Welfare IS NOT Socialism

Post Reply New Topic

I've heard this so many times from Americans as well as fellow Danish citizens:

"The Welfare State is Socialism".

It's not. Socialism is when the means of production is owned by the workers. It has absolutely nothing to do with how to spend the taxes.

Collecting taxes is not Socialism either. Again, the definition of socialism = Worker's ownership of the Means of Production. Taxing the wages of the workers is not socialism.

The Soviet Union didn't have much welfare, and they also didn't pay much taxes, at least not compared to, say, Sweden, Norway or Denmark - none of which are socialist states.

And - btw. - The Soviet Union wasn't socialist (despite the name).
It was an elite class owning the means of production (the workers had no say in it). Not much different from today's capitalist Russia.

And just for a fun fact for you:

We don't have a state-regulated minimum-wage in Denmark, like the U.S.
The wages are solely discussed between the labor unions and the employers organizations.

If they can not come to terms, the labor unions will most likely ensure there's a strike. Most workers here are members of labor unions.

Another fact for you:

We also allow private health insurances, alongside the public health insurance.
Why should that be a problem? If you're not satisfied with the public health services, you're free to pay for something else yourself. That's why I don't buy the Republican fear-campaigns of Biden's Public Health Insurance policy, claiming you can't have a private health insurance. I'm sure you'll be free to have a private health insurance too, if you like.

But I'm not sure it will be necessary.

And btw. Danes have some of the highest quality health care services, compared to most Americans. That's because we pay taxes, and because of the taxes are a percentage of our income, you actually pay less for the public health insurance than what most Americans would pay for a low or medium health insurance.

So who's paying the rest, you'd ask.
Answer: The rich.

But this still does not equal the Scandinavian welfare states with Socialism.

Another way to look at it is: if you do call those things "Socialism," then Socialism is clearly not the abomination it's been made out to be.

It is, to the rich.

They have no interest in co-operative companies (private companies owned by the workers themselves), nor would they benefit from a universal/state health insurance or other welfare benefits for the people, because it means the rich would have to pay more taxes, meaning they may not be able to afford their very own private helicopter, airplane or private ships.

This is why they love to blame anyone who wants socialism or welfare - or other goodies for the common people - for supporting dictatorship, so that the rich can continue exploiting the poor and working class people for their own gain.

I don't think the Fox News crowd quite grasps this. They've sold 'socialism' to younger people as much as anyone else because they constantly deride relatively moderate, reasonable proposals as radical left-wing socialism. Most of these proposals aren't actually socialist by any reasonable definition, but sadly it seems as though many people's working definition of socialism isn't reasonable.

Their definition of Socialism is extended and expanded to anything that financially benefits the common citizen at little to no cost.

To be fair to these young people ...

This guy is confusing people, and making them think Socialism is about giving them stuff.

He's always been a social democrat in practice but he's not the one who started the mislabelling.

Fox News was doing it in the 90s long before Bernie's popularity began to rise and over the years they've often done it to people who are well towards the centre compared to Sanders. I'd suggest if anything he was just the one best positioned to ride the wave that resulted from FNC's use of the term.

Sanders is a genuine socialist. He wants the public sector in the US to represent something like 78% of the economy. That’s social ownership of most of the means of production, funded by extremely high taxes on the rest.

Welfare and free healthcare/education is a safety net. It is a sign of a compassionate society.

What makes this labelling abhorrent is when I see people on TV slamming Obamacare who are missing teeth because they can't afford dental.

Not only is Bernie Sanders not a true socialist, he's not even really a democratic socialist, because he falls in line with corporate Dems at every turn these days.

If he really believed in democratic socialism, he'd leave that rotten stinking party.

Ever wonder why Tulsi gabbard hangs around a party that doesn't want her?

Bernie Sanders is a has-been, so there is no need to be concerned about his political affiliations anymore.

Yes! I supported her and Sanders in the past, but they've sold out too many times. The time for half measures is over. Even AOC and the squad are worthless because they won't use their leverage to push progressive initiatives, despite assertions that is what they will do.

Just like Jimmy Dore and other faux-left grifters, they can't be 'the one sane leftie who criticizes the left all the time' for right wing pundits to have on occasionally if they admit they're no longer a part of what they claim to be a part of.

How do you recommend the squad and Sanders pursue progressive initiatives? What recommendations would you make to increase their effectiveness?

Do you mean tow the party line? They probably have to still appeal to their support base don't they.