• hexaflexagonbear [he/him]
      hexagon
      ·
      edit-2
      3 years ago

      I love how he had to add the radical line himself, because tax the rich is such a moderate proposal that his fanbass would probably agree with it. Hell, over 70% of the country already does.

      • Rem [she/her]
        ·
        3 years ago

        Literally who thinks the rich shouldn't be taxed at all? Only a few ancap cranks. Obviously there's a silent "more" in there, but still, almost no one disagrees that the rich should pay taxes.

        • axont [she/her, comrade/them]
          ·
          edit-2
          3 years ago

          Hello I'm gonna be a pedant. I technically don't believe in taxation because I'm a communist who wants the private sector seized or repressed to the point of political subordination. Needing to tax the rich would represent an unstable public sector and I wouldn't agree with a model that anticipates tax income as part of its spending. As in, if we're going to tax the rich in a socialist economy, we had better only be doing that to punish them for being rich and not because we need the money. Something like 87% of Cubans don't pay taxes and the ones who do own private businesses. The Cuban economy doesn't primarily rely upon taxation from its wealthiest to fund the state, which is what I advocate for.

    • please_dont [he/him]
      ·
      edit-2
      3 years ago

      She says she is more than a socdem lib, tons of normal people(chuds or not) have her in mind when they think of socialism, its the media's representation of socialism and tons of american leftists still see her(less than used to) and electoralism+entryism in the democratic party through politicians like her as valid approaches for the radical left to focus on, coalesce, support with money and manpower, organize around and brand as

    • axont [she/her, comrade/them]
      ·
      3 years ago

      AOC has directly said she's attempting to redefine what socialism means. I believe she was once put on the spot to define it in a sentence, which she did as "no one has to be poor." You're right that she's not a radical and never claimed to be, the problem is she wants to take radical rhetoric and distort the meaning on purpose.