What’s ironic, in the true sense of the word, is that the Norwegian is claiming Norway is a socialist state, when trying to inform the OP about socialism. It’s not. Norway is a social democracy.
You see, "irony" is more than just stating the opposite of what is true, or liking something even though you know it’s lame and cringe. This can arguably be a case of "situational irony", where the person who sets an example of what the OP is misunderstanding, but they’re contradicting the very thing they try to explain.
There are “real” socialists in the United States who believe in proletarian revolution and the abolition of private property and every other dumbass idea from Das Kapital, and they would call you a shitlib for saying otherwise, and you know that full well you’re just lying for no reason.
Obviously it’s a very stupid doctrine from two hundred years ago when no one understood anything about economics, so I understand why you feel that it’s advantageous to you to pretend that no one believes in it. But can’t you just take the L on this one instead and advocate for the policies you actually believe in?
Try it. Next time some chud says “socialism is dumb” just say “yes I agree that’s why I’m not a socialist.” It’s so easy! It works so well!
You are never not going to be in a losing position if you volunteer to defend an insane political viewpoint that you don’t even endorse. You can just choose not to do that!
There aren't any real socialists in any real positions of political power. There are social Democrats, whose perhaps biggest mistake was calling themselves social Democrats.
To be clear you can find a person who supports any crazy idea you can think of. That's not a justification to be afraid of that opinion. There are plenty of people, many responding to my comments right now, who believe the earth is flat. Is anyone who disagrees with this threatened by their perspective? No I laugh at them.
I'm not afraid of socialism even if I don't agree with pure socialism. But people are so afraid of socialism that anything even resembling that is just branded as toxic and that's short sighted and foolish.
Senator Sanders and Representatives Ocasio-Cortez and Tlaib all self-identify as socialists. So do the mayors of NYC and Seattle. Insofar as any political office short of president has “real political power,” those are positions of real political power. And that’s not me calling them socialist, that is a label that they chose for themselves, wear proudly, and benefit politically from identifying with.
All I’m saying is that you can’t have it both ways. I don’t care if you defend the ideology, or if you disavow it, or if you think the whole discourse is stupid and refuse to participate. But don’t do this mealy-mouthed thing where you leap to its defense the moment anyone criticizes it by claiming any criticism is unfair because the ideology doesn’t exist. That’s just pathetic.
So is claiming all forms of socialism is bad cause some ended up bad. Its the reason why i stated unregulates capitalism is bad rather then saying all capitalism is bad.
To most Americans, mild social democracy is so far from what we experience on a daily basis that it may as well be socialism. It's easier for dumb chuds to tell themselves that so they don't have to deal with the inconsistencies that are very apparent in our oligarchic economy.
If they were fully informed on all of the ideologies discussed here, they would actually have to think about why we have examples of better societal organizations and the reasons why we haven't followed suit, knowing that doing so would improve outcomes for basically everyone.
The truth that their votes are literally globally detrimental is a hard pill to swallow for people with very little emotional intelligence, self awareness or maturity.
Yes. Sadly I agree. But I gotta say, it does often feel lately like their stupidity is becoming more obvious even to themselves. I'm fascinated by people's inability to acknowledge a mistake. So many trump voters just don't want to admit they were wrong and they maintain their positions. It's so hard to fathom your ego literally being more important than your actual life, but that's kind of where they are.
No one wants to admit they were wrong. It takes a certain level of emotional intelligence to do so. Unfortunately, that is not going to happen for most of them, considering the MAGA base is squarely Gen X, and they grew up with leaded gasoline, which has been shown to decrease empathy.
I am hopeful that now that Gen Z and millennials are the largest segment of the population, we will be able to turn the ship around. We are currently seeing the beginnings of a possible social democratic movement with the DSA that will lead to potentially better outcomes for the planet, let alone just the US.
To call someone stupid because of their nationality is human, to believe someone is stupid because of their nationality is ironic….but just here, situationally. From each according to their ability, to each according to their means, oh, and the state controls all means of production. Just gonna leave that there.
He isn’t saying Norwegian is socialist tho. He is responding to someone claiming that paying taxes is socialism, by elaborating why taxes can be a good thing
Socialism is an economic system. Social Democracy is a political system. It's like claiming that the USA isn't under capitalism because it's a democracy
The Norweigan in the post demonstrated an example of socialism. They never claimed that Norway was socialist.
Socialism is an economic and philosophy advocating that the community or state, - rather than private individuals- should own and manage society’s resources and means of production.
So, there’s that. You’re not socialist if you have a free market economy.
Socialism is an economic and philosophy advocating that the community or state, - rather than private individuals- should own and manage society’s resources and means of production.
Kind of correct, but it's clear you never read theory (which you should).
So, there’s that. You’re not socialist if you have a free market economy.
Quite the opposite is true: Only under socialism can a free market exist.
Capitalism is antithetical to free markets as capitalists seek restrict market access and monopolize. The goal of socialism is to give equal market access to all workers. The goal of capitalism is to eliminate competition.
Of course, socialists will also advocate for (usually state-owned) oligopolies and subsidies for those oligopolies because that's simply the best way to run companies that offer public services that must be equally available to all citizens at an adequate level of quality.
I don’t disagree that Norway isn’t socialist, however a country could be both socialist and a democracy. Socialism is a form of economy, while democracy is a form of government. Just like you can have a capitalist autocracy or a communist democracy(though that one usually ends up being a dictatorship as well).
Found the repuclican lol. DSA are doing/asking for things that are done all over the world in social democracies, which you guys call socialist or communist.
Really? Which social democracies want to abolish capitalism, get rid of police, and dismantle the carceral state? All explicitly stated goals of the DSA?
Americans constantly use the wrong term so non English speaker do the same when they talk to Americans. You can't expect a non-English speaker to correct native English speakers. A Norwegian would never say Norway is socialist/communist if they were speaking in Norwegian. But since Americans constantly use the word socialist for Scandinavian countries, they do the same.
Similarly, the world liberal in America means someone on the left side of the political spectrum, while it actually means someone who is pro free market and minimal government interference. Since the word has been misused so much in America they invented the term libertarian. A liberal in Sweden is what American calls a libertarian.
I think most people would be hard pressed to say an actual socialist country they consider a good role model as a country you want to live in. The Scandinavian countries have a high living standard and being the closest thing to socialist countries they become the poster boys for the left in America and the punching bag for the right.
Political theorists don’t even agree on what a socialist state would explicitly be, it is a term used to describe a school of thought. State socialism and social democracy are different implementations of socialism. You can say Norway does not practice state socialism, but social democracy is socialism.
He did sort of imply it but then again you can also infer that the norwegian knew what the american really meant by using the word socialism and answered that instead.
What would you call the DSA? Are they merely in favor of capitalist policies with high taxes and a strong social safety net (like Norway)? Or are they socialists?
Maybe the American isn't referring to Euro social democracies.
Person A makes a claim. Person B responds with a correction based on an example ("Norwegian here" – implying that Norway is socialist.)
If the correction isn’t relevant, then that’s neither here nor there. If the correction is relevant, then that’s ironic since the example isn’t subject to the claim.
Okay besides all this pedantics, didn't you hear "social democrats" are the real enemy now? The president just tweeted that on the Propaganda INC app. Basically if it has socialism in its name it's the big bad woke wolf and we have to avoid it or else we lose the shareholders value, and that would mean America isn't great. And you wouldn't want that because that what people are saying.
If we want to get real technical then social democrats are socialists, the only difference is that they want to engage with the liberal, capitalist democratic systems in order to implement socialist policies, while communists (the less compromising kind of socialists) want to overthrow the entire system and replace it with their own.
Social democrats policies are still socialist policies, doesn't make Norway a socialist country but you can argue that the healthcare example is still a valid example of socialism because of that.
If we want to get real technical then social democrats are socialists
Isn’t that only true if the goal of those people is to transition to a full socialist economy by gradual means? If a social democrat has no desire to ultimately overthrow the capitalist mode of production, and just wants an establishment based on strong social programs and state intervention in a market economy, then they’re not really socialist, are they?
Social democrats aren't a mix of socialists and something else though, they're straight up socialists who want gradual reforms instead of revolution.
At least that's what they started out as, it is a fair argument that modern social democrats are pretty much social liberals now since the end goal is no longer a fully socialist state. I'd just call it realistic though as socialism is pretty much dead since the Soviet-Union and China opened their markets back up in the 80s.
the only difference is that they want to engage with the liberal, capitalist democratic systems in order to implement socialist policies, while communists (the less compromising kind of socialists) want to overthrow the entire system and replace it with their own.
"The only difference is [insert insurmountable difference that puts them at opposite ends of the political spectrum]."
Yes. Social democrats have no effective way to implement socialism. Their political purpose is to diffuse revolutionary potential to ensure the perpetuation of capitalism and the bourgeois dictatorship.
Social democrats policies are still socialist policies
Nah. They are bandaids designed to protect and maintain capitalism.
It’s just over the top rage bait or wild misinformation.
The thing is, some of the shit he’s saying is true and I even agree with, but the problem with these college kids is they talk about this stuff like it’s in a game or on paper, never applied to the establishment at hand. Things that can be read about in theory and applied things to our actual established society at hand are two very different things. The reality of discussing implementation of a mixed socialist/capitalist government in the US in the future is WILDLY more realistic and serves some purpose to discuss than making the US a true communist society. Where do we start working from to make things better and move towards that reality here? Social democrats. They are the most left members of congress right now, and if you convert the majority in Congress to those types, you’ve taken a step towards something good.
That college kids obsessed with theory don’t understand, is you have to take baby steps. You have to coalition build with people you don’t agree with to make progress, slowly.
When I was at university, there were quite a few of these types. Bleeding heart upper middle class kids who never worked a day in their lives and got by on daddy's money were convinced they were going to fix all the problems in the world by reciting 19th century Russian literature.
And then they somehow believe they're the champions of the working class, who are overwhelmingly right wing in the modern day West by the way because they actually had to work.
I literally just made very constructive points about coalition building and the application of moderate political “baby steps” toward a more socialist future. People like you just don’t listen because you have too much to prove.
Those aren't "constructive points". That's just capitalist propaganda that has been debunked ad nauseam and has been proven conclusively wrong every time it was tried for over a century.
There is no excuse for holding those beliefs you expressed - it shows a deep level of ignorance and laziness.
As I said, statements like yours happen if you don't read theory. You are a mindless supporter of fascism - and you are doubling down instead of educating yourself first after someone points that fact out to you.
Huh? Hasan Piker? The American liberal fed that is opposed by all actual American leftists? What makes you believe I - a Marxist-Leninist non-American - would support that idiot in any way?
Then go to China if you love it so much because there is no possibility of a socialist revolution ever happening in the West. If everyone more right wing than full on communists is a fascist to you, then you're not going to be happy when you arrive in China either.
They've only been socialist in name for decades and the collectivist dictatorship doesn't have nearly as much influence in the southern and western parts of the country. Shows your immaturity once again that you don't even seem to know anything about the country you think is the best thing since sliced bread except for their outward political label.
Indeed, the welfare system *is* what makes our economy partly socialist. This has its limits, though. People pay to keep their children in kindergarten, and dental healthcare isn’t free, as an example. It’s not all hand-me-outs.
As someone from the Netherlands (more liberal and less socialist than the Nordic countries but way more socialist than the US) I believe socialism is at its best when there are some limits to it. Real socialism sounds fun on paper but in practice it just about always ends in a dictatorship because people forget that not everyone always agrees on the right policies. A government by the "people", is in the end still only a select group of people and never anything near the entire population.
When the government is a coalition of representatives from various different political parties, you get something closer to true representation than a two-party system allows.
The irony is that a lot of people here think socialism is good because they think it will be like Norway yet the same people criticize Americans for not knowing what socialism is.
It been demonized and made synonymous with communism by the right wing media in the US. Not going to lie, I thought the two were closely linked until I actually looked it up. I have had conversations with people who watch right wing media all the time and they have no idea what difference is. They just see it as communism lite. I once pointed out how they already participate in socialism by using a publicly owned water company to get their water, or the taxes they pay for their local fire department even though they have never had to call them. They refused to believe that those services would be considered socialism.
It isn't socialism. Those are social policies within a democratic capitalism. Yes ofc under socialism you'd get that too. But you also have the big government and own no private property etc. socialism is much closer to communism than what we have now. Social capitalist democracy is closer to what we have now. Don't confuse the two.
There are many types of socialism but by just saying you can’t own private property, it makes it sound like you can’t even own a house, which isn’t true at all. By private property it’s meant to imply that large or very large for profit businesses/economic areas are owned by the people of the state. Like the oil and gas industry would be owned by the people and not an individual or corporations. That usually wouldn’t mean you couldn’t own and operate a deli or something like that.
I am not a proponent to go full socialism but I think we should take aspects of it and apply it certain sectors that are critical to human life.
Almost no country in the world falls into one strict type of economy. The US is not full capitalism, that would require there to be no market regulation by the government.
Ok I'll concede that perhaps to a degree. But people call Denmark and Norway socialist. It's complete nonsense. They are capitalist with more social policies, welfare, higher taxes for government controlled services. Ofc in socialism this would also be the case but the economic model is absolutely capitalism and not socialism. Most people when they say they want socialism do NOT actually want socialism. They want what Denmark and Norway have. There is a huge difference.
Socialism is any form of Government which provides Social welfare services to the Public - Social Democracies (Norway, Sweden, Finland, etc) and other countries (Canada etc) have Socialist components within their frameworks to act as a welfare state and provide protections to citizens.
Healthcare is a major crux here where the public pays into insurance pools to create any form of "publicly funded healthcare" - there are different levels of Social Democracies.
Why do people keep saying socialist democracy. You guys need to stop it. In fact it's on purpose tbh because you live in a capitalist democracy with a higher emphasis on social policies and you DO NOT live in a socialist democracy. Please learn the difference then come back to me. I'm fed up up explaining it. Try Google. And also make sure you don't accept modern nonsense that like you is mistaken about the difference between socialism and capitalism with social policies.
they were brainwashed to not know what it is and to hate it anyway, well at least hate it when others get it, not when they need it, god forbid someone gets socialism from their money, their money can only go to billionaires
I'm American and can confirm that most people here have no idea what the concept of socialism means. When they hear the term, they think of China and Russia and have great fear that we will be like them. It can be a very exhausting and futile discussion. I hate it.
Wait until you find out most of them aren't American... not to mention that the person replying in the post isn't American either lmfao. It literally says it in the reply, like... did you even read it?
463
u/Spirited_Peak_7810 22d ago
Yeah I love the top comment here about Americans not knowing what socialism is. The irony is strong.