We need to talk about Bernie

[Young Master Smeet]

https://medium.com/@paulmasonnews/usa-the-radical-moment-has-begun-d1538e944c87#.y2gj7mldc

Quote:

Even Lebanon voted for Bernie Sanders. As I write, the small rural upmarket Grafton County, NH has Sanders beating Clinton by 32%. The county is 94% white, 3% Asian, 1.8% Hispanic and 0.9% Black. It’s middle class white America and the voted, on a large turnout, for the first serious leftwing candidate in the history of the Democratic Party.

This is apparently the biggest win by a radical in any Democrat primary.  Of course, practically no-one lives in New Hampshire, and the race has a long way to run (and Trump won the GOP primary).

Obviously, we have concerns over what Sanders desribes as socialism (basially welfarism and statism); but the simple fact that large numbers of Americans can support sopmeone calling himself socialist at all is significant.  But he is only one man, teh Democrat Party is still a Democrat Party.

[ALB]

Our US comrades are to it, according to this email:

Quote:

… an idea that has been accepted by the other WSPUS members active on our forum. It was reported in the US press that as a result of Bernie Sanders calling himself a socialist internet searches on the word "socialism" have surged. [The] idea is to take advantage of this by creating a new website using the domain name whatissocialism.org (or .net) specially designed to attract people who do these searches.

As an aside, I see Mason describes Sanders as "the first serious leftwing candidate in the history of the Democratic Party" but what about FD Roosevelt? Isn't Sanders advocating the same sort of "New Deal" policies? I know he's denouncing billionaires and calling for a political revolution but didn't FDR do much the same?

[jondwhite]

Surely a domain name to attract people is not as good as a high Google ranking?

[Young Master Smeet]

https://theconversation.com/sanders-wins-new-hampshire-why-the-time-is-again-ripe-for-american-socialism-54317

Quote:

Sanders has explicitly placed himself in the tradition of liberal icon Franklin Delano Roosevelt. The comparison is apt indeed: FDR’s liberalism was not only “socialist” by the standards of realigned American politics, providing the foundation for modern liberalism and the foil for modern conservatism. His conservative opponents in the inter-war years labelled him a “socialist” for his bold initiatives to combat the Great Depression and revive the country from economic collapse.

[ALB]

jondwhite wrote:

Surely a domain name to attract people is not as good as a high Google ranking?

The US comrades have that in hand too:

Quote:

comrade S … has agreed to create the site and take the technical measures needed to get it high on the lists of sites that people get when they do the search.

[DJP]

jondwhite wrote:

Surely a domain name to attract people is not as good as a high Google ranking?

Actually a good domain name, one that is related to the content, will help get a high Google ranking…And if you Google "What is Socialism" (sign out of Google first to make the test fair) we come out number one. Anyone else seeing this?

[Anonymous]

We are not alonehttp://www.counterpunch.org/2016/01/15/why-americas-next-president-will-not-be-a-socialist/

[alanjjohnstone]

The blog has certainly not been neglecting Sanders and his version of "socialism"http://socialismoryourmoneyback.blogspot.com/2016/02/sanders-is-no-socialist.htmlhttp://socialismoryourmoneyback.blogspot.com/2016/01/sanders-de-cyphered.htmlhttp://socialismoryourmoneyback.blogspot.com/2016/01/sanders-is-no-eugene-debs.htmlhttp://socialismoryourmoneyback.blogspot.com/2015/06/bernie-sanders-is-no-saviour.htmlNor did we forget Clinton –  "pragmatic progressive" candidatehttp://socialismoryourmoneyback.blogspot.com/2016/02/saving-capitalism.htmlhttp://socialismoryourmoneyback.blogspot.com/2016/01/who-pays-pipercalls-tune.htmlhttp://socialismoryourmoneyback.blogspot.com/2015/08/wasnt-me-guv.htmlOthers on the US elecion are ready and ready to be posted at later date. We have understanably ignored the Republicans until they decide on the demagogue they wish to put up for president. But perhaps the above may form part of the content of a new website. 

[alanjjohnstone]

Oh, i know there are those here who are not impressed by Chomsky but he has been talking about Sanders, too. 

Quote:

“Though he happens to use the word socialist, it just means New Dealer.” Chomsky considers Sanders a New Deal democrat, which in today’s political spectrum is way off on the left. President Eisenhower would look like a radical leftist in today’s spectrum, literally…On earlier occasions Chomsky has said that the Sanders campaign is valuable for flagging some important economic issues, but the senator wouldn’t be able to do much even if he is elected president – “which was unlikely in the system of bought elections” — for Sanders would be alone with virtually no Congressional support …Today’s Democrats, Clinton-style Democrats, are pretty much what used to be called moderate Republicans…"

http://thewire.in/2016/01/31/chomsky-interview-the-us-is-one-of-the-most-fundamentalist-countries-in-the-world-20491/

[Anonymous]

alanjjohnstone wrote:

Oh, i know there are those here who are not impressed by Chomsky but he has been talking about Sanders, too. 

Quote:

“Though he happens to use the word socialist, it just means New Dealer.” Chomsky considers Sanders a New Deal democrat, which in today’s political spectrum is way off on the left. President Eisenhower would look like a radical leftist in today’s spectrum, literally…On earlier occasions Chomsky has said that the Sanders campaign is valuable for flagging some important economic issues, but the senator wouldn’t be able to do much even if he is elected president – “which was unlikely in the system of bought elections” — for Sanders would be alone with virtually no Congressional support …Today’s Democrats, Clinton-style Democrats, are pretty much what used to be called moderate Republicans…"

http://thewire.in/2016/01/31/chomsky-interview-the-us-is-one-of-the-most-fundamentalist-countries-in-the-world-20491/

As always Noam Chomsky says something on his books, and then he acts different to what he has written. Now he is supporting the Social Democrats Bernie Sanders, in the past he also gave his support to John Kerry, and he gave his support to the invasion of Haiti during the government of Bill ClintonBernie Sanders is just another bait of the capitalist Democratic Party of the USA, used in order to attract the youths, the low income workers, the black, the Latinos and the Asian, in the same manner that they used an Afro-American in order to continue their imperialist aim around the world.Noam Chomsky has said many times that he is an Anarchist but he has always supported state capitalist governments and their leaders, in the past he gave his open support to the government of Venezuela, and to the governments of Nicaragua and Cuba.The left wingers of Latin American has been supporting him because he is with the poor peoples, and do not know what they mean by being poor, because,  according to the socialists we are all poor cause we do not own any means of productions, and we are wage slaves, and in those countries that he has supported there are millions of wages slaves, and according to some financial statistics he is worth.around 5 millions dollars 

[Anonymous]

ALB wrote:

Our US comrades are to it, according to this email:

Quote:

… an idea that has been accepted by the other WSPUS members active on our forum. It was reported in the US press that as a result of Bernie Sanders calling himself a socialist internet searches on the word "socialism" have surged. [The] idea is to take advantage of this by creating a new website using the domain name whatissocialism.org (or .net) specially designed to attract people who do these searches.

As an aside, I see Mason describes Sanders as "the first serious leftwing candidate in the history of the Democratic Party" but what about FD Roosevelt? Isn't Sanders advocating the same sort of "New Deal" policies? I know he's denouncing billionaires and calling for a political revolution but didn't FDR do much the same?

 He does support the Glass-Stegall l law that was signed by FDR in 1933

[Anonymous]

alanjjohnstone wrote:

The blog has certainly not been neglecting Sanders and his version of "socialism" 

Nor have I on twitterBernie is talking and being talked about daily on twitter

[jondwhite]

good pr from berniehttp://www.snopes.com/bernie-sanders-unpaid-interns/

[jondwhite]

is Sanders the next Tsipiras?

[alanjjohnstone]

Has Sanders brought socialism in from the cold?http://static.politico.com/e2/b7/4b6f2ac94dfc9a5c21e4c8d20cdf/socialism-final-1.pdfSix-in-ten Democratic primary voters believe socialism has a 'positive impact on society,Democratic voters in every age group, every gender, and every race view socialism favorablyAmong people 45 and under — a group that has helped power Sanders’ primary performances — the ideology is preferred to capitalism by a margin of 46 percent to 19 percent.Voters over 66 years of age (36 percent preferred socialism, 28 percent sided with capitalism) and African-Americans (40 percent to 27 percent).In a January Bloomberg/Des Moines Register Iowa Poll, 43 percent of likely Democratic caucus-goers said they would use the word 'socialist' describe themselves.Now the bad news for ourselvesSocialism was defined as a system for those who believe “corporations have too much control and that the capitalist system is set up to favor the rich and powerful,” and that “the only way to police corporations and protect the citizens is for the government to take a larger role in managing the economy to make sure that every individual has equal access to basic necessities and public goods, even if that means that some people have to transfer their wealth to others." Free market capitalism, meanwhile, was described as the world-view for those who “say that it’s not the government’s job to pick winners and losers and that government intervention only leads to inefficiency. They say that capitalism produces the greatest amount of personal and economic freedom for every individual and [it] ultimately results in the best economic outcome for society, even if some people are left behind because they can’t compete.” 

[Author]

Posts