The exploiting classes will do the accelerating no matter what, but it’s socialist political education efforts that will yield international socialism rather than national “socialism”.
I’d think at some point politicians are going to capitalize on this sentiment by proposing their own kind of socialism that fits for Americans. It might not be actual socialism under the hood, but the important thing will be that it’s America-first at its core, like explicitly nationalist.
I kind of wonder if this idea has been tried before. I’m a bit surprised none our politicians have suggested this yet, but that would make some sense if this has been tried elsewhere and they want to be innovative rather than rehashing old ideas.
I’d think it is far more likely that any politician in the US proposing something like that would push for something that “isn’t capitalism and isn’t communism, but a new third way.”
You’re right of course, I was just trying to be snarky about repackaging national socialism.
The problem with “socialism with American characteristics” is that American characteristics are just
Isn’t that just the standard Social Democracy/Bernie Sanders/Nordic Model shit that’s fooled like 80% of the zoomers
I know it’s defeatist, I know it’s counterproductive, but I have privately maintained for years that the only socialism America will accept is “National Socialism”
The line of thinking that that would work is probably a motivating factor for the ACP’s patsoc bullshit
lets be real though; they think socialism is when bernie sanders
Great. Now ask them to accurately define those two terms before being allowed to answer and see the responses then.
In this context Socialism=Nordic Model, right?
I think we should rename it to ex-nordic model. The Nordic countries abandoned welfare above a decade ago, and keep putting hundreds of thousands of their inhabitants in poverty
Yeah, I was saying this with a strong hint of disdain. It’s the only form of socialism that is even slightly amenable to libs.
Now do Communism and see if they’ve just allowed the DSA to co-opt the word socialism for electorialism
Why does the first column sum to 101% and the second to 108%?
There was a minimum of 1% of Dems who were “both pro-socialism and pro-capitalism” in 2010, and it was at least 8% in 2025.
The presentation is misleading bc the question at the bottom isn’t what was asked to the poll participants. They were asked if they have a favorable view of socialism and of capitalism. It’s possible to say yes to both.
Poll question:
Just off the top of your head, would you say you have a positive or negative image of each of the following?
Yes I’m a socialist who likes capitalism. I’m valid. I exist.
Stuff like this is also entirely useless. Most of the people who responded to these probably can’t define either of those terms.
I can guarantee all the people who answered yes to both think that socialism is what nordic countries have.
it’s not entirely useless. it means you can say you’re for socialism and not elaborate further and they’ll support you. that can be good for us or it can be good for literally hitler.
Well I’m not in favor of electoralism anyway so i don’t much care what catch phrases people respond to.
i’ve seen people too focused on electoralism before but this is a first to have someone too focused on antielectoralism. If you’re a socialist group trying to do anything in a community having that community be nebulously favorable to socialism makes your task easier, whether that’s recruiting, fundraising, supporting a strike, or chucking rocks at cops.
If they ACTUALLY support socialism yes, but if they just support “The word the republicans call Nancy Pelosi all the time.” then its not very useful. Since what you really need are people that actually want to organize. Just look at someone like Bernie Sanders. He calls himself a socialist but he was one of the people out there refusing to call Gaza a genocide for the longest time. Words don’t mean anything unless people know their actual definition. Someone who says they support capitalism but actually wants to get out there and do anti-imperialist action is vastly more useful than someone who wants to sit at home and say they want free college so theyre a socialist. The USA is just a very strange place where people say things that make absolutely no sense.
if people were already principled socialists we would have no work to do.
if you want to raise money for real work and you decide to have a socialist bake sale with socialist in the name it does not matter how educated the public is, it matters whether they’re positive on the word or not. you’d do much better with one of those now in the US than you would at any time 10+ years ago until you go back far enough to the Panthers being active and better among white people until you go back before McCarthyism.
it’s the job of (some) orgs to educate people and it’s good if more of them are willing to come in the door or hear you out in the first place.
the downside of john q. public not knowing the difference is that bernie or “national-socialists” can co-opt the sentiment as well.
healthcare pls socialists aren’t all going to show up and do the work but they’re much more amenable to us than clintonite single-payer types were in the 1990s.
https://news.gallup.com/poll/694835/image-capitalism-slips.aspx
https://news.gallup.com/file/poll/694838/250908Capitalism-Socialism.pdf
I think they were 2 independent questions - see % by party. (Also +/- 4% sampling error)
It being 2 different questions makes sense.
The bourgeoisie does accelerationism much better than us.
I’m not accelerationist but sometimes it sure seems like the bourgeoisie are
Grill-warfare. Acceleration through deceleration.
