Until we start seeing some socialists in positions of power, passing socialist policies, I'm going to respectfully disagree.
They're right that capitalism is out; but look around. Socialism isn't in. Fascism is.
this post was submitted on 02 Oct 2025
422 points (94.9% liked)
Uplifting News
16945 readers
1151 users here now
Welcome to /c/UpliftingNews (rules), a dedicated space where optimism and positivity converge to bring you the most heartening and inspiring stories from around the world. We strive to curate and share content that lights up your day, invigorates your spirit, and inspires you to spread positivity in your own way. This is a sanctuary for those seeking a break from the incessant negativity and rage (e.g. schadenfreude) often found in today's news cycle. From acts of everyday kindness to large-scale philanthropic efforts, from individual achievements to community triumphs, we bring you news—in text form or otherwise—that gives hope, fosters empathy, and strengthens the belief in humanity's capacity for good, from a quality outlet that does not publish bad copies of copies of copies.
Here in /c/UpliftingNews, we uphold the values of respect, empathy, and inclusivity, fostering a supportive and vibrant community. We encourage you to share your positive news, comment, engage in uplifting conversations, and find solace in the goodness that exists around us. We are more than a news-sharing platform; we are a community built on the power of positivity and the collective desire for a more hopeful world. Remember, your small acts of kindness can be someone else's big ray of hope. Be part of the positivity revolution; share, uplift, inspire!
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
"Passing socialist policies" would require a majority in Congress. What you have right now, is a growing list of socialist politicians currently holding office. And they are having an impact on the direction things are heading.
load more comments
(1 replies)
You can totally have a "socialist worker's party" that is actually anti-Marxist. You can also privatize some state-owned enterprises to maximize profits while still calling it a socialist party. Might as well abolish the unions while you're at it. These labels are just marketing baits for luring in the working class.
The blueprint is out there, just look up the history of NSDAP, and you'll see what I mean.
load more comments
(1 replies)
They tried so hard to make socialism a bad word. And non of their voters know one single thing of what it is.
Spoiler: it's from the countries doing better than you.
The US should stop saying socialism = evil communism ...
One can be social towards others without giving away all of one's personal possessions and liberties...
Personal property exists under socialism and communism.
Private property does not. A factory cannot be privately held under communism. Roads belong to the people. Workers own the farms.
It’s not “our toothbrush, Comrade”
But you also don’t need a totalitarian state to regulate every last thing. There can be independence for those who work and manage the resources; you can still create a restaurant and be paid a high wage for managing it, coming up with new and innovative dishes etc.
The point is to remove the incentive to exploit for profit. It’s literally the root cause of every scam.
Communism without a dictatorship is yet to be seen at large scale. That would be interesting to compare.
And you also dont have to go ALL IN on communism. You can absoluty choose sectors, that will never be private, and have private sectors that will be regulated by giving the workers more power and owners much less.
There's so many nuances.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(29 replies)
Capitalism is not the opposite of socialism in fact the people in the picture advocate for nordic style socialism which is very much capitalism based just with strong safety nets.
Nordic Style socialism is actually called social democracy. Americans are somehow latching onto the term given to them by the right.
Hopefully they will realize that the best America has ever been outside of racial and social issues is when FDR was president who was basically a social Democrat, although he preferred the term progressive and new nationalist. The decades after his economic reforms were the greatest time in American history, and then the Republicans got power again with Nixon and started to dismantle all of it, by the time Regan was in office, he killed organized labor and cut taxes on corporations leading to the current situation of hyper Inflationary debt based economics.
This is exactly what needs to happen again. A bold progressive president who DGAF and builds some monumental new social programs and revives a strong welfare state, taking back the word "welfare" because it's A GOOD thing to not watch your citizens starve to death in the street, and we once knew this.
It’s important to remember that the New Deal was a compromise between the Capitalists and the Labor Unions / Communists. There has to be a far left threat to Capital for the status quo to move to the left at all. That has been absent in the USA for decades (like you said, starting around Nixon time) which partially explains how far right the USA has moved with decline in labor’s share of profits, increasing wealth inequality and now all the way to fascist violence.
You will never get a president that just enacts sane social policies without a strong left, and that means organizing and Labor Unions.
It's important to remember that the New Deal was a compromise between the Capitalists and the Labor Unions / Communists. There has to be a far left threat to Capital for the status quo to move to the left at all. That has been absent in the USA for decades (like you said, starting around Nixon time) which partially explains how far right the USA has moved with decline in labor's share of profits, increasing wealth inequality and now all the way to fascist violence.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Not Americans, American media which is all completely controlled by oligarchs.
load more comments
(4 replies)
So........ social democracy ?
Capitalism works best with strong rules in place to prevent psychopaths and sociopaths from expanding too large.
But those rules inevitably fail because under capitalism wealth always consolidates under the psychopaths and sociopaths. Like, there’s no way to have capitalism and not have that happen. It’s part of the fundamental structure of private ownership of capital.
Limit the amount of capital that can be individually owned. Wealth cap. Sociopaths are going to sociopath, make it so they can't have more money than a government and there wouldn't be so many problems.
Wealth cap paired with a wealth floor and UBI, and we're really cooking.
Absolutely agree!
load more comments
(4 replies)
That's not just money, but any form of power (in every system over time). Fighting it seems to be the eternal struggle.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Fully agree. Capitalism with strong safety net and social oversight is a really good system.
- Social safety net promotes risk taking for businesses, grows economy and balances society against extremes
- Social oversight prevents entities from gaming the system. There has to be a human dungeon master behind every system as every system can be gamed and corrupted within the rules of it. So external oversight is needed.
People like to hate on capitalism but capitalism + social oversight is really the best system.
load more comments
(15 replies)
Exactly! Every widget that sells well leads the inventor to think they can effectively run societies. How the hell does anyone make that leap?
From the American point of view anything that even dares to suggest the possibility that there might be limitations to corporations' liberty to freely exploit and consume the population and their environment is communism, anarchy, heresy, and terrorism., and anathema to capitalism, democracy, and Freedom®(some limitations might apply).
I hope America tries a bit of socialism next because they clearly have the power to do so. The billionaires will not pack up and start leaving, I just don't see that ever happening. Especially when there are clear examples in California that is outcompeting every other state despite having higher taxes and more social programs.
Due to history, many East-Europeans (and US apparently) seem to understand socialism as communist dictatorship, because soviet puppets liked to call themselves that.
if you say "democratic socialism" everybody seems to understand it more as the Nordic model.
Political propaganda really likes to use that confusion.
For me, it’s simply that socialism is a sliding scale.
Did you help out the grandmother that had fallen off her mobility device on the sidewalk? Congratulations, you’re partly SOCIALIST. She didn’t pay for that assistance and yet you gave her value anyway.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Or as the republicans will call it: Anti-capitalism.
I actually like that term better. Hell yeah, anti-capitalism!
That makes you a terrorist in america.
Executive Orders only cover the executive branch of the US federal government.
They aren't laws, they don't create laws & they damn sure don't override the Constitution.
Like that matters anymore.
Neat!
More like “those who want to see 10% more socialism in their capitalism are feeling cautiously optimistic that the Democratic Party might change slightly.”
Aw man, just when not supporting Capitalism became illegal :/
https://jacobin.com/2025/10/trump-classifies-anti-capitalism-as-a-political-pre-crime
Capitalism has always needed lots of support from the government in order to work (and I think we hurt Capitalism's feelings).
Finally!
If you want the populace to support capitalism, the wealthy need to share the spoils voluntarily.
view more: next ›