The infighting and dogmatism is pretty off puting. Even if multiple studies show that a police doesn’t work, ie rent freezes, they still blindly push for it.
The studies can be biased. But you are absolutely right on the main point. Leftists are just as susceptible to group thinking as anyone. However, nobody else in a collective group is any different.
Also, putting society above the individual is not quite right. It is recognition that you should put the majority of individuals above the minority, instead of protecting an individual’s absolute rights above the interests of the majority. It’s not like society isn’t made up of individuals, after all.
It doesn’t say anything about how you think they should be achieved.
It might not include many specifics but “by eliminating capitalism” is definitely one of them. Without that you’re just describing Keynesian capitalism.
It doesn’t matter if you disagree, that’s what it is. Socialism is the economic system of communism and anarchism, worker ownership of the means of production, or at the very least the process of moving to that economy. It’s not compatible with capitalism and the private ownership of means of production.
The infighting and dogmatism is pretty off puting. Even if multiple studies show that a police doesn’t work, ie rent freezes, they still blindly push for it.
The studies can be biased. But you are absolutely right on the main point. Leftists are just as susceptible to group thinking as anyone. However, nobody else in a collective group is any different.
You’re talking about how a particular party or group within a party behaves. Presumably you’re talking about the DSA. That’s fine.
Being socialist just means being an advocate for policies which put society above the individual.
Being socialist just means that you agree that those a good goals. It doesn’t say anything about how you think they should be achieved.
Also, putting society above the individual is not quite right. It is recognition that you should put the majority of individuals above the minority, instead of protecting an individual’s absolute rights above the interests of the majority. It’s not like society isn’t made up of individuals, after all.
It might not include many specifics but “by eliminating capitalism” is definitely one of them. Without that you’re just describing Keynesian capitalism.
I’d disagree. It certainly means being against unbounded capitalism. I think you need heavy regulation on companies, but not the elimination of them.
It doesn’t matter if you disagree, that’s what it is. Socialism is the economic system of communism and anarchism, worker ownership of the means of production, or at the very least the process of moving to that economy. It’s not compatible with capitalism and the private ownership of means of production.