Impact of the Democratic primaries: MS Now has been cutting back and forth to this bland-looking chart comparing democratic socialism to communism
this post was submitted on 07 Aug 2026
83 points (97.7% liked)
Slop.
895 readers
433 users here now
For posting all the anonymous reactionary bullshit that you can't post anywhere else.
Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.
Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.
Rule 3: No sectarianism.
Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome
Rule 5: No bigotry of any kind, including ironic bigotry.
Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 7: Do not individually target federated instances' admins or moderators.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Nonetheless, DSA explicitly states that their goal is to replace capitalism with socialism. Their program asks people to imagine a world without capitalism.
DSA is the boogey man they're pointing and DSA is clear that their democratic socialism is about ending capitalism and building socialism.
Labour in the UK also used to be explicit in its charter about wanting to replace capitalism with socialism, until Blair cut it from the charter. Fat load of use that was 'ey?
This is trivially true. Any socialist formation can drop its demand to end capitalism. Many have.
Labour were/are social chauvinists who oversaw both radical and meek reforms to the capitalist system they've been tasked with overseeing over the last century. Their charter's ambition never manifested because they are ardent supporters of bourgeois democracy, and continuously fail to overthrow the basic elements of the political system they operate in to stop swings to outright reactionaries like the Tories.
Yet their strategy is to elect social democrats who openly say they are capitalists. Something isn’t adding up here
Which DSA electeds call themselves capitalists?
Abdul El-Sayed: drew immense boots-on-the-ground support and resources from DSA activists. Despite benefiting from their infrastructure, El-Sayed openly walked back any association with the socialist label, explicitly stating to the press: “I am not a socialist, just a capitalist who understands how capitalism works.”
Bernie Sanders: While Sanders popularized the term "democratic socialist" and the DSA heavily allocated organizational power to canvass for his presidential runs, Sanders has explicitly defined his ideology as akin to Nordic social democracy. He maintains that he supports a regulated market economy with a robust social safety net rather than the complete abolition of capitalism.
That's just the 2 biggest/most recent, the DSA has done this dozens of times. They endorse and back every "progressive" with resources from their organization and then those candidates go on to become centrist careerists. If their goal is "Democratic socialism", why do they promote social democrats and Liberals? Why do they repeatedly spend their resources on political campaigns of people they have no control over whatsoever?
Neither El-Sayed or Bernie Sanders is in DSA. Neither are currently endorsed by DSA. If you want to move the goal post and discuss Sanders and El-Sayed I'm happy too.
But first, will you admit you couldn't name a DSA elected who has called themselves a capitalist?
They were both heavily backed by DSA individuals, their ground teams composed of DSA volunteers using DSA resources. Sanders was officially endorsed. A system is what is produces.
You can’t use the “they aren’t officially members of DSA” defense while the DSA endorses and backs and gives resources to electeds outside of the DSA constantly as a matter of process. Why don’t they stick to backing DSA members instead? Then that would be a valid defense.