• dayruiner [they/them]
    ·
    4 years ago

    The only part of Biden’s record that could be called socialist was his vote to bail out Wall Street executives — but that was a form of corporate socialism that enriched the wealthiest and most powerful people in the country after they ruined millions of Americans’ lives

    So the only "socialist" part is by definition not socialist

    • cacophony4ever [they/them]
      ·
      4 years ago

      Every time someone uses the phrase "Corporate Socialism" or "Socialism for the wealthy", I have a low-key brain aneurysm. cuz "The working class controls the means of production, but only for rich people" makes zero sense.

      • Chapo_Trap_Horse [none/use name]
        ·
        4 years ago

        I mean yeah it's an easy take, but so is this counter-take. Obviously it's just a turn of phrase. People don't literally mean "socialism for the rich." It's just a lazy riposte to people who are already using the term "socialism" wrong. I don't really see how it's damaging to the wider discourse in the bizarro hell fever-dream parlance we are already navigating.

        • mao [he/him]
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          4 years ago

          deleted by creator

          • Awoo [she/her]
            ·
            edit-2
            4 years ago

            It literally only works because they have internalised "socialism is bad" and it is being used as an insult against the rich. "Haha look at these rich socialist fucks".

            If you said "look at these people implementing homosexuality for the rich eww" you'd recognise it as a clearly homophobic remark, in the same vein it is therefore a very clearly socialist-phobic remark to make when saying exactly the same thing but replacing homosexuality with "socialism for the rich".

            The usage holds socialism as a slur and intentionally tries to play to people who have internalised the word as a slur.

  • RNAi [he/him]
    ·
    4 years ago

    Really, who gives a shit about the election? There is revolt or death

    • cacophony4ever [they/them]
      ·
      4 years ago

      One take I found to probably be pretty accurate is that Biden and the DNC aren't aiming to cater favor with (former?) republican voters, they are trying to cater favor with donors. It makes a lot sense to me, since the group of "I voted for Trump once, but am leaning towards voting for Biden this time, but will definitely go back to voting Trump if Biden's platform makes any healthcare or environmental protections" is probably about 6 people, but each of those six probably has as much wealth as the entirety of everyone in a small state like Deleware combined.

  • mao [he/him]
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    4 years ago

    deleted by creator