These are my beliefs:

  • Workers should control where they work at and receive proper equity from the value they create.
  • Non-essential industries should not be controlled by the government, essential industries should be, for the most part.
  • People should be able to have some say in who gets into government positions (at a minimum, like Vietnam or Cuba).
  • Social democrats are not the same as fascists.
  • Regular people (non-politicians, pundits and/or wealthy people) who happen to be liberals are likely well-intentioned and could be educated.
  • Military action should not be taken unless you are being directly threatened by another country.
    • Ryan_Holman [he/him]
      ·
      4 years ago

      I really don't think a country should be interfering in the affairs of another one, unless they are attacking us first. I considered this more anti-imperialist.

      • Mardoniush [she/her]
        ·
        4 years ago

        Should a socialist country provide aid to a revolution in a bordering country?

        • Ryan_Holman [he/him]
          ·
          4 years ago

          In most cases, I would say so. It depends on how strong and serious the movement.

          I think an attempt could be made to work with the existing government, but, if the revolution is strong and more aligned with you, it would make more sense to actively support them.

          • Mardoniush [she/her]
            ·
            4 years ago

            But this turns into "interventionist" behaviour quite quickly. Is a "permanent revolution" attitude justified?

            The Soviets aided their fellow SSRs (who often had independent socialist revolutions), and then drove west, hoping to overcome the Sucdem/Nationalist Coalition in Poland and link up with the KPD. Cuba famously aided Angola.

      • glimmer_twin [he/him]
        ·
        4 years ago

        “Self-defence” was used to justify Iraq, Afghanistan, Vietnam... the list goes on. If you believe the libs the US has never fought a war of aggression lol

        • Ryan_Holman [he/him]
          ·
          4 years ago

          None of those countries attacked us though. I know full-well that the United States is imperialist.

          All I'm saying is that if one country explicitly attacks another country, the latter has the right to defend themselves.

          • comi [he/him]
            ·
            4 years ago

            The issue is such words can be warped by 911, which they were. Or attack on a consulate/diplomatic mission. It should be much stronger statement, than nebulous threats. China threatens usa. Congo could nationalize coltan and threaten usa production.

            • Ryan_Holman [he/him]
              ·
              4 years ago

              Basically, what I was meaning was a full-on military invasion, not some foreign government nationalizing a business' assets.