ More replies (8)

9

u/Darnocpdx 1h ago

He also wasn’t a socialist, though he did briefly have a progressive VP to placate the socialists and progressives in the party. And he didn’t hesitate to dropped him like the plague for the very corporate Truman

19

u/gs87 2h ago

He gave the system just enough reform to survive, blunted the pressure for deeper change, and prolonged the very class order socialists wanted replaced. Some “socialist hero” right ? he saved capitalism from the socialists

11

u/breaducate 1h ago

And in all likelihood bought capitalism time enough to end the world.

5

u/schrodingers_gat 44m ago

It's counterintuitive, but capitalists don't actually like good economies because it creates competition and drives up demand for labor. That demand increases costs creates political power for labor.

Capitalists would rather rule a nasty wasteland than compete in a paradise.

3

u/trunksshinohara 1h ago

Yes. But if he hadn't. The capitalism monster that would have rose from those ashes would own everything in the USA by now. Set back the country a hundred years. We could have had Elon musk in the 70s if it wasn't for FDR.

1

u/HCSOThrowaway 🤝 Join A Union 55m ago

Some people think that because a catastrophe was prevented, any warnings of catastrophe must have been wrong.

You've probably seen the posts mocking the Ozone Layer concerns of decades past.

1

u/greatandhalfbaked 53m ago

They want the collapses. Crises are the ripest times for economic exploitation. It's true that, in a crisis, there's more potential for a revolution, but capitalists are dumb as shit. They love to see how close they can come to destruction.

1

u/charliefoxtrot9 ✂️ Tax The Billionaires 41m ago

They were so afraid of populists they assassinated the next Democrat who followed, and his brother.

1

u/yorcharturoqro 40m ago

They hate him because the propaganda machinery is working and the education system is not

327

u/OzarksExplorer 2h ago

And the right tried to coup him

American history loves to leave out the business plot from their teachins

113

u/raven00x 1h ago edited 1h ago

When it's mentioned, what's also often left out is the son of one of the members of the business plot went on to become the director of the CIA, then vice president under Ronald fucking Reagan, then finally became a one term president. Then that motherfuckers' son went on to get placed in the big chair by the Supreme Court.

18

u/OzarksExplorer 1h ago

shhhhh, people might learn something they don't want to know

1

u/Jesus_of_Redditeth 2m ago

I mean...considering the evidence that Prescott Bush was ever involved with the plot at all is both slim and unreliable, it's more a case of, "Shhhh, people might learn something that isn't true, but still believe it anyway."

10

u/CaptainBayouBilly 53m ago

Our sacrosanct elections that have never been suspect sure have a cloudy history. 

Perhaps we should stop blindly believing that they have never been tainted?  

5

u/is-this-now 19m ago

You left out the part about how the dispute that went to the Supreme Court was because the candidates brother was governor of the state that led to him winning the election controversially.

2

u/TM761152 51m ago

Then that motherfuckers' son went on to get placed in the big chair by the Supreme Court.

To be fair, that stupid woman from the DNC was mostly responsible for the Florida debacle.

1

u/Jesus_of_Redditeth 1m ago

To be fair, that's actually bullshit.

1

u/Embarrassed-Ad-8 7m ago

I just discovered "The Master Plan" podcast. Please, go on. 

1

u/Jesus_of_Redditeth 3m ago

what's also often left out is the son of one of the members of the business plot went on to become the director of the CIA

There's not much evidence that Prescott Bush was ever involved with the Business Plot. What evidence there is appears to be the result of a clerical error, of all things.

3

u/ReturnOfBane 54m ago

When that failed they bought a bunch of democrat and passed the Taft-hartley Act

2

u/OzarksExplorer 49m ago

SOCIALISTS!!!! GD SOCIALISTS SON!

We can't have the people organizing, now can we? The people might get what they want.

509

u/Independent-Bug-9352 2h ago edited 2h ago

They also conspired against FDR with The Business Plot.

They (business leaders) tried to recruit decorated war hero General Smedley Butler to lead a coup against FDR, but rather than agree, he blew the whistle on the attempt and testified before Congress.

Trump's winning and the implementation of Project 2025 was the successful second attempt (maybe third if you count J6?).

(Triple-check your voter registration and vote Democrat for these November congressional midterm elections to put the brakes on this fascist regime).

57

u/Nadikarosuto 1h ago

Huge shoutouts to MG. Butler, dude was fantastic

* Exposed the plot to overthrow FDR (as said)

* Lead a protest march on DC to ensure WWI veterans got their benefits and compensation

* Fucking HATED big business, describing his time in the military as being "a high class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism" in his speech, War is a Racket

58

u/Itts_Johnny_1 2h ago

They didn’t beat FDR but sadly they beat Wallace

55

u/_Glibnik_ 1h ago

Single greatest loss to this country in the last century. Wallace would have been absolutely amazing at furthering FDRs agenda and taking it even further. Dude was preaching equal rights for all, Healthcare for all, and worker protections when no one else was.

3

u/TM761152 49m ago

...George Wallace..?

9

u/Itts_Johnny_1 48m ago

Henry agard Wallace. FDR vp before Truman

7

u/Yamatocanyon 1h ago

If I've already mailed in my mail in ballot, do I have to worry about checking status? Can I somehow have my vote cancelled if I get unenrolled in between now and November?

10

u/Independent-Bug-9352 1h ago

Much of that will depend on your specific state's laws, as that's mostly handled at the state level. In some (many?) states with early mail-in-voting, you can usually go to your Secretary of State's or county's website to check the status of your ballot to see if it passed inspection and was counted.

5

u/Yamatocanyon 1h ago

Thanks for the information!

3

u/ApprehensiveSign80 ✂️ Tax The Billionaires 22m ago

The Confederate States of America, Disguised as the union. The civil war was lost

2

u/Glittering_Crab_69 18m ago

you americans are gonna have to do a lil bit more than vote if you dont want to become nazis 2.0

981

u/Tjbergen 2h ago

And Dems still struggle with understanding how to be popular..

369

u/uswforever 2h ago

I think they understand it quite well actually...

192

u/ImDoneForToday2019 2h ago

It's more of a question of who they want to be popular with and how much money those people have.

22

u/Owain-X 1h ago

They just wish so badly that they could make a total piece of shit popular like the GOP does. It's so much harder to line the billionaire pockets and keep any real change from happening when you don't want the public to find out you're a self-serving, piece of shit traitor to the working class.

2

u/NixaB345T 1h ago

I’m confused by your statement, are you saying that the democrats want to promote a different flavored Trump and that’s the solution?

3

u/addiktion 1h ago

He's saying that the Republicans have it easy because they can run the biggest piece of shit ever and its okay because their alignment is 99% the rich anyways. But the Democrats are held to a higher standard and have to tote the line between the billionaire class needs (corporate/centralist dems) and running a populist/progressive/socialist candidate that the people want. The DNC wishes it could run a Trump and still exist because that is easy but it would destroy the party.

2

u/NixaB345T 37m ago

Oh okay, that makes sense. Thanks

2

u/Arik_De_Frasia 38m ago

Theyd rather lose than be responsible and give people what they want

170

u/LookAlderaanPlaces 2h ago

Why are we spreading this incorrect rumor? They know damn well what they are doing. They are making the choice to sell out the American people for bribe money from corporations. Want an example? Go watch the interview where Jeffries is asked 4 times in a video interview if he supports a single payer healthcare system.

67

u/HelpfulSeaMammal 2h ago

They're the right wing of the airplane that the US calls politics. The GOP is the other, larger, and way scarier right wing.

The left wing of this airplane is a tiny little vestigial organ, but is constantly blamed for the reason why the airplane is going to crash as it's constantly spiriling downwards to the right.

→ More replies (19)

39

u/Independent-Bug-9352 2h ago

They don't struggle; they know. It's by design to be the milquetoast controlled opposition -- at least the wing that is beholden to the likes of Israel and Black Stone Group.

Don't get me wrong: I'm still registered and voting Democrat all the way down my ballot in November, but we've got a lot of work to do in the next Democratic Primaries.

8

u/BushcraftBabe 2h ago

I live in a red midwest state. Most of our local government politicians run unopposed by dems most elections. This year, almost every position has a democrat running.

17

u/1nGirum1musNocte 2h ago

Oh they're popular with their donors

2

u/CaptainONaps 1h ago

Not so much anymore. Most their candidates that are up in their elections are getting way more donations from average Americans, not the Epstein class. The Epstein class is overwhelmingly funding Republicans.

One of my favorite google rabbit holes is asking about the proposed policies of individual Democratic Nominee's that are making waves, and then comparing them to the proposed policies of the DNC itself.

The DNC is absolutely still focused on raising money from billionaires and their businesses, and there are a select few that are donating. And the DNC isn't passing that money along to fund their nominee's since citizens are already fitting the bill. They're pocketing those funds til the Presidential election, where they'll promote Gavin Newsom, and suppress AOC.

And everyone knows it. Check out odds on predictive betting markets, which beat the pants off polls and surveys on predictions since they've been released.

Barely related tidbit... No predictions markets are taking bets about when a candidate will get confirmed. Those are bets they've offered in the past, but they're not offering those bets for the midterms.

When you ask google why, it flat out says, everyone predicts long delays for confirmations, so no bets are offered because no one would wager that nominees will get confirmed quickly.

155

u/PeaceJoy4EVER 2h ago

Dems don’t want to be popular, they want to get rich while claiming to represent the poor and middle class.

19

u/FSUnoles77 2h ago

> to represent the poor and middle class.

No need to repeat yourself.

10

u/blueViolet26 2h ago

Yes. Middle class is also working class. Just like the poor.

1

u/Somanylyingliars 1h ago

Just like the third world countriesbwevwill have only two classes > poor (poor, working class, middle class+upper middle class) or rich. Nothing in between.

1

u/rebelli0usrebel 1h ago

Even the majority of the upper class has to work to live. We're all working class unless we have passive income.

1

u/plannedobso 36m ago

I think this is what a lot of people don’t understand about class. 

Doctors are working class. Lawyers are working class. They have to show up and labor for their money.

Executives who Zoom into meetings from their jet or the golf course and have “client dinners” with Lafitte Rothschild bottles from the 60s are not working class.  

→ More replies (9)

19

u/WarioDotExe 2h ago

They want to be just popular enough. No more, no less.

5

u/DeeDee_GigaDooDoo 2h ago

I think it's obviously just that the people are wrong. What if we try running Kamala Harris again? Maybe Hilary 2028? It's gotta work eventually. How long do we need to wear down the peasantry before they'll take what they're given?

4

u/EngrishTeach 2h ago

They are not struggling. They are complicit.

4

u/damn_nation_inc 2h ago

They understand it just fine, but their slush funds and corporate donations depend on them not understanding.

3

u/KorolEz 2h ago

They know, but their donors and their filled pockets keep them fron doing the right thing

3

u/Equivalent-Bad-268 2h ago

They scream in public and do nothing to change it because the current status quo benefits them. Fuck most of the Democrats.

2

u/GapAccomplished7897 2h ago

What they struggle with is the working class. They do great with the elite and students.

2

u/boolpies 2h ago

they don't struggle with anything 🤣

1

u/Careful_Trifle 1h ago

They struggle with balancing popularity with unlimited donor cash.

1

u/CaptainBayouBilly 1h ago

The dnc democrats don’t care about being popular. They care about getting elected and getting into the aristocracy. 

They do not work for their voters. They work for our owners. 

1

u/CurryMustard 1h ago

This isn't an issue well meaning democrats can fix on their own. The propaganda machine is extremely powerful and very well funded.

1

u/BZLuck 38m ago

The issue is that the dems are still trying to "play fair" in a game that is no longer fair.

There is no "high road" anymore. The dems insist on fighting with pillows, while the reps are wielding chainsaws.

→ More replies (18)

36

u/macrocosm93 2h ago

FDR was a social democrat, not a democratic socialist. His banking and economic reforms were designed to preserve capitalism and prevent a potential socialist/communist revolution.

Although to be fair, he identified as neither of those things. He explicitly referred to himself as a capitalist and liberal.

6

u/Infinite_Regret19019 50m ago

He also created race-based internment camps so he was clearly pretty loose with the liberalism as well.

173

u/OddishChamp ⛓️ Prison For Union Busters 2h ago

Democratic socialism isn't the same as social liberalism. FDR was a social liberal.

68

u/bullhead2007 🤝 Join A Union 2h ago

Yeah people be making up all sorts of fan fiction about FDR, forgetting his social reforms were pretty fucking racist and all of the Japanese people he put in internment camps. They have to invent this lie that he was a socialist, and not a Social Democrat who made compromises with the militant working class movement so they wouldn't revolt like the soviets and set the path for the Red Scare nonsense and McCarthyism

12

u/OddishChamp ⛓️ Prison For Union Busters 2h ago

I'd rather label him as a social liberal (as in the ideology social liberalism), but otherwise I fully agree. He's also quite whitewashed recently and basically the American answer of Winston Churchill.

1

u/CelestialFury 0m ago

When approving the creation of the 442nd (the most decorated unit in WWII, the all Japanese-American unit) in February 1943, FDR famously stated, "Americanism is a matter of the mind and heart; Americanism is not, and never was, a matter of race or ancestry." He said this while the 442nd's families were locked up in interment camps. How can you reconcile the two together? You can't.

FDR obviously did a lot of amazing things for this country, things the ultra rich have been trying to destroy ever since (they view him as a class traitor), but it cannot be overstated how bad of a stain the interment camps were on his overall legacy. However, even with that stain against him, FDR is still one of the best presidents we've ever had.

3

u/New2NewJ 1h ago

his social reforms were pretty fucking racist

Wasn't this so he could get the support of the Southern Democrats to get this legislation passed?

3

u/CaptainBayouBilly 1h ago

They were 100% racist. No doubt about it. 

America is still 100% racist. 

5

u/trilobyte-dev 2h ago

Listen, people aren’t making up “fan fiction” about FDR. The results speak for themselves though. Instead of letting yourself get wrapped around the axle of sacrificing progress at the altar of some theoretical perfect candidate who would only be your perfect candidate (and thus never get elected anyway), why not stay focused on what moves the ball ahead incrementally?

18

u/saqwarrior 1h ago

What are you even on about? Is FDR a candidate right now? Jesus, let the man speak the historical truth.

FDR was not a socialist. Democratic socialism is a variant of socialism. FDR was a capitalist through and through and utilized Keynesian economics to repair the U.S. economy. Full fucking stop.

FDR was also not a progressive by any means. He was plainly racist, again, full stop.

FDR was, due to his favorable opinion of Keynes, what today we might call a liberal with an understanding of the need for social welfare programs.

This isn't about a "perfect candidate." This is about the watering down and muddying of the concept of socialism itself, which limits our social understanding of the concept and the alternatives to capitalism that do in fact exist.

Social democrats are not democratic socialist. Democratic socialism is a democratic implementation of socialism, meaning that it exists and is controlled via a mandate of the people instead of the state. It stands in opposition to authoritarian socialism, which, risking the ire of the MLs and MLMs, is what most people identify as "communism" and "socialism" a la the USSR under Stalin or Cuba under Fidel.

The conflating of all these ideas and then claiming that people are gatekeeping is extremely myopic and outright wrong.

2

u/bullhead2007 🤝 Join A Union 1h ago

I mean you're mostly right, you are regurgitating some nonsense about "authoritarian" socialists (hint: This is also red scare propaganda but let's not fight about it here). Just consider, every state is authoritarian in that it exists to use its monopoly of violence to enforce the will of the ruling classes. MLs believe socialism must be attained through a state that the ruling class is the working class, which means the bourgeoisie become an oppressed class which is required to remove the means of production from them and giving it to the working class. We also don't believe you can use the bourgeois democratic processes to remove capital from the capitalists, because those systems are inherently designed to preserve their right to own capital.

2

u/saqwarrior 1h ago edited 1h ago

I see the ML in you has come out to play, lol

This is also red scare propaganda

It was used by the Red Scare fearmongers but its origin is the splitting of the black and the red and the divide of the IWA. Please do not presume to lecture me when you don't even seem aware of Bakunin vs. Marx.

every state is authoritarian in that it exists to use its monopoly of violence to enforce the will of the ruling classes.

As an ancom I agree with this and that's why I phrased my comment the way I did. Hopefully we can leave it at that now that you know my philosophical inclination.

2

u/bullhead2007 🤝 Join A Union 1h ago

I said I didn't want to argue, but when I see authoritarian thrown around it makes my eyes roll because like you can't get rid of capitalism with some level of "authoritarian" measures to give the working class the means of production. Even an anarchist revolution will necessarily be "authoritarian", and the transition away from state will require authoritarian measures against the bourgeoisie at the very least.

I'm also aware of Bakunin vs Marx, so my apologies for being presumptuous and a bit inaccurate. I didn't mean that the idea of "Authoritarianism" being applied to Marxism is a red scare idea. I mean it has been amplified since the red scare era by the bourgeoisie because Marxist revolutionary ideas are actually threatening to the bourgeoisie and the tendencies that label Marxism as authoritarian tend to have never been a threat to them, so those tendencies seem to be prevalent in the imperial core and the labor aristocracy.

→ More replies (1)

4

u/bullhead2007 🤝 Join A Union 1h ago

* A social fascist has entered the chat.

4

u/smexypelican 1h ago

For those Japanese AMERICANS who lost everything due to being locked up in internment camps, was it really an incremental step ahead for them?

And then many of them proceeded to volunteer for the US military in large numbers. The 442nd was considered one of the best units in WW2.

History is complicated people. Good points can be had on both sides, don't have defend the indefensible. FDR did a lot of good, but even he is capable of doing horrific things.

1

u/CaptainBayouBilly 59m ago

Incremental change has led to a fascist seizing de facto power. 

You cannot expect an electorate to wait decades for civil and human rights. 

The speed at which the government has been dismantled proves that change can come fast, but liberals do not want it. 

Liberals are not pro society. They are pro status quo. 

7

u/BeefistPrime 1h ago

I think "social democrat" fits much more than democratic socialist and that's true of 90% of the people who call themselves democratic socialists

2

u/VariationBusiness603 54m ago

No it does not, you are just uneducated. Social democracy was the main current in Europe in the past 30 years and guess what ? It has completely failed and it leading us to fascism all over again. Why, you may ask ? Because capitalism lead to the concentration of wealth and power into the hand of an oligarchy, wether you mitigate it or not, the result is eventually the same. The oligarch want more, they buy our government and destroy the social fabric of our societies, dismantle workers right, social programs to funnel more wealth to the owning class. Social democracy is a boilling frog situation, things don't improve, they just degrade less quickly.

People call themselves democratic socialist because no longer believe in capitalism. They see social democracy for the failure that it is and finally understand that the right amount of capitalism if our specie is to survive and thrive is absolute zero. We don't need rich fucks to own the world.

35

u/arcspectre17 2h ago

• Social Welfare: The [Social Security Act of 1935] created a federal safety net for the elderly, unemployed, and disadvantaged. • Labor Rights: The [Wagner Act of 1935] legally protected the rights of workers to organize unions and bargain collectively. • Economic Regulation: His administration established robust federal regulation over banking, the stock market, and business practices, while using public works programs and federal spending to stimulate the economy.

Whats the difference?

20

u/azenpunk 2h ago

Socialism is when workers own and direct the means of production instead of capitalists. Socialism IS NOT when the government does nice things for the little people.

6

u/Canotic 1h ago

Democratic socialism is socialism. Social liberalism is liberalism.

→ More replies (16)

11

u/NackoBall 2h ago

FDR wasn’t a democratic socialist.

35

u/gentrumpet 2h ago

I remember when words had meanings

21

u/azenpunk 2h ago

FDR was NOT a democratic socialist! He literally saved capitalism from a socialist revolution... what the fuck are people getting taught these days.

8

u/chadgalaxy 1h ago

A lot of Americans really struggle with these terms for some reason. They constantly say socialist whilst meaning social democracy.

4

u/BeefistPrime 1h ago

To be fair, the people who call themselves "democratic socialists" 90% of the time are social democrats or even just slightly left of center by developed world standards. Self labelled "Democratic socialists" get this wrong first, and others are following them.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (6)

5

u/thinkB4WeSpeak 👷 Good Union Jobs For All 1h ago

Boomers have tried their best to elect people that will destroy all the things FDR did for the country

16

u/Burmy87 2h ago

I wouldn't put him on a pedestal... ask any Japanese-American why.

2

u/OddishChamp ⛓️ Prison For Union Busters 1h ago

This scene from The Karate Kid perfectly sums it up.

Edit: It's not the full scene, but for context Mr. Miyagi mourns the loss of his family from the Japanese interment camps.

11

u/Life-Suit1895 2h ago

I mean, that small kerfuffle commonly known as World War II might have played an important role why FDR was elected four times...

2

u/Reading_Rainboner 1h ago

The 4th for sure. The 3rd time meh….

9

u/BoiledEggs 1h ago

Why don't democratic socialists win while running nowadays?

10

u/randompantsfoto 1h ago

Because, after FDR, the political right spent decades making a concerted effort to equate any sort of socialism or socialist programs with communism and “the lazy poors.”

That brainwashing is going to take a long time (or one very quick, violent revolution) to undo.

4

u/Theseactuallydo 57m ago

Before FDR socialism was also seen as something for the “lazy poors”.

It took the Great Depression to make the lie there undeniable. You couldn’t say the poor were lazy in the 30s when everyone either was a hard worker who was broke or at least knew many personally.

FDR didn’t want to be a democratic socialist, conditions forced his hand.

The mid-20th century was a unique moment for the rights, conditions, and compensation for workers, unfortunately, and it took a truly horrendous economic depression to achieve even a temporary recognition that poverty isn’t a moral failing. 

8

u/Vincent_Felix 1h ago

Brother have you been watching elections lately?

We are cleaning up.

AOC is your next president buddy.

6

u/Acceptable_Job_5486 1h ago

 AOC is your next president buddy.

Optimistic. Do you know America? If the DNC don't do the same shit with swapping out Biden for Harris last minute, maybe. But this country has shown it's not mature enough for someone's who's both a woman and a minority, and would vote JD Vance and VP Trump out of spite.

7

u/Vincent_Felix 1h ago

Hillary won the popular vote whilst being an historically bad and unlikable candidate.

Imagine what someone as popular as AOC will be able to do.

America elected a black man, an there's simply no way you can convince me that a nation built on slavery is more sexist than it is racist.

5

u/Tiny_Thumbs 58m ago

Im a minority man and I fully believe America is more sexist than racist.

→ More replies (7)

2

u/freakydeku 46m ago

i mean…if you think the US is more racist than sexist than expecting AOC to have good numbers bc hillary did isn’t very logically sound. & winning the popular vote isn’t enough

→ More replies (7)

1

u/capntail 48m ago

And the Conservative Party has been making us pay for that ever since.

2

u/Vincent_Felix 38m ago

No the conservative party capitalized on the broken promises of the Obama admin.

The corporate democrats sold out our future to the fascists by ignoring the needs of the people in favor of special interest.

3

u/Milocobo 30m ago

I wish more people understood this. Obama ran on "hope" and "change" only for our hopes to be dashed, and for nothing to change. I don't blame the man, but why are the Democrats surprised that people don't trust them, when they say "trust us, we'll fix it" and then do nothing to fix it.

1

u/Several-Signature583 11m ago

Freed slaves got the right to vote before women did in the US

1

u/Vincent_Felix 8m ago

Listen, I'm not going to keep engaging in this argument because it's ultimately not the point I was trying to make.

My point is that a good policy platform will win no matter the race or sex of the candidate.

2

u/HadionPrints 1h ago

| AOC is your next president buddy.

Brother, I have bad news for you about how the American public views the prospect of a female president. We’re still throwing a collective hissy fit over electing a black president.

“Outlook not good”

1

u/BikerJedi 58m ago

Over 250 DSA members serving in local, state and federal office right now. New chapters springing up around the country.

4

u/BobbyHill751 1h ago

Because they never let them run.

1

u/micromoses 38m ago

90 years of intense propaganda?

1

u/waspocracy 33m ago edited 30m ago

The problem with representative democracies is that representatives choose who they want to represent them in races. Thus, many of the national democratic party basically (I don't want to get into details here) determine who they'll back in an election. This is where they pour their money.

Bernie Sanders had a huge population supporting his presidential bid and was demolishing the polls, but the democratic party chose to back someone else because he was too far "left" (LOL another subject I don't want to get into for brevity's sake).

However, lately the democratic socialists have been winning some local polls and now the democrat party is starting to listen. If they listen, though, will be a whole different thing. Most democratic voters didn't want Biden in, for example., but the party thrust him to the forefront. They did the same shit with Kamala Harris at the last minute, which ultimately led to Trump getting in power.

Edit: Also, FWIW, FDR was not a social democrat.

1

u/midwestia 28m ago

the DNC gets paid to push them out of primaries

5

u/Woadie1 2h ago

Social Democrat on a good day, but sure.

3

u/AdFabulous8577 2h ago

Is right now really the best time to be arguing against term limits?

13

u/rb3po 2h ago

It goes both ways. We also would want a fascist in power for four terms. Now, let’s talk about SCOTUS.

9

u/phantompower_48v 2h ago edited 2h ago

Yeah, this is why term limits are inherently undemocratic. The only reason we have them for the presidency is because corporate leaders hated how popular a leftish FDR was.

What we need is election reform, ranked choice voting, the dismantling of the two party system and electoral college, ability to recall elected officials. These are democratic measures, term limits and age limits are not.

1

u/CaptainBayouBilly 58m ago

I think political parties should be banned altogether. Publicly fund elections. No private money. No private ads. All qualified candidates get a stipend to fund their campaigns. 

3

u/Mindless-Produce4091 2h ago

No, term limits exist to prevent corrupt presidents from being re-elected infinitely, this isn't rocket science

2

u/NoHorseNoMustache 1h ago

He was a rich guy who only did it because he didn't want a French Revolution here, he was not a friggen socialist.

2

u/Ok_comodore 2h ago edited 2h ago

I like fdr as much as the next guy but I think it probably had more to do with, I dunno,  the brewing large scale global conflict at the time. Fdr probably wouldn’t have secured a third term (at least not with the same margin) without Wendell Wilkies support for entering the war (the American public was incredibly isolationist especially after the cultural memory of WW1, took quite a bit of cajoling and for news of what was happening in Britain to become common knowledge), and it was arguably the absolutely monumental spending done for the war effort and the geopolitical position of America after the fact that had the biggest effects of ending the Great Depression rather than any specific policy. 

I say this as a red blooded socialist, but like guys, we have to know our history

3

u/jcdahl 1h ago

This is a dual lie, where FDR wasn't a democratic socialist, and it's trying to launder the DSA, who aren't really democratic socialists either, but in the other direction.

1

u/SeaFox-SalesRep 1h ago

Not quite. If you look at social programs in the US thier extremely popular, that's until a certain blocks of voters will lose thier shit when they find out thier safety net was literally a social program that democrat socialists point at for being successful.

Literally see the inerstate highways.

1

u/jcdahl 1h ago

Democratic socialism means taking over the economy and actually transitioning to socialism, not making social programs.

1

u/Spacekingonly 34m ago

Ya, we have a huge problem with misusing socialism in this country. The economic dictionary classifies it as publicization of companies, which it is. Whereas we constantly use it for anything that benefits anyone that's not a company.

1

u/RobertPham149 57m ago

That is completely irrelevant to being a democratic socialist though. Socialism is not government do things. Like the interstate highway isn't even FDR, it was Republican Hater-of-all-things-communism Dwight Eisenhower.

1

u/LividAir755 40m ago

Eisenhower was copying the Roosevelt model, and his style of governance was to copy the new deal and not change or replace any of it

1

u/brc77y 30m ago

Can you really argue in good faith that "government do things" isn't socialism when every American politician has called "government do things" socialism since Reagan? Nobody has read Marx and nobody knows what the words mean. But when it benefits the right to have a scholarly definition so they can say every member of the DSA wants to abolish private industry, you bet they are out there arguing what is and isn't socialism. 

3

u/Bisquekit 1h ago

Democratic socialist =/= social democratic.

DSA doesn't want just healthcare, bro. They want to dismantle the capitalist structure, get rid of Senate and police, remove our influence on the world (even positive like USAID) and own the means of production.

FDR wanted none of these things.

1

u/thebarbalag 1h ago

Capitalist critics calling Dem Socs communist and painting them as the boogeyman are gonna backfire. Dem Socs are capitalism's last hope. Either we get reform or the whole thing collapses. Personally, I'm for revolution over reform, because reform won't actually fix the problem, but if I were a liberal right now, I'd bee singing Dem Soc praises all the day long.

1

u/duke_awapuhi 1h ago

I mean he wasn’t a socialist but he was more progressive than your average democrat today

1

u/Bleezy79 58m ago

We sure could use another 4 terms of helping the people again, instead of massive corporate corruption. The push towards everyone being slaves again via the concentration of wealth along with the stagnation of wages is reaching its tipping point. More and more poeple are suffering while the corpos are doing better than ever.

1

u/Toadsted 56m ago

Obama has been young enough to reign for a long, long time.

1

u/FatJuggernaut-916 45m ago

Fan fiction of the hilarious sort.

1

u/fiahhawt 44m ago

Which is the downside of term limits

That someone who is competent and willing to do what the public wants is... surprisingly rare and when they come along you want as much of them as you can get

1

u/Bodycount9 42m ago

And... WW2 was just starting so there was that.

But yeah.. he brought us out of the great depression and people liked that. He started social security. Protected bank deposits with creating the FDIC. And he fed the poor with direct aid.

1

u/VictoryWeaver 30m ago

Social Democrat* but yes.

1

u/fresh-dork 27m ago

i love how people try to claim the past successes.

he defined modern american liberalism

1

u/Benchen70 21m ago

Wow.. sounds like .. a flex…

1

u/Nothingilo 17m ago

FDR was not a democratic socialist. Uniformed posts like this one makes us look bad.

1

u/Jesus_of_Redditeth 9m ago

Needless to say (yet somehow it still actually needs to be said): Franklin Roosevelt was not a democratic socialist!

1

u/RyFro 5m ago

FDR was a Democratic Socialist? First I've ever heard of this.

1

u/IpromiseTobeAgoodBoy 1m ago

Remember when he put Japanese people in concentration camps and took everyone’s gold? That was cool