Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

UglyGreed

(7,661 posts)
Thu Feb 11, 2016, 06:42 PM Feb 2016

Bernie is a Democratic Socialist, let's see who else was

10 Surprising People Who Advocated Socialism

Martin Luther King Jr., Activist And Pastor



Nelson Mandela, Resistance Fighter And Politician



George Orwell, Author And Journalist



Pablo Picasso, Painter



Helen Keller, Author And Activist



Albert Einstein, Physicist



http://listverse.com/2014/05/13/10-surprising-people-who-advocated-socialism/

Democratic Socialism Has Deep Roots in American Life

The shock and disbelief with which many political pundits have responded to Bernie Sanders’s description of himself as a “democratic socialist”—a supporter of democratic control of the economy—provide a clear indication of how little they know about the popularity and influence of democratic socialism over the course of American history.

http://historynewsnetwork.org/article/161058#sthash.Ju4CEDDN.dpuf

21 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Bernie is a Democratic Socialist, let's see who else was (Original Post) UglyGreed Feb 2016 OP
The 12 best reasons to be a democratic socialist UglyGreed Feb 2016 #1
Upton Sinclair ...wrote the book "The Jungle" Stuart G Feb 2016 #2
Thanks UglyGreed Feb 2016 #4
Didn't Sinclair say something like, "I aimed for America's heart and retread Feb 2016 #16
My favorite: Ed Asner cyberswede Feb 2016 #3
You're just promoting "wealth guilt." valerief Feb 2016 #5
Did I do that? UglyGreed Feb 2016 #7
Franklin Delano Roosevelt pacalo Feb 2016 #6
Nope wyldwolf Feb 2016 #9
New Deal. pacalo Feb 2016 #10
Sorry, no wyldwolf Feb 2016 #11
Sorry you felt the need to go to all that trouble, but I'm fine with my stance. pacalo Feb 2016 #12
of course you are. wyldwolf Feb 2016 #14
Franklin Delano Roosevelt called for a $25,000 salary cap Ichingcarpenter Feb 2016 #19
I like Ike compared to many pols of today, even if he was a Republican... cascadiance Feb 2016 #8
K&R liberal_at_heart Feb 2016 #13
Kick for Hillary UglyGreed Feb 2016 #15
Bernie and Mandela Donkees Feb 2016 #20
K & R AzDar Feb 2016 #17
A Democratic socialist is what I am madokie Feb 2016 #18
I'm pretty sure UglyGreed Feb 2016 #21

UglyGreed

(7,661 posts)
1. The 12 best reasons to be a democratic socialist
Thu Feb 11, 2016, 06:52 PM
Feb 2016

In a highly anticipated speech, Sen. Bernie Sanders passionately detailed what being a democratic socialist means to him and would mean for Americans if elected president.

After listing many metrics showing Americans today are working harder than ever yet facing undue pressures to pay for necessities like housing, healthcare, higher education and retirement, Sanders said democratic socialism means reviving the wisdom and policies behind President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s New Deal, Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society and Rev. Martin Luther King’s call for economic justice.

“Real freedom must include economic security,” Sanders said, quoting FDR’s 1944 speech calling for a second Bill of Rights for economic justice. “That was Roosevelt’s vision 70 years ago. It is my vision today. It is a vision that we have not yet achieved. And it is time that we did.”

“People are not free,” he continued. “They are not truly free when they are unable to feed their family. They are not truly free when they are unable to retire with dignity. They are not truly free when they are unemployed, underemployed or when they are exhausted by working 60, 70 hours a week. People are not truly free when they don’t know how they are going to get medical help, when they or a family member are sick.”

“So let me define for you, simply and straightforwardly, what democratic socialism means to me,” Sanders said. “It builds on what Franklin Delano Roosevelt said when he fought for guaranteed economic rights for all Americans. And it builds on what Martin Luther King, Jr. said in 1968 when he stated that, ‘This country has socialism for the rich, and rugged individualism for the poor.’ My view of democratic socialism builds on the success of many other countries around the world, who have done a far better job than we have in protecting the needs of their working families, their elderly citizens, their children, their sick and their poor.”

http://www.salon.com/2015/11/21/bernie_sanders_12_best_reasons_for_being_a_democratic_socialist_partner/

Stuart G

(38,436 posts)
2. Upton Sinclair ...wrote the book "The Jungle"
Thu Feb 11, 2016, 06:54 PM
Feb 2016

Most of the book, is a call to "democratic socialism" and the true evils of capitalism. About 10 -12 pages talk about the awful conditions in the meat packing industry. That setting in Chicago in 1906, is where an immigrant is followed on his journey as a worker in the packing plants to a view of a new political ideology . That journey is totally lost on the incredible description of how awful conditions for workers are as well as the way the food produced in those plants. The Jungle was responsible for the Pure Food and Drug Act being passed in 1906. Nevertheless, most of the book is about that journey and Sinclair view of why the socialistic view is superior to the selfish capitalistic one.

retread

(3,762 posts)
16. Didn't Sinclair say something like, "I aimed for America's heart and
Fri Feb 12, 2016, 09:57 AM
Feb 2016

got them right in the stomach."

wyldwolf

(43,867 posts)
11. Sorry, no
Thu Feb 11, 2016, 07:30 PM
Feb 2016

Chicago Democratic Socialist of America:

http://www.chicagodsa.org/thomasnewdeal.html

http://www.hoover.org/research/how-fdr-saved-capitalism

The new deal was a calculated system to save capitalism. Not replace it. Not reform it. And the Democratic Socialists and Progressives of the day knew it.

There were elements of socialism in the new deal, an obvious reaction to the times. But FDR was no socialist.



FDR was a one-percenter

Roosevelt's net worth in 1932 was $6o million (http://www.therichest.com/celebnetworth/politician/president/franklin-d-roosevelt-net-worth/)

Roosevelt saved capitalism and the principles of privately owned business for the U.S. economy... Roosevelt did not think in dictatorial or even anti-business terms. Amid speculation that his administration would nationalize the banks, Roosevelt's emergency banking bill extended government aid to help banks through the crisis... Roosevelt's New Deal reforms didn't challenge the system of private profit but sought to regulate and channel it.

In the New Deal there was a tug of war between those who favored a centrally planned economy and those who believed that a reliance on small business and decentralized economic power would bring about recovery. The decentralizers prevailed.

This belief in decentralized and democratic economic power characterized the most important reform of the Roosevelt era: Social Security.

Social Security, by guaranteeing income to elderly retired Americans, established the proposition that the individual has social rights.

But Roosevelt, against the advice of economic planners who would have made it solely a relief program for the poor, insisted on adding responsibilities by funding Social Security through taxes deducted from every wage earner's paycheck.

http://articles.latimes.com/1999/oct/25/news/ss-26179


He sensed a shift in the electoral mood in the early 1930s and went with it



http://books.google.com/books?id=z8wSCZG9O6AC&pg=PA406&lpg=PA406&dq=fdr+opportunist&source=bl&ots=uS-ItBAquz&sig=-g7THj75It4D9BiqplduDbcTr-o&hl=en&sa=X&ei=B4J2VLXvCs_ToASfiYDQAw&sqi=2&ved=0CFYQ6AEwCQ#v=onepage&q=fdr%20opportunist&f=false

Broadly representative measures of public opinion during the first years of the Depression are not available — the Gallup organization did not begin its regular polling operations until 1935...

... the most striking difference between the 1930s and the present day is that, by the standards of today’s political parlance, average Americans of the mid-1930s revealed downright “socialistic” tendencies in many of their views about the proper role of government.

http://www.pewresearch.org/2010/12/14/how-a-different-america-responded-to-the-great-depression/


National surveys suggest that the leftward shift in public opinion during the 1930s was even more extensive than indicated by third-party voting or membership in radical organizations.

http://www.hoover.org/research/how-fdr-saved-capitalism


Like President Obama and those in Congress who favor government programs to put people to work and ensure that all Americans can enjoy a healthy and productive life, FDR’s New Deal—including his passage of unemployment insurance and Social Security—was attacked as “undisguised state socialism” by one senator. Others went so far as to insist that FDR was a communist, including FDR’s erstwhile colleague Al Smith, who, as one of the founders of the right-wing American Liberty League, warned in the 1936 election that “the people could either breathe the clear fresh air of America, or the foul breath of Soviet Russia.”

FDR brushed aside these attacks in part by insisting that we were a rich nation that could “afford to pay for security and prosperity without having to sacrifice our liberties into the bargain.”

http://rooseveltinstitute.org/franklin-d-roosevelt-socialist-or-champion-freedom


He co-opted much of the left's rhetoric to keep progressive third party threats at bay

The economic crisis of the 1930s presented American radicals with their greatest opportunity to build a third party since World War I, but the constitutional system and the brilliant way in which Franklin Delano Roosevelt co-opted the left prevented this...

Franklin Roosevelt demonstrated his skill at co-opting the rhetoric and demands of opposition groups the year before his 1936 reelection, when the demagogic Senator Huey Long of Louisiana threatened to run on a third-party Share-Our-Wealth ticket. This possibility was particularly threatening because a “secret” public opinion poll conducted in 1935 for the Democratic National Committee suggested that Long might get three to four million votes, throwing several states over to the Republicans if he ran at the head of a third party. At the same time several progressive senators were flirting with a potential third ticket; Roosevelt felt that as a result the 1936 election might witness a Progressive Republican ticket, headed by Robert La Follette, alongside a Share-Our-Wealth ticket.

To prevent this, Roosevelt shifted to the left in rhetoric and, to some extent, in policy, consciously seeking to steal the thunder of his populist critics.

http://www.hoover.org/research/how-fdr-saved-capitalism


Progressives' of his day didn't care for him much

In my examination of the historical record, it is clear that Roosevelt endured vicious, unrelenting attacks from his left that often exceeded the level of vitriol directed at President Obama, and correspondingly, Roosevelt was not viewed by liberals of his day with the adulation and reverence liberals view him today.

In fact, it's pretty remarkable how closely the attacks Roosevelt experienced from his left echo the attacks that liberals make against Obama today. (numerous links and examples follow...)

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/08/11/891631/-UPDATED-Liberal-Criticism-of-Franklin-Roosevelt-and-The-New-Deal#


He cut deals with conservatives on civil rights to get parts of the New Deal passed, many of his policies were racist.

Most women and minorities were excluded from the benefits of unemployment insurance and old age pensions. Employment definitions reflected typical white male categories and patterns.[6] Job categories that were not covered by the act included workers in agricultural labor, domestic service, government employees, and many teachers, nurses, hospital employees, librarians, and social workers.[7] The act also denied coverage to individuals who worked intermittently.[8] These jobs were dominated by women and minorities. For example, women made up 90 percent of domestic labor in 1940 and two-thirds of all employed black women were in domestic service.[9] Exclusions exempted nearly half of the working population.[8] Nearly two-thirds of all African Americans in the labor force, 70 to 80 percent in some areas in the South, and just over half of all women employed were not covered by Social Security.[10][11] At the time, the NAACP protested the Social Security Act, describing it as “a sieve with holes just big enough for the majority of Negroes to fall through.”[11]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Social_Security_in_the_United_States#Initial_opposition


The harsh logic of Roosevelt's racial stance was expressed most clearly in 1938, when liberal congressmen attempted to pass federal anti-lynching legislation to halt the most horrific type of anti-black terrorism. (Several thousand blacks were killed by lynching in the United States between the 1880s and 1960s.) Southern Senators angrily filibustered, and FDR defied black leaders and his own wife by refusing to throw his support behind the measure. "I did not choose the tools with which I must work," he explained. "Had I been permitted to choose them I would have selected quite different ones. But I've got to get legislation passed by Congress to save America. The Southerners... occupy strategic places on most of the Senate and House committees. If I come out for the antilynching bill now, they will block every bill I ask Congress to pass to keep America from collapsing. I just can't take that risk."

http://www.shmoop.com/fdr-new-deal/race.html


He didn't intend for welfare to be a permanent government expenditure.

The lessons of history, confirmed by the evidence immediately before me, show conclusively that continued dependence upon relief induces a spiritual and moral disintegration fundamentally destructive to the national fibre. To dole out relief in this way is to administer a narcotic, a subtle destroyer of the human spirit. It is inimical to the dictates of sound policy. It is in violation of the traditions of America. Work must be found for able-bodied but destitute workers.

The Federal Government must and shall quit this business of relief.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=14890


He was propagandist

This was propaganda. FDR's talks were scripted by policy advisers and stylized by the playwright Robert Sherwood. Through these homey "fireside chats" the aristocratic Roosevelt recast himself as a plain-talking everyman. ...

http://www.thenation.com/article/fdrs-democratic-propaganda#


He was a warmonger.

As World War II began, Roosevelt was among those concerned at the growing strength of the Axis Powers, and he found ways to help Great Britain, the Chinese Nationalists, and later the Soviet Union in their struggle against them. His program of Lend-Lease supplied military equipment to those powers despite the U.S. government's official neutrality.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Franklin_D._Roosevelt#Criticism_of_Roosevelt_as_a_.22Warmonger.22


a great president in a profession where the bar is set pretty low. Certainly not the progressive hero the left has made him out to be.

Ichingcarpenter

(36,988 posts)
19. Franklin Delano Roosevelt called for a $25,000 salary cap
Fri Feb 12, 2016, 10:05 AM
Feb 2016

In 1942, during World War II, US President Franklin D. Roosevelt proposed a maximum income of $25,000 during the war:[5][6]
At the same time, while the number of individual Americans affected is small, discrepancies between low personal incomes and very high personal incomes should be lessened; and I therefore believe that in time of this grave national danger, when all excess income should go to win the war, no American citizen ought to have a net income, after he has paid his taxes, of more than $25,000 a year. It is indefensible that those who enjoy large incomes from State and local securities should be immune from taxation while we are at war. Interest on such securities should be subject at least to surtaxes.
This was proposed to be implemented by a 100% marginal tax on all income over $40,000 (after-tax income of $25,000). While this was not implemented, the Revenue Act of 1942 implemented an 88% marginal tax rate on income over $200,000, together with a 5% "Victory Tax" with post-war credits, hence temporarily yielding a 93% top tax rate (though 5% was subsequently returned in credits

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maximum_wage#History


That amount would be around $350,000 today
and we've been at war for longer than ww2

UglyGreed

(7,661 posts)
21. I'm pretty sure
Fri Feb 12, 2016, 10:16 AM
Feb 2016

many people are but were afraid to say so do to the propaganda during the cold war. It does pop up every now and then and we have even seen it in some posts here.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Bernie is a Democratic So...