What is democratic socialism

Care to explain? Isn’t the same shit repackaged?

Attached: A9FA462D-7CE4-4904-AE50-D147B7294B6F.jpg (638x330, 38K)

liberalism with welfare

Attached: 1530355694127.jpg (790x1080, 280K)

i have no idea and i also have no idea what countries could be seen as ''democratic-socialist''.

it's socialism for the rich (bailouts, make money by doing nothing) and capitalism for the poor (wageslaving)

All forms of collectivism only have insignificant differences.

It's the new evolution in (((academic))) subversion. The Marxists live among all of us in the western world. And we have to remain vigilant against their shit.

Attached: 1515383160520.jpg (480x704, 235K)

You can really see how fucked up these people are if you keep track of those 'boomer' troll threads.

They seem to lack the self awareness that running up, sweeping everything off the table (Art, literature, you name it!) and loudly declaring 'Year Zero' NEVER ended well.

free tranny surgeries for everyone, but no food

We have what your politicians advertise as "democratic socialism" over here and it works.

People are idiotic if they think capitalism doesn't result in the same shit.
The only economic system that has ever worked to liberate individuals is the simple barter economy, as existed in 17th century New England.

an oxymoron

Yes it is. This problem would be solved if people started enforcing the Communist Control Act of 1954 and officially recognized socialism as being the same of communism. The law bans and criminalizes communism in the United States, but currently isn't being enforced.

Can you elaborate? Wouldn't a barter system just evolve into a standard capitalist system? I mean it's unlikely for things to ever maintain a static value due to supply/demand, so if you happened to barter for some random goods and then it turned out your goods inflated in value overnight, suddenly you'd be relatively "rich" right? It would be like every random citizen trading goods would essentially be participating in a living stock market.

Commodities are still run through the free market.
Housing, healthcare, and a job are paid for through taxes.
Every large company is run through labor unions and corporate decisions are decided through voting majorities of the employees

id expect a kraut to understand how socialism works, democratic socialism works, but it needs to be mixed with nationalism to produe good social results,
tldr takes the good things from socialism (social programs, keeping big ass corporations in check, environmentalism) with the goodie basket of capitslism (democracy, free market, etc)

it's a gradual implementation of totalitarianism through democratic means.
once the government takes care of everyone, the country descends into a dictatorship, like in Venezuela.

You basically do the exact opposite with the social risks and rewards as the American is doing right now.

Right now the risks are socialized (huge bailouts for failing companies, no return for the taxpayer) and the rewards are stacked towards the top (1% etc.).

In democratic socialism it would be the other way around. The common people would benefit from a growing economy and business owners would be stuck with all the risk.

As with many things in life though, the far ends of the spectrum are utter garbage.
You guys should just copy one of the more successful European approaches.

Over here it just works. No student loan debt. No high fees for higher education. No risk of going bankrupt from medical bills. Very few homeless people. Low crime rates. Very low consumer debt. etc... The list of advantages for the general population is enormous.
But an American wouldn't understand because they do not know how it is to live their lives in peace from all those things.

IT'S COMMUNISM YOU FUCKING DICK-LICKER DO WE HAVE TO SPELL IT OUT FOR YOU?

My country in a nutshell.

Socialism without a revolution is worthless.

No border, free capital flows,
free goods trade.
In this kin of environment, it can't be any different.

The billionaire aristocratic class just doesn’t want to lose control of the company their grandpa founded. They were raised to believe they are better than everyone and they spend billions founding propaganda networks to make people believe it.
Why does being a businessman qualify someone to work in the public sector? If they wanted to help people, they would of had a career in public service before running for high office. They really just reached a limit on the power they can accumulate in the business world (because they actually aren’t anything special) so they use their recognition to take over the government.
People here are just easily dazzled by money

Pretty much. As long as your nation allows corporate money to buy your politicians, you are fucked.

Comunism: Students in charge of slavery, sell the country to be good goys.

Capitalism: Same, but much worse. Do things for profit instead of demonstrating how not stupid people who went to a classroom to see the world are.

The less govt the more freedom. No students, good world, freedom to find and aid.

Unless you are prepared to fight capitalists for progress and to protect your gains, it will always be taken away from you. Look at this hateful burger here. You live half a world away from him and already he's thinking about how his rich masters can exploit you and take everything you have. He's licking his lips at the thought of the measly ten cents American that your total destruction and ruin will net him. In order to ever be safe from a murdering mutt bastard like that you have to be just as aggressive and willing to kill as he is. You have to be prepared to stab him in his beady little mutt eye until crazy pink shit spurts out. This is why you need Communism.

Except that you don't. The only thing you need communism for is as a deterrent for capitalism.
There does not need to be a revolution of any kind. There just needs to be the possibility of a revolution to keep the capitalistic forces on their toes. As long as the general public can push for reforms that will not hurt the capitalistic caste of lazy, entitled, brats who have inherited all their fortune, they will not move in fear of pushback, and let the common folk have their will.

The capitalist does not care if another capitalist will lose their power. They only care about their own and will try to seize the opportunity to fill the void. Therefore it is very possible for change to happen without a "revolution". And it is also more desirable. Social stability and peace drive economies. Civil unrest and forceful takeovers by the laymen however, do not.