Bernie Sanders and the socialist Christmas spirit

[Donkees]

Dec 24, 2019

Excerpt:

Individualist ways of thinking do have a long American history. But the collectivist tradition is just as strong. Abolitionists built a ferocious movement against slavery in the mid-19th century. Populists, socialists, and union organizers banded together to demand government action to rein in ruthless monopolists in the Gilded Age and the New Deal. Civil rights groups did the same against Jim Crow in the 1950s and 60s. There is no reason Sanders couldn't rekindle the embers of that old ideology.

Indeed, if you just stop to think for a moment, it is preposterous to believe one can fully determine one's economic fortunes. When a factory is shipped to Mexico, or a financial crisis throws millions out of work, or somebody gets a $11,000 bill because they fell sick, no amount of learning to code would have helped the people trampled under the tank treads of capitalism.

It is only when someone has been conditioned to believe solutions are impossible that they will just sit and take such punishment. And Wall Street likes it that way. They want depressed and anxious sheep who can be sheared without a peep.

So perhaps this Christmas, think about Bernie Sanders and his peculiar program of socialist political therapy. The problems facing America are severe indeed, but they are also eminently solvable. As George Bailey says in that classic piece of American Christmas culture, "We can get through this thing alright. We've got to stick together though, we've got to have faith in each other."

https://theweek.com/articles/885903/bernie-sanders-socialist-christmas-spirit

[Donkees]

1. ...

[Marengo]

3. That applies to the state as well

[Hortensis]

2. Abolitionists, unions and civil rights activists are NOT socialists.

Collectivists believe in communal ownership, everyone contributes labor to and receives from the collective. It's an extreme ideology, and very few are interested.

Notably, people who believe in limited applications such as socialized medicine, the only kind that have ever worked (think the VA), are not socialists, just pragmatic and open to various ideas. VERY unlike the extremist mentality. Which no doubt confuses those Sanders' followers who imagine that as support of his dream of socialist "revolution."

Btw, throughout history socialist demonstrators have had to be careful not to get beaten up by other activist groups. Especially in the cold war days when most people didn't know or care that not all socialists were commies.

[greatauntoftriplets]

4. Great post.

In the early 1970s, I visited Germany and spent time in both the West and East. In Berlin, there were some stark examples of the differences between the two zones. Stores in WB had shelves stock with attractive well-made merchandise. By contrast, in the East store shelves had maybe a few items, mostly unattractive. Restaurants in the East would run out of food for lunch by 1 p.m. That never happened in the West. West Berlin had experienced significant rebuilding in the 25 years since WWII had ended. Ruins from the war were too common in the East.

While I know that Germany was experiencing an extreme form of socialism, it was clear to see that the system was not working.

[Hortensis]

5. Great post! Nothing like first-hand knowledge

to just kill the romance. I envy that. My aunt traveled in the Soviet Union a few times and told me the only decent stores she saw were in Moscow and most people weren't allowed to shop in them.

Lol, what popped to mind among my own memories was this, from the 1980s not '70s, but courtesy of modern technological miracles, here it is! Too ridiculous not to post.

[greatauntoftriplets]

6. Thanks!

I wasn't with a group, but a German friend who lived in the West. As a result, were not taken to stores that the locals could not go to. I did experience that about 10 years later in China. There, I visited places like the Friendship Stores. At least they had good merchandise, much of it relating to Chinese culture and well made. I was with a group there, but took every opportunity to go out and walk on my own. Those were probably the best experiences I had there.

[Hortensis]

7. I bet. China's advanced enormously over a short period

in many places. Allowing limited capitalism has been critical, of course. Its socialist leadership tried various miracles and leaps forward, while many millions died, but reintroduction of capitalism was the miracle that worked and has reportedly wiped out most of the extreme poverty of its socialist era. I'd love to see it.

[greatauntoftriplets]

14. Oh, it has!

I see photos of cities like Beijing and Shanghai and don't recognize them because all the high rises weren't there back then. I passed through Shenzhen on the way from Guangdong to Hong Kong. It was a small place back then and has grown incredibly since I was there.

The sad part for me is that they've torn down so many of the old neighborhoods that you can't see the old China.

From what I've read, the standard of living has improved amazingly in recent years. The more you get out of the big cities, the more of the "real China" still exists. I'm happy that I went when I did.

I've read that more than 50 percent of babies born in the same year as me died, either of starvation or disease. Fortunately, that's been turned around.

[David__77]

8. Plenty have been. WEB Du Bois and Harry Bridges to name a couple.

...

[Hortensis]

10. Yes, googling's a marvel. Merry Christmas Eve. :) nt

[David__77]

12. Merry Christmas Eve to you!

...

[George II]

16. Was all that work worth it? Enjoy your stay.

[NurseJackie]

18. Not sure if that was an essay or a diatribe... but it was a lot of work for not much reward or...

Not sure if that was an essay or a diatribe or a manifesto ... but it was a lot of work for not much reward or discussion.

[Uncle Joe]

9. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread Donkees.

[David__77]

11. Socialists have been at the heart of freedom movements.

While there such divergent strains of thought called “socialism” or “capitalism,” I appreciate the contributions of many people who upheld a socialist ideal of progressively building social guarantees and social rights.

[Donkees]

13. Congressman Meyer London ...

Meyer London, a Socialist Jew, was a politician who not only ran for Congress, but his economic proposals were advanced for his time, and they later were encompassed in Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal platform.

When Congressman Meyer London died in 1926, half a million New Yorkers attended his funeral. “For six hours,” the New York Times reported, “the Lower East Side put aside its duties, pressing or trivial, to do honor to its dead prophet.” Although a politician, London was so respected for his learning–even by his political opponents–that he was buried in the Writer’s Lane section of Mount Carmel cemetery, near the grave of Sholom Aleichem and other Jewish cultural heroes. London’s working-class instincts and intellectual acumen made him advocate for social legislation that later formed the heart of Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal platform.

London immediately sponsored bills which Congress defeated, yet later became integral elements of the New Deal program: minimum wage, unemployment insurance and increased taxes on the wealthy. He fought for then-radical ideals such as anti-lynching laws, higher immigration quotas, and paid maternity leave. Prescient in his own day, London’s economic proposals became right for the 1930’s and 40’s, and his civil rights proposals became law in the 1960’s.



https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/meyer-london-a-jew-in-congress/

MEYER LONDON (1871-1926). American politician. Speaking to a crowd of striking streetcar workers and supporters in Union Square, New York City

[George II]

17. Many non-socialists have been at the heart, too...

I come from a long line of union members. I belonged to three, my brother would not be alive today had he not been a union member, and my father could be considered a "pioneer" of the union movement in the 1930s. I could go on.

None of us are socialists, indeed my brother is far from a socialist.

[David__77]

19. Absolutely!

I’m appreciative of the role of unions!

[Hortensis]

20. I know you're sincere, but socialism constrains freedom

far more than capitalism, both regulated and unregulated. Sure, everything's relative and people of socialist ideology have definitely been involved in freedom movements. But socialism's still universalist, collectivist, communal in essence, and individual freedoms take huge hits. Not just economically either.

What happens when the collective is the only medical device manufacturing employer in an 11-county area and a worker's cultural views don't suit the committee? That'd be under Sanders' system where management would tend to be local, not normally subject to centralized national management. Except when it wasn't. Since all systems are made up of people, they all have the same human flaws and cultural traits.

Including greed and lust for position, btw. All socialist systems develop hierarchies of have-a-lot-mores and have-lesses. And unlike under capitalism, economic mobility is one of the freedoms that takes a really big hit.

Bottom line, smart freedom fighters don't fight for socialism. That's strictly for people who'd be happy with less freedom in return for what they imagine would be more security.

[David__77]

21. I get the argument.

Here, I’m also not advocating for some specific social system. I think socialism and capitalism are not so different, actually. Is China socialist? Is Norway capitalist?

What I do think makes sense is increasing social guarantees of the state: housing, education, health care, employment, rest.

Edited to note: of course, all that is premised on sufficiently building up the aggregate economy. I don’t think it makes sense to establish legal “rights” not supportable by the economy. Redistribution cannot be the key means - rather, simultaneously building the aggregate economy while limited class polarization.

[Hortensis]

22. Many things have worked, but the constant flux of change,

of many types, keeps them all from working well indefinitely.

Our government was meant to create a stable, strong framework within which people could achieve security on their own terms, those individual liberty and pursuit of happiness things, in an environment of healthy economy and maximized social and economic mobility and opportunity.

Thanks in huge part to the flexing provisions combined with immutable protections of a "living constitution," I'm with you in that I think it's actually done amazingly well at that overall, given that our world and our very ideas of what society and life should be have evolved through many new, astonishingly different realities since inception. Universal education a basic principle from the very beginning. But it certainly needs some big tinkerings now.

The need to protect our liberties from those who'd subjugate them to communal security reminded me that we're still working on those liberties also. Workers having the liberty to agree to purchase and communally own and share in their workplaces, where it's amenable, sounds good. Which they already do, of course. Instead of seizure by political fiat.

It is possible to read the history of this country as one long struggle to extend the liberties established in our Constitution to everyone in America. ~ Molly Ivins

[David__77]

23. Different views of social contract.

I would perhaps posit having a different sort of “safety net” than others. What’s great is that we will come together to vote out Trump in November!

[Hortensis]

24. Absolutely. Noting, btw, that political psychologists

say the single biggest difference between conservatives and liberals is their attitudes toward equality.

Conservatives, especially authoritarian types, also want a different (very!) sort of social contract that limits the freedom their dark view of humanity leads them to believe encourages people to misbehave and doesn't legislate an equality of all men they don't believe in. They're most comfortable with a vertical socioeconomic hierarchy with more control, but less government-guaranteed socioeconomic security.

Liberals believe in the stable but free structure our founding fathers created for individuals to achieve life, liberty and pursuit of happiness in, with safety nets that don't limit freedom.

Those drawn to collective solutions like socialism imagine a range of officially very egalitarian, universalist solutions trading off degrees of personal freedom for a lot more economic security.

And the discussion of the role for government continues.

Merry Christmas

[David__77]

25. And Merry Christmas to you!

...

[guillaumeb]

26. The US myth of the rugged individual is nonsense.

It only serves to divide workers so the rich can more easily exploit them.

That is why the rich hate unions.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

27. K&R... great post Donkees!!

Bernie/Elizabeth or Elizabeth/Bernie 2020!!
Either way, they're stronger together & can't be bought!!
Jump on the Bernie Bandwagon & join the revolution!!

[JudyM]

28. " Wall Street likes it that way. They want depressed and anxious sheep who can be sheared without a

peep.” Hardly just Wall St, but certainly true.

[brooklynite]

29. Dickens wrote it better...