There are no ethical choices under first-past-the-post voting. We must instead make a decision that reduces the most harm.

  • @ToastedPlanetOP
    link
    English
    22 months ago

    Believe me, I understand what Capitalism is and isn’t, what Socialism is and isn’t, and what Social Democracy is and isn’t. Social Democracy isn’t Socialism, and the Nordic Countries are not Socialist, nor are they moving towards Socialism.

    Social democracy is a form a socialism. Social democrats in Nordic Countries apparently are aligning themselves with groups on the right. I am saying we need to move to socialism.

    Yes, Social Democracy is insufficient. We need both leftist theory and practice. You are attempting to reject what leftists have learned and built on to do what has already failed, a mistake no leftist should be making.

    I think we are talking past each other at this point. I’m very much saying we need workers to own corporations as part of social democracy.

    • @Cowbee@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      22 months ago

      Social Democracy is not a form of Worker Ownership but welfare Capitalism.

      You are calling Market Socialism Social Democracy, despite Nordic Countries not being Market Socialist.

      • @ToastedPlanetOP
        link
        English
        22 months ago

        Social Democracy is not a form of Worker Ownership but welfare Capitalism.

        Again, this is a description of current social democracies. This is not what am I advocating for with social democracy.

        You are calling Market Socialism Social Democracy, despite Nordic Countries not being Market Socialist.

        No, I was just pointing out social democracies exist. They currently have mixed economies like most countries in the world.

        • @Cowbee@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          22 months ago

          You aren’t advocating for Social Democracy then, but Market Socialism. Why call it something it isn’t? That’s like saying you want Communism with Capitalists, you’re redefining established terms.

          • @ToastedPlanetOP
            link
            English
            22 months ago

            I would argue the majority of what I argue for is social democracy. The fact I’m arguing for workers owning their companies does not exclude the system I’m arguing for from being social democracy. I want a market economy, I just want the workers to own that market economy.

            • @Cowbee@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              22 months ago

              So you don’t want Social Democracy, you want Market Socialism. Absolutely none of what you have said so far indicates Social Democracy over Market Socialism.

              Again, a worker owned market, is Market Socialism, not Social Democracy.

              • @ToastedPlanetOP
                link
                English
                22 months ago

                We are discussing workers owning the companies they work for. I don’t need to explain every other idea I hold because the one being discussed could fit in another box. My point is that workers owning the companies they work for fits into social democracy. Ideas do not respect your rigid categorizations. And this splitting hairs is effectively a moot point.

                Also I want social democracy.

                • @Cowbee@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  22 months ago

                  No, workers owning the companies they work for is not compatible with Social Democracy. Your point is akin to saying you want Communism with Capitalists, or a state with Anarchism.

                  Let me ask this: what do you believe Social Democracy is, and why are you against advocating for Market Socialism, which is exactly what you have been advocating for if we take you at your word?

                  • @ToastedPlanetOP
                    link
                    English
                    12 months ago

                    Social democracy combines the inclusive economic institution of socialism with the inclusive political institution of democracy. In short people have a say in both their economy and government. Listing things off the top of my head that a social democracy should include are things like health care paid for by the government, a government run retirement program like social security, food stamps provided by the government, government housing, government maintained public drinking fountains, government provided internet access. If something is needed routinely by people in order to survive then the government should have a hand in making sure that they get that thing. Market economies by default fire the poorest customer in pursuit of profit. It isn’t profitable to house everyone, so not everyone gets a roof over their head, but everyone needs shelter in order to live.

                    In the spirit of inclusive economic and political institution alone, I would say workers owning the companies they work for is consistent with social democracy. Corporations will still be pursing the profit motive. The difference is that the C-staff will beholden to make profit for the workers and not the share holders. The system is still reliant on a welfare state to avoid people falling through the cracks and make sure everyone gets their basic necessities. I’m sure some social democrats would say we don’t have to go this far and that a mixed economy is sufficient. I have come to the opinion that we do need to go farther in this specific regard. As long as the owner class exists, even with sufficient wealth distribution, which is still needed, they will be incentivized to overthrow democracy. By having one class of people, workers, there is no class with the incentive to overturn democracy for profit. We need to have a real say in our place of work, as it has a tremendous impact on our lives and the best way to do that is for workers to own it.