Who is a progressive and who is a centrist?

[Ziggurat]

No, Bernie Sanders calls himself a Democratic Socialist. The difference is huge.

Sure. Huge difference.

 

[theprestige]

No, Bernie Sanders calls himself a Democratic Socialist. The difference is huge.

All the real socialists call themselves republicans.

 

[p0lka]

Okay, so is the consensus here that no one running is actually a socialist of any stripe?


Then who is and who isn't a progressive? Who is a neoliberal?

Forget the labels,

If you like their policies, then you like their policies, it doesn't matter how social media labels them.

 

[theprestige]

Forget the labels,



If you like their policies, then you like their policies, it doesn't matter how social media labels them.

What if I don't know what I like, unless social media tells me what labels and ideas I have?

 

[rdwight]

The whole concept of centrism rests on the flawed principle that good ideas lie midway between two bad ideas

Since centrist isn't prescribed to a particular side or party, it's hard to see how the view would be on any given subject. It doesn't have to be the middle between two bad ideas, but could be a more realistic outlook on it. Say for Medicare for all. I don't know what you would put as a centrist view.

The right would be against it in principle. The left would be for it with the expectation the rich and business would pick up the tab. The centrist might be that if a majority wants it, it is something that should be done, but the cost will hit the majority of people. With higher taxes, some loss of service availability etc. Hard to advocate for where 'centrist' stands on any given topic though.

 

[dann]

All the real socialists call themselves republicans.

Only golf socialists call themselves republicans.

 

[Norman Alexander]

Are you saying tuition is free in Australia and have single payer, or did you mean something else?

Basically, yes. That's why we are a Socialist Republic. Or something.

 

[Norman Alexander]

What we need is an online app that generates the appropriate label for you, depending on the various social issue solutions you would prefer. E.g. Do you support one-payer health care? Do you support monarchy? Do you think tertiary education should be free? Etc., etc. Do some sort of weighting and grading and calculation, then assign a suitable label you can proudly wear on a campaign button or trumpet on social media. Because that's how people make up their minds apparently - getting angry about other peoples' campaign buttons. Go democracy!

 

[acbytesla]

I think I'm with most Americans when I say this.

I DON'T ******* care how we get we obtain the best results for the greatest number of people. Just that we do. If a more socialist model works for best for delivering services such as electricity, sewer, water, healthcare, whatever, then let it be socialist. If capitalism and free markets can, even better.

But let's not act as if a more socialist approach to say healthcare or education is the slippery slope to government running EVERYTHING because it isn't.

 

[theprestige]

Only golf socialists call themselves republicans.

Nah. It's the serious hardcore socialists, too. Don't believe me? Check it:

Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.

People's Republic of China.

Democratic People's Republic of Korea.

Republic of Cuba.

Socialist Republic of Vietnam.

 

[Norman Alexander]

I think I'm with most Americans when I say this.

I DON'T ******* care how we get we obtain the best results for the greatest number of people. Just that we do. If a more socialist model works for best for delivering services such as electricity, sewer, water, healthcare, whatever, then let it be socialist. If capitalism and free markets can, even better.

But let's not act as if a more socialist approach to say healthcare or education is the slippery slope to government running EVERYTHING because it isn't.

Stop being rational. This is serious government issues we are talking about.

 

[theprestige]

I think I'm with most Americans when I say this.

I DON'T ******* care how we get we obtain the best results for the greatest number of people. Just that we do. If a more socialist model works for best for delivering services such as electricity, sewer, water, healthcare, whatever, then let it be socialist. If capitalism and free markets can, even better.

But let's not act as if a more socialist approach to say healthcare or education is the slippery slope to government running EVERYTHING because it isn't.

The best way to get the best results for the most people is to put someone in charge who knows what's best, and empower them to summarily execute anyone who gets in the way of that goal.

Think of it as applied Darwinism. Two generations of this program, and humanity would consist almost entirely of people committed to the cause.

 

[acbytesla]

The best way to get the best results for the most people is to put someone in charge who knows what's best, and empower them to summarily execute anyone who gets in the way of that goal.

Think of it as applied Darwinism. Two generations of this program, and humanity would consist almost entirely of people committed to the cause.

Ouch.

 

[Norman Alexander]

The best way to get the best results for the most people is to put someone in charge who knows what's best, and empower them to summarily execute anyone who gets in the way of that goal.

Think of it as applied Darwinism. Two generations of this program, and humanity would consist almost entirely of people committed to the cause.

Well, you failed at the first hurdle in 2016. Try again.

 

[theprestige]

Ouch.

That's what the egg said to the omelette chef.

 

[theprestige]

Well, you failed at the first hurdle in 2016. Try again.

Bro, name a year that didn't fail the first hurdle.

 

[acbytesla]

The best way to get the best results for the most people is to put someone in charge who knows what's best, and empower them to summarily execute anyone who gets in the way of that goal.

Think of it as applied Darwinism. Two generations of this program, and humanity would consist almost entirely of people committed to the cause.

Well, you failed at the first hurdle in 2016. Try again.

Bro, name a year that didn't fail the first hurdle.

Doesn't that detract from your proposal then?

 

[theprestige]

Doesn't that detract from your proposal then?

Not at all. Norman Alexander, seeking pointless rhetorical advantage, pretends that the US presidential election of 2016 was about selecting someone who knows what's best.

The truth is that very few modern political systems are intended to execute anyone who expresses Incorrect Thought. And those that do cold suck at empowering people who know what's best for the most people. Exhibit A: North Korea.

 

[acbytesla]

Not at all. Norman Alexander, seeking pointless rhetorical advantage, pretends that the US presidential election of 2016 was about selecting someone who knows what's best.

The truth is that very few modern political systems are intended to execute anyone who expresses Incorrect Thought. And those that do cold suck at empowering people who know what's best for the most people. Exhibit A: North Korea.

Except, you seem to be playing the false equivalence game. As if every leader is equally good or bad.

 

[Ziggurat]

Except, you seem to be playing the false equivalence game. As if every leader is equally good or bad.

That's not even implicit in anything he said.