I'm in a Twitter fight with some Bernie folks arguing "millennials and socialism are the future..."

[brooklynite]

Link to tweet

Anyone want to join in?

[guillaumeb]

1. Voting, actual engagement, is our civic "voice".

And no amount of virtual activity can replace that voice.

[empedocles]

2. Our future is 2020!

[RKP5637]

4. Yes!!! n/t

[George II]

3. Other than that they're way off base, on both scores. But not worth fighting about on twitter.

[mikeysnot]

5. Gen Z, Millennials and Gen X outvoted older generations in 2018 midterms

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/05/29/gen-z-millennials-and-gen-x-outvoted-older-generations-in-2018-midterms/

[Lib 4 Life]

54. this a fact that constantly gets overlooked.

[mikeysnot]

87. Convenient isn't it

more divide and conquer.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

6. Ah, the life of a heavy hitter donor and king maker.

Is Tom Perez busy?

[NurseJackie]

10. Bazinga!

[TidalWave46]

14. He's not busy if there is money on the other end of the line.

(I say this as a current and enthusiastic supporter of Perez.)

[brooklynite]

17. Well I was invited to two receptions with Tom later this month...

...sadly, I’ll be in the Middle East.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

40. .

[NurseJackie]

7. I believe you've summed it up perfectly. Nothing else to add.

[Celerity]

8. that Twitter account is trying to gaslight by conflating socialism with social democracy

If you explain to a group of 1000 US voters who are pre-disposed to social democracy what moving to a pure socialist economy would actually entail, 900 plus would drop off in terms of support.

[NNadir]

9. No. I wouldn't dream of joining in.

[flying_wahini]

11. Well, of course the young voters ARE ALL our future. Not this election.

My guess is that if Bernie doesn’t get the nomination then they disappear Again.
I hope I am wrong.
It’s gonna take Every person to go and vote Blue no matter who
or we are in big trouble.

But how do we get there if Trump is in control? Because one way or the other,
fascism is waiting in the graveyard as the Bernie bots whistle by.

Every vote counts and every vote counted.

[betsuni]

12. "We grew up with the internet and our minds are hardened against propaganda."

[Cha]

19. lol hard pass on propaganda!

I grew up on tv and newspapers and I'm no friend to propaganda OR Gas Lighting!

[TidalWave46]

13. Just look away.

At least they are watching and engaged. I know it’s going to come as a shocker but young people can be foolish and full of energy. Passionate and void of logical thinking skills. Blinded by their feelings of invincibility while having little defense to back it up.

Some are future democrats. They aren’t hanging out at storefront.

My statement is not a broad brush of younger generations. Buttigieg falls in the age being discussed and I’m pretty much sold on him. Along with many others.

[Joe941]

15. Socialism is our future. I agree.

[Celerity]

25. I think you mean social democracy, not socialism, and NO, they are not the same thing

Name one successful actual socialist nation.

Social democracies like the Nordic nations are amongst the most successful nation states in history, and are most definitely NOT socialist. They all have vibrant (more healthy and robust than the US's) capitalist fundamental elements that are also heavily regulated to curb the destructive tendencies.

It is foolish and self-destructive to try to falsely rename social democracy as socialism, especially in a fundamentally reactionary nation like the United States. It just gives the RW systemic forces and their mindless dupes a free taxonomic axe with which to falsely bludgeon profoundly needed programmes, philosophies, and vital legal/regulatory controlling/balancing structures with.

[Joe941]

26. Actually they are the same, but I dont mind rebranding if it helps the cause.

[Celerity]

30. 'Actually they are the same'

That is simply factually and profoundly untrue.

The very definitions are fundamentally divergent.

I will engage in a debate all day long, but not one where you a priori take a deliberately false stance in terms of basic terms and socio-economic and governmental systems.

Socialism's end goal is state/societal control of the means of production, ofttimes via nationalisation. I can assure you that that is not the endgame in any of the social democracies on the planet.

You may very well be an actual socialist, but do not try and say that is the same as bog standard social democratic forms of governance and economic ordering. Come here (I am doing post grad studies in Sweden) and try and tell them they live in a socialist nation. They will laugh at you, just as they would laugh at a RW American saying the same thing (albeit the RW says that for different reasons.) Sweden has a very robust capitalist system as one of its fundamental organising principles, they just do a far better job at regulation and steering the outcomes of it, especially in terms of income inequality, which is the most important overarching and interlocking statistic that determines the well-being of a nation state.

Bernie's inane stubbornness in terms of false self-labelling (as a democratic socialist) via to his futile attempts try to change close to 200 year old, pervasive, globally accepted (at both academic levels and in everyday informal parlance) political/economic definitions is not only suicidal electorally speaking, but has the spill-over effect of doing great damage to our Democratic Party as a whole. It feeds into bullshit RW messaging that falsely smears us all as socialists and thus (in the reactionary and woefully brainwashed USA) the even more false and loaded term, 'commies.'



What socialism is — according to Bernie Sanders

U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders has been calling himself a democratic socialist since the 1960s.
Bernie's use of the word "socialist" has attracted both love and ire from the left.
His definition of socialism is vague, but is the basis for many peoples' understanding of the concept.

https://bigthink.com/politics-current-affairs/what-is-socialism-bernie-sanders?rebelltitem=3#rebelltitem3

snip

Luckily for us, Senator Sanders explained his political philosophy in a speech he delivered at Georgetown University in 2015. (The entire speech can be viewed here.)

He begins by referring to the New Deal of President Franklin Roosevelt and pointing out the good that it did for a country in the depths of the Great Depression:

"He saw one-third of a nation ill-housed, ill-clad, ill-nourished. And he acted. Against the ferocious opposition of the ruling class of his day, people he called economic royalists, Roosevelt implemented a series of programs that put millions of people back to work, took them out of poverty and restored their faith in government. He redefined the relationship of the federal government to the people of our country. He combated cynicism, fear and despair. He reinvigorated democracy. He transformed the country. . . . And, by the way, almost everything he proposed was called 'socialist.'"

The senator then muses on several issues facing the United States, income inequality, unemployment, high rates of childhood poverty, the high cost of medical care, and a declining faith in our political system, among others, and decides that the concentration of wealth and power is both the root cause of them and the key reason why we have failed to solve them. His solution, of course, is "socialism." It is then that he gives us his conception of what that is:

"Democratic socialism means that we must create an economy that works for all, not just the very wealthy. Democratic socialism means that we must reform a political system in America today which is not only grossly unfair but, in many respects, corrupt."

He goes a bit into the particulars of policy and explained that his conception of socialism would require — this is what it would look like — universal health care, total employment, free college education, more public spending, a living wage, environmental regulations, and a robust democratic culture to come into existence. He flatly denied any interest in nationalization, telling the audience:

"So the next time you hear me attacked as a socialist, remember this: I don't believe government should own the means of production, but I do believe that the middle class and the working families who produce the wealth of America deserve a fair deal."

The contents of this speech were very similar to other statements he has made about socialism across his entire political career. The entire speech could have been summed up neatly in a quote he gave to the Associated Press back in 1997:

"To me, socialism doesn't mean state ownership of everything, by any means, it means creating a nation, and a world, in which all human beings have a decent standard of living."

Wait a moment, praise for the New Deal? No interest in nationalization? That definition sounds a lot like capitalism!

You might have noticed that this program focuses on making capitalism work better and not replacing it with an entirely new system based on social ownership. This has made his definition of socialism a matter of contention.

While "socialism" is a system based around replacing private ownership of the means of production with social ownership, which generally means having the workers own and operate them instead — either through cooperatives or the state — Bernie hasn't shown much of an interest in using the government to promote this change.

Bernie's explanation of "socialism" is, in fact, closer to what political philosophers refer to as "social democracy." This is a capitalist system, since the means of production are still privately owned, where the state heavily regulates the economy and has an active welfare system in place to correct for the worst problems inherent to capitalism like inequality, cyclic instability, or the profit motive encouraging people to do things against the public interest.

snip

[pangaia]

57. thanks for taking the time...

i don't like the way Sanders USES the term socialism.. never have..

Social Democracy IS, as you say, much closer to what he proposes, in my view.

I also think Bernie's biggest problem is his decades long 'attachment' to his ideas... 'attachment' being used in the same sense in which it is used in spiritual practices.....

I strongly supported him in 2016..
As of now, I have no 'favorite,' and really don't know WHO is best placed to beat the enemy..

[Celerity]

60. +10000

[cwydro]

16. I'm not on twitter, but hope you win.

The first sentence of your tweet says it all.

[melman]

18. Some interesting retweets you have there

Like this one for example.







"Kellie's" bio




Why are you retweeting Trumpian attacks on Greta Thunberg?

[RandiFan1290]

23. Great question

I'm not at all surprised that he's pretending not to see it.

[progressoid]

37. wtf?

[Hassin Bin Sober]

39. .

[Lib 4 Life]

55. it all becomes clear. 😡

[trotsky]

63. Wow, just wow! n/t

[kcr]

99. Huh

What a surprise.

[Cha]

20. You said it accurately.. they should know that.

[Hortensis]

21. Extremists imagining themselves the future is their eternal delusion.

Some will come to understand that democratic majorities, whether measuring liberal or conservative majorities, or national electoral majorities, virtually always average out moderate. Of course! How could it be otherwise? The more fortunate will come to appreciate how greatly their own wellbeing depends on the stability that democracy provides when it functions as it needs to.

Others will never understand any of this and are doomed to unhappiness and anger every election, stolen elections the only explanation that makes sense.

[melman]

22. Why are you retweeting right wing attacks on Greta Thunberg?

as seen here


and still on your twitter right this minute


I asked before and you didn't answer. So I'm asking again. Why are you doing that?

[RandiFan1290]

24. Looks like an active campaign

to discourage young democratic voters.

[MaryMagdaline]

29. Yea, really NOT a good idea

I like to shoot a WTG to young voters. Any encouragement to engage is helpful. It’s not a good idea to foster hostility. They already think we stole their future.

[obamanut2012]

34. whoa

[ecstatic]

67. Could have been by accident

Last edited Fri Oct 11, 2019, 01:04 AM - Edit history (1)

2 wrong & successive clicks (usually due to screen lag while scrolling or something) and you can easily retweet, like, or follow the wrong person or post.

[randr]

27. They would be a hell of a lot closer to their goal

had they showed up for Hillary with a respectable number

[Thekaspervote]

103. Yes!

[Lotusflower70]

28. I hate the divisiveness

They are like every generation of young people who are trying to use their voice in any sort of powerful way. It's so easy to say young people don't understand or know or haven't experienced anything. It's so easy to put the old against the young. But if you can't hear the concerns of the young instead of the entitled millennials propaganda, then you have gotten old.

[BlueMississippi]

31. All those millennials grow up and realize that someone has to pay for the unicorns

Then they become centrists.

Those who don't grow up, still dream of free unicorns.

[Act_of_Reparation]

32. I'm 37 years old.

Seriously, how in the blue fuck old do you think millennials are? Late teens? Early twenties?

[Celerity]

102. I am 23 and a last year millennial (unless you count born in 1996 as the last year, there is debate)

I deffo think that the truest sense of the word would be those born in the first half or first third (so 1981 to 1985 or 1987ish) of the Gen.

Talk about some shit events to have happen to people born around then right in key life events times. Turn teen (sometimes, if younger turn teen in middle of the post 1999 shit) and then boom, RW Rethug 1994 gangster takeover, Oklahoma City bombing, Clinton Impeachment, Columbine, Y2K, immediately followed by dot com crash, the 2000 US election, then 9-11, then Afghanistan and even more so, the Iraq War, wee tiny mid noughties break/respite (although I grew up in London, so had the 7/7 attacks in 2005), then the 2007-2010 global financial crash,(at least during that time from end of 2008 and for next 8 years there was Obama) but then Libyan and Syrian wars and that refugee crisis (deffo hit us here in the EU harder than it did the US), another wee wee break and BOOM, BREXIT and TRUMP

Probably left some big events out too.

No wonder some (not all of course) the older millennials I know are so cynical (I am too!) I relate more to them than I do many of my Gen Z friends.

[Thekaspervote]

104. Thx.. very good explanation!

[Cuthbert Allgood]

33. So any answer pending from you about your retweets of RW talking points

because that is some shitty optics right there.

[obamanut2012]

35. +1

[progressoid]

36. And these children that you spit on...

As they try to change their worlds
Are immune to your consultations
They're quite aware of what they're going through

[ehrnst]

45. "Children?" "Spit on?"

[progressoid]

46. Ch-ch-ch-ch-changes

[ehrnst]

47. Non-sequitur

The response of champions.




And a choice of boomer era song to boot...

[Cuthbert Allgood]

48. You really didn't get the connection of that response?

You might want to have a Snickers.

[ehrnst]

49. Very nice of you to rush to the aid of someone

who needs help. That's friendship right there.

[Cuthbert Allgood]

51. Take the tin foil hat off.

I was reading the sub thread. Saw the song reference and laughed. And saw that it went totally over your head. Which is ironic given your response. So I commented.

And I see you don't really address the issue.

[ehrnst]

53. "Tin foil hat?"

Non-sequitur:

non se·qui·tur
/ˌnän ˈsekwədər/
noun
a conclusion or statement that does not logically follow from the previous argument or statement.

[Cuthbert Allgood]

72. Posting the definition of the fallacy does not mean that you correctly identified the fallacy.

And, in the world of argumentation, if you have to resort to the definition as your only argument, you've likely lost.

And, without my help even, the other poster explained why it was, in fact, a sequitur. Any thoughts on the clear relationship of that song to the argument at hand or are you just going to post the definition again, thinking that makes everything clear?

And I do not know what possible conspiracy theory you think I was engaging in here with your mirror post. But, hey, nice try at deflection. Or, maybe projection.

[ehrnst]

74. Yes, the "tin foil hat" crack was such a "winning" reposte.

And your "conspiracy theory" response is irony defined.

[Cuthbert Allgood]

78. So you are just never going to address the arguments anyone makes. Got it.

[ehrnst]

84. Some strawman there.

Speaking of avoiding arguments.

[Cuthbert Allgood]

86. Specifically what strawman argument did I make?

I await you posting the definition of strawman for me. Because I'm sure that's your next move.

[ehrnst]

91. Not going down the rabbit hole.

But "conspiracy theory" and "tinfoil hat" are apparent to anyone else.

And the "not going to address the argument" red herring is apparent to anyone with a nose.

[Cuthbert Allgood]

93. Giving the data and warrant for your claim isn't a rabbit hole

It's called making an argument. But you do you.

[ehrnst]

94. You do you, too.

[melman]

95. .

[ehrnst]

96. .

[George II]

98. Lots of those here these days. Frank Lloyd Wright would be SO proud, eh?

[George II]

97. Bazinga!

[Cha]

61. Why are you personally attacking her?

Nobody here has "tin foil hats".

[Cuthbert Allgood]

71. So you think that the other poster and I are friends and I came to their rescue?

Or is it more likely that I comments on a post in a discussion board, because...you know...discussion. One might even argue that her saying I was coming to the defense of a friend was a personal attack. But since you didn't point that out and you are the supreme ruler of determining that, it must not be.

[ehrnst]

75. "Supreme ruler?"

A bit over the top, don't you think?

[Cuthbert Allgood]

77. It was purposeful hyperbole.

I clearly don't think there is a supreme ruler of deciding those things.

But, you clearly aren't an "it" getter, though, are you?

[ehrnst]

85. Some don't need hyperbole or to attack straw men to make their points.

Some just make their point and let others do the scrambling.

[progressoid]

50. It's not a non-sequitur.

I find it interesting. The young people Bowie was singing about were Boomers. And now those Boomers are complaining about today's young people - Millennials.


(I'm a Boomer btw)

[ehrnst]

52. Non-sequitur:

non se·qui·tur
/ˌnän ˈsekwədər/
noun
a conclusion or statement that does not logically follow from the previous argument or statement.

Is that clearer?

[progressoid]

56. Thanks for the condescending post.

I'm quite aware (pun intended) of what a non-sequitur is. I'm a fan of the non-sequitur. My post wasn't one.

The Twitter feud in the OP about Millennials sounds exactly like our elders complaining about us when we were young. Hence, my post quoting Bowie's commentary about us and our elders of the past. Get it?

[ehrnst]

59. It was a non-sequitur.

Is that clearer?

[LanternWaste]

38. I s'pose that simply illustrates your own character more than anything else.

Useless arguments for their own sake certainly allow us an unearned faith in a fictional cleverness.

The important thing is you deny it as such.

Again.

[Bradshaw3]

80. "... it does little more than advertise my character for many, many other posters to see."

"I say this as someone who has been doing that very thing more and more often lately-- letting my visceral reactions take precedence over an exchange of thoughts and ideas. However, I am wrong in doing that-- I certainly cannot rationalize it, and it does little more than advertise my character for many, many other posters to see."

Again.

[Cuthbert Allgood]

41. I maded a couple things for you that sums up my thought on your twitter war

[scheming daemons]

42. First, we need to find out what your wife thinks

[Cuthbert Allgood]

43. ...

[sheshe2]

62. ...

[ehrnst]

44. Leftward Swing was on DU (under another name). They are no longer here. (nt)

[Lib 4 Life]

58. we millennials will be fighting for our very survival sooner than later. some aspects of socialism

will be critically needed to make that happen.

[polichick]

76. Exactly. The paradigm shift needed for survival is overdue...

Younger people are still close enough to their true spirits to pull off that kind of change - and some older people are wise enough to help.

The dirty rotten hippies were right about peace, love, environmental justice and corporate control - and inspired millennials are right today. This time it will take all generations working together - led by the visions of the young.

[Lordquinton]

64. Millennials are not just the future, we're the present

Now please explain why you're retweeting trump supporters.

[Celerity]

66. who is retweeting trump supporters?

I must have missed something

[Lordquinton]

68. Read up in the thread

It's linked there.

[Celerity]

69. thanks! found it, sigh

[brooklynite]

70. And apparently you didn't see my response.

Link to tweet

[Hassin Bin Sober]

73. Is it possible you were hacked? Maybe have the FBI look in to it.

[Act_of_Reparation]

79. One time, I left my iPad on my desk while I went upstairs to take a piss.

When I came back, a squirrel was using it to read articles from The Blaze.

True story.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

89. Fuckin right wing squirrels. I wish they would fuck off to the Republican Party where they belong

[melman]

90. Don't you just hate it when your finger slips all over twitter

and finds the worst kind of right wing tweets and then keeps on slipping into a retweet...


....and then the damn thing stays on your timeline for two weeks? It really is a hell of a thing.

[Act_of_Reparation]

105. You know, when you put it like that...

...it almost sounds like the whole "my finger slipped" story is just a lame excuse cooked up after the fact.

Oh well. Guess we'll never know.

[melman]

107. If I was some kind of big mover and shaker type

that's not the kind of thing I'd want sitting on my timeline. That I do know.

But I guess sometimes fingers get un-slippy and you just can't delete things.

[Act_of_Reparation]

108. My wife thinks timelines don't matter.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to get to a $50,000 per plate fundraiser for Walter Mondale's pet cat Clinton B. Fiskers.

[Celerity]

81. fair enough, it is not a big deal to me, it is twitter and you said it was a mistake nt

[melman]

83. Why is it still on your timeline?

[George II]

92. You seem to have attracted quite a following in this thread. Careful!!

[kcr]

100. Wow, what a terrible thing to happen. If only there was a way to fix that

Who knew Twitter doesn't have a delete button?

[Devil Child]

65. Not your personal army

Fight your own social media fights.

[ismnotwasm]

82. While Socialism isn't the future

Certain aspects of it certainly is. I work with a LOT of millennials, and I’m the parent of four of them.

I find them as diverse politically as any other group, although the libertarians among certainly give me more pause than the “socialists”

[Celerity]

106. What about the libertarian socialists? nt

[Blue_Tires]

88. They're full of shit and most of them have me on block anyway

Just ask him what the DSA and OR's record on winning elections is...

Ask them if they've ever run one of their candidates in a deep red district...

[HopeAgain]

101. Not Really

Why not find a common ground instead of finger pointing?