However, America has been a country championing socialist policy for almost 100 years.
Uh, what?
You have horrible social security and labour laws. If anyone has been āchampioning socialist policiesā, itās the Nordics, or if talking labour rights especially, France definitely more than the US.
The American anti-socialist rhetoric is so bad it has its own name. Even very moderate socialist policies are often disparaged as ācommunismā.
Thereās so much libertarianism online now, mostly affected by said American rhetoric, that Iāve actually met an idiot here in Finland who genuinely argued that homelessness and unemployment is a conscious choice by anyone suffering either.
Since most arenāt gonna listen hereās the transcript:
Peter Thiel: I think a lot of the voters who vote for Trump, take Trump seriously, but not literally. And so when they hear things like the Muslim comment or the wall comment or things like that, Itās not, the question is not, you know, are you gonna build a wall like the Great Wall of China, or, you know, how exactly are you gonna enforce these tests? What they hear is, weāre gonna have, weāre gonna have a saner, more sensible immigration policy.
Cut back to John Oliver
Oliver: Oh, yeah, that is definitely the sense I got from watching those Trump rallies. Yes, while we are all furiously chanting, ābuild that wallā, we all understand in this context, wall is a clever use of metonymy, or a figure of speech in which 1 word, wall in this example, is used as a stand-in for a saner, more sensible immigration policy. Now, if you will, letās unpack āTrump the bitchā.
So you just downvote me, because you didnāt quite understand.
Brother, Iām happy the government of Finland is strong in the face of Russian fascists. But Republicans are not. And in America today, waving around John Oliver clips about āhow obviously America is trash for 18 reasonsā only exists to destroy a narrative with Trumpian citizens ā those same citizens that wish to use their voting power to demolish the institution. They already have SCOTUS. Technically, theyāve already won the election.
So you just downvote me, because you didnāt quite understand.
Made my drink spill out my nose for laughing so hard.
No, ābrotherā, itās you who doesnāt understand. And this not understanding ā willfully so even ā is a hallmark of the American spirit.
Saying āthe US has been championing socialist policies for 100 yearsā is the same as saying āChina has been championing personal freedom for 100 yearsā.
āWaving around John Oliver America Bad clipsā = āI donāt have the cognitive capabilities to pay attention to an award winning journalistic show that sources itās claims so thus everything addressed in it is shitā
The US still doesnāt have a direct presidential election, I donāt think youāve quite understood what that means.
Youāre right, the phrasing is generous. I mean even 100 years ago, itād be far more about championing white rights. If reconstruction went betterā¦ but thatās my point. I think we have differing definitions of the word āchampioningā. It does not mean to be the best, but rather the support for exists. And America has been pushing for these ideals. In comparison to so some other country, that isnt inundated with capitalist cowboys and slave stories ā sure, nice. Even some countries that have those were able to. But still, those in America have championed for social rights, and fundamental programs exist that prove that. You just think it means ābest in the worldā, and after watching all the Olympics, I forgive you.
I think we have differing definitions of the word āchampioningā.
No, we donāt. Youāre trying to pretend we do, to get out of having said something utterly silly.
Itās far sillier to try those sort of semantical shenanigans than just admitting to having said something silly in the first place.
And America has been pushing for these ideals
You had segregation just 60 years ago, you still donāt have limitless sickleave or even mandatory maternity leave. You have homeless people ā who actually have jobs ā shitting on the streets and dying from completely treatable things like infections, because they canāt afford the insane prices of healthcare. Education is more or less a joke, youāre literally burning books.
America has been actively suppressing socialist policies (and complete governments). Thatās a fact. Not an argument. Not an opinion. And definitely not up to semantics.
Youāve never heard of Social Security? I personally think itās important to highlight the fundamental pieces of government that already work using systems people could classify as āsocialistā. You pay in. You get you cut. The government uses everyones money as leverage.
The context, is the current population is quite literally on the precipice of throwing out modern liberal democracy all together.
I agree, of course, there are many other components to being human in America that the government isnāt properly established to deal with. But people who already hate the idea of socialism, they should understand that America grew to what it is, what it was, in part because of those policies.
Itās also a much better story to wrap yourself in than WW2 dominance and trickle-down horse-shit, and the ever-constant reminder of failed reconstruction and native demolition. America came together once, in the darkness of the Depression, to build a foundation. The last several generations, even those that existed when these programs were established, have existed to destroy and steal and gut. But Reagan told us all it was the governmentās fault, and in the golden hue of the 1980s, who the fuck needed Social Security? It was those same government programs that saved Americas cities, that built Americas roads. Many of the tracks may be gone, but theyāve all been replaced with internet cables ā similarly a public enterprise.
America is not a socialist country, itās constitution needs rewritten. But so much of what makes America what it is, what Americans understand America to be, is solely because of social liberalism. And all of these people that are voting Trump, they should understand that. Because Trump literally stands for demolishing all of it.
Ok yes. In the 1930s the United States came shockingly close to socialist revolution over the Great Depression and as such we won massive concessions that have been in the process of being eroded since the end of wwii, but especially since the 80s. Such a massive propaganda campaign combined with anti communist crackdowns happened that we basically surrendered social security and couldnāt implement universal healthcare
To say that America is ānumber 1ā is not what I was saying, it was that at the heart of the American governmental systems lies a true socialist foundation. Thatās why itās been hammered for so long, because itās what should have propelled America into the 21st century.
Like Iām often the defender of the American socialist tradition both on Lemmy and over in America, but I wouldnāt call it a foundation. We have deep socialist roots for sure, but theyāre concessions and arguments. Itās the foundational conflict of our nation: a slave empire built on the idea that all men are created equal. It resulted in a breeding ground for anarchists and fascists.
Those concessions are important and they led to a lot of prosperity, but donāt forget that by the 50s we had McCarthy. We shouldāve toppled it and showed the ussr what communism can be
Oh, youāve never heard of the The Democratic Peopleās Republic of Korea? As you can see from the name, theyāre definitely democratic.
The US social security is a bad joke compared to other developed nations.
To say āUSA has been championing socialist policies for 100 yearsā is on the same level as saying āChina has been championing personal freedom for 100 yearsā.
The US doesnāt even have direct presidential elections, which by the standard of developed democratic nations is extremely weird.
Thereās a lot there I donāt need to comment on. Iām challenging you on your āAmerica has been championing socialist policies for 100 yearsā comment.
Compared to European social security and labour laws, US socialist policies and labour laws are pretty much on the level of developing nations ā if that.
Are you honestly trying to use public roads as an example of āhaving championed socialist policiesā? Not exactly the most novel or progressive policy, I would say.
Literal strawman nonsense, look at this man go. I think you should understand that America is attempting to erode a womanās right to vote. Thatās what Iām saying. That all these people that think America should continue down the path of abandoning modern democracy should look into Americas past and understand the points in time in which it has championed for rights.
Thats the way you use that word. Youāre literally admitting youāre ESL and canāt use English as well as I can. Youāve built a massive strawman on this simple fact. Other commentors can see my point. You canāt. Sorry.
Like I actually canāt believe youāve built this massive of a strawman, itās incredible. All because you donāt know the definition of a word. Thatās literally all you go back to, as well. Nothing else I say matters. You just masturbate to your strawman, Mr Fin.
You donāt understand what a strawman argument is.
ESL? No, thatās āEnglish as a second languageā. Mine is technically third. My English is better than 60% native speakers (a large 60min test by a professional). And that counts countries which arenāt on the level of developing nations when it comes to literacy figures
America is attempting to erode a womanās right to vote.
America has been championing socialist policies for 100 years.
So which one do you believe in this one?
Itās quite hilarious how often I end up teaching Americans English. While this is my third language, Iām fairly sure Iāve used it longer, more and in more academic contexts than you have. Thatās why I donāt make up meanings for words when someone proves me wrong.
champion
verb
vigorously support or defend the cause of.
āhe championed the rights of the working class and the poorā
Once I answered your arse-ignorant āwell when did your countryā bullshit you got shaken and started shifting your asinine goalposts. The US has never CHAMPIONED socialist policies, let alone even using them. Still donāt.
Itās incredibly ironic how you think saying āyou got the wrong definitionā will work, and how āother commentors can seeā. Yes, they can. They will be able to even check the definition (which Iāve linked btw, but you ofc havenāt, as your definition of the word is made up) and see that āchampionā doesnāt exactly mean what you pretend it does. :)
Even if you forgo the most used definitions, and try to find a niche one thatās even remotely similar to how youāre using itā¦? Nah. The closest ones still will have at least āenthusiasticā in them. The way you use it to say āAmerica has been championing socialist policy for 100 yearsā is incorrect.
America has been actively suppressing socialist policies, socialist movements and even socialist countries. These are facts.
So I donāt know what āEnglishā youāre using, but here in the real world āchampionā doesnāt mean āactively fighting againstā.
āMr. Finā
See you canāt even write Finn, which is the demonym for a Finnish person. You use the noun which means a literal fin. Like those things fish have. :D
āchampioning socialist policyā
If it wasnāt so worrying that people like you exist, itād be kinda hilarious.
I also said a century. I mean when was Social Security setup in your country? I donāt think you understand the ideological war being fought in America.
I mean when was Social Security setup in your country?
So nothing I showed matters, the Red Scare doesnāt matter, the current situation doesnāt matter, you ignore (willfully) literally everything that proves your sentence to be insanely inaccurate and very ironic.
Most actual paying social security systems started right around WWII. Do you think your āchampioned for a centuryā will be correct with the first US social security starting in 1940?
In the last years of the nineteenth century, Finnish social policy had as its goal the lessening of class friction. The few existing pieces of social legislation addressed the needs of specific groups rather than of society as a whole.
According to the Finnish sociologist Erik Allardt, the hallmark of the Nordic welfare systems is their comprehensiveness. Unlike the welfare systems of the United States or most West European countries, those of the Nordic countries cover the entire population, and they are not limited to those groups unable to care for themselves.
We donāt have people (who are employed even) shitting on the streets. We have guaranteed maternity leaves, limitless sick days.
Just how brainwashed or ignorant does one need to be to say the US was more a āchampion of socialist policiesā than the Nordicsā¦?
In 1906, the autonomous Grand Duchy of Finland, which later became the Republic of Finland, was the first country in the world to give all women and all men both the right to vote and the right to run for office. Finland was also the first country in Europe to give women the right to vote.[5][6] The worldās first female members of parliament were elected in Finland the following year.
You still had segregation less than 61 years ago. And still donāt have the labour laws that are considered utterly basic in most developed nations.
I do understand the ideological war fought in America, because I exist on the internet and a significant portion of it deals with US politics.
The only reason weāre speaking English now is because you only know English. Ie I know more than you and are accommodating your level of knowledge and trying to get you to improve it.
Uh, what?
You have horrible social security and labour laws. If anyone has been āchampioning socialist policiesā, itās the Nordics, or if talking labour rights especially, France definitely more than the US.
The American anti-socialist rhetoric is so bad it has its own name. Even very moderate socialist policies are often disparaged as ācommunismā.
Thereās so much libertarianism online now, mostly affected by said American rhetoric, that Iāve actually met an idiot here in Finland who genuinely argued that homelessness and unemployment is a conscious choice by anyone suffering either.
You sound a bit like Peter Thiel in this clip (played on John Oliver) where he is pretending Trumpās rhetoric has deeper meaning.
Since most arenāt gonna listen hereās the transcript:
Cut back to John Oliver
So you just downvote me, because you didnāt quite understand.
Brother, Iām happy the government of Finland is strong in the face of Russian fascists. But Republicans are not. And in America today, waving around John Oliver clips about āhow obviously America is trash for 18 reasonsā only exists to destroy a narrative with Trumpian citizens ā those same citizens that wish to use their voting power to demolish the institution. They already have SCOTUS. Technically, theyāve already won the election.
Made my drink spill out my nose for laughing so hard.
No, ābrotherā, itās you who doesnāt understand. And this not understanding ā willfully so even ā is a hallmark of the American spirit.
Saying āthe US has been championing socialist policies for 100 yearsā is the same as saying āChina has been championing personal freedom for 100 yearsā.
āWaving around John Oliver America Bad clipsā = āI donāt have the cognitive capabilities to pay attention to an award winning journalistic show that sources itās claims so thus everything addressed in it is shitā
The US still doesnāt have a direct presidential election, I donāt think youāve quite understood what that means.
Youāre right, the phrasing is generous. I mean even 100 years ago, itād be far more about championing white rights. If reconstruction went betterā¦ but thatās my point. I think we have differing definitions of the word āchampioningā. It does not mean to be the best, but rather the support for exists. And America has been pushing for these ideals. In comparison to so some other country, that isnt inundated with capitalist cowboys and slave stories ā sure, nice. Even some countries that have those were able to. But still, those in America have championed for social rights, and fundamental programs exist that prove that. You just think it means ābest in the worldā, and after watching all the Olympics, I forgive you.
No, we donāt. Youāre trying to pretend we do, to get out of having said something utterly silly.
Itās far sillier to try those sort of semantical shenanigans than just admitting to having said something silly in the first place.
You had segregation just 60 years ago, you still donāt have limitless sickleave or even mandatory maternity leave. You have homeless people ā who actually have jobs ā shitting on the streets and dying from completely treatable things like infections, because they canāt afford the insane prices of healthcare. Education is more or less a joke, youāre literally burning books.
America has been actively suppressing socialist policies (and complete governments). Thatās a fact. Not an argument. Not an opinion. And definitely not up to semantics.
Youāve never heard of Social Security? I personally think itās important to highlight the fundamental pieces of government that already work using systems people could classify as āsocialistā. You pay in. You get you cut. The government uses everyones money as leverage.
The context, is the current population is quite literally on the precipice of throwing out modern liberal democracy all together.
I agree, of course, there are many other components to being human in America that the government isnāt properly established to deal with. But people who already hate the idea of socialism, they should understand that America grew to what it is, what it was, in part because of those policies.
Itās also a much better story to wrap yourself in than WW2 dominance and trickle-down horse-shit, and the ever-constant reminder of failed reconstruction and native demolition. America came together once, in the darkness of the Depression, to build a foundation. The last several generations, even those that existed when these programs were established, have existed to destroy and steal and gut. But Reagan told us all it was the governmentās fault, and in the golden hue of the 1980s, who the fuck needed Social Security? It was those same government programs that saved Americas cities, that built Americas roads. Many of the tracks may be gone, but theyāve all been replaced with internet cables ā similarly a public enterprise.
America is not a socialist country, itās constitution needs rewritten. But so much of what makes America what it is, what Americans understand America to be, is solely because of social liberalism. And all of these people that are voting Trump, they should understand that. Because Trump literally stands for demolishing all of it.
Ok yes. In the 1930s the United States came shockingly close to socialist revolution over the Great Depression and as such we won massive concessions that have been in the process of being eroded since the end of wwii, but especially since the 80s. Such a massive propaganda campaign combined with anti communist crackdowns happened that we basically surrendered social security and couldnāt implement universal healthcare
See this guy understands what Iām saying.
To say that America is ānumber 1ā is not what I was saying, it was that at the heart of the American governmental systems lies a true socialist foundation. Thatās why itās been hammered for so long, because itās what should have propelled America into the 21st century.
Like Iām often the defender of the American socialist tradition both on Lemmy and over in America, but I wouldnāt call it a foundation. We have deep socialist roots for sure, but theyāre concessions and arguments. Itās the foundational conflict of our nation: a slave empire built on the idea that all men are created equal. It resulted in a breeding ground for anarchists and fascists.
Those concessions are important and they led to a lot of prosperity, but donāt forget that by the 50s we had McCarthy. We shouldāve toppled it and showed the ussr what communism can be
Oh, youāve never heard of the The Democratic Peopleās Republic of Korea? As you can see from the name, theyāre definitely democratic.
The US social security is a bad joke compared to other developed nations.
To say āUSA has been championing socialist policies for 100 yearsā is on the same level as saying āChina has been championing personal freedom for 100 yearsā.
The US doesnāt even have direct presidential elections, which by the standard of developed democratic nations is extremely weird.
Thereās a lot there I donāt need to comment on. Iām challenging you on your āAmerica has been championing socialist policies for 100 yearsā comment.
Compared to European social security and labour laws, US socialist policies and labour laws are pretty much on the level of developing nations ā if that.
Case in point; Among 41 countries, only U.S. lacks paid parental leave
Are you honestly trying to use public roads as an example of āhaving championed socialist policiesā? Not exactly the most novel or progressive policy, I would say.
https://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/a-paradigm-shift-in-social-policy-how-finland-conquered-homelessness-a-ba1a531e-8129-4c71-94fc-7268c5b109d9
Last Week Tonight with John Oliver - Homelessness
https://www.cbpp.org/research/social-security/social-security-benefits-are-modest
You have people who are employed full time, some even in two jobs, who still have to live and shit on the street.
āChampioning socialist policiesā lol
Literal strawman nonsense, look at this man go. I think you should understand that America is attempting to erode a womanās right to vote. Thatās what Iām saying. That all these people that think America should continue down the path of abandoning modern democracy should look into Americas past and understand the points in time in which it has championed for rights.
Thats the way you use that word. Youāre literally admitting youāre ESL and canāt use English as well as I can. Youāve built a massive strawman on this simple fact. Other commentors can see my point. You canāt. Sorry.
Like I actually canāt believe youāve built this massive of a strawman, itās incredible. All because you donāt know the definition of a word. Thatās literally all you go back to, as well. Nothing else I say matters. You just masturbate to your strawman, Mr Fin.
You donāt understand what a strawman argument is.
ESL? No, thatās āEnglish as a second languageā. Mine is technically third. My English is better than 60% native speakers (a large 60min test by a professional). And that counts countries which arenāt on the level of developing nations when it comes to literacy figures
So which one do you believe in this one?
Itās quite hilarious how often I end up teaching Americans English. While this is my third language, Iām fairly sure Iāve used it longer, more and in more academic contexts than you have. Thatās why I donāt make up meanings for words when someone proves me wrong.
Once I answered your arse-ignorant āwell when did your countryā bullshit you got shaken and started shifting your asinine goalposts. The US has never CHAMPIONED socialist policies, let alone even using them. Still donāt.
Itās incredibly ironic how you think saying āyou got the wrong definitionā will work, and how āother commentors can seeā. Yes, they can. They will be able to even check the definition (which Iāve linked btw, but you ofc havenāt, as your definition of the word is made up) and see that āchampionā doesnāt exactly mean what you pretend it does. :)
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/champion
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/champion
Even if you forgo the most used definitions, and try to find a niche one thatās even remotely similar to how youāre using itā¦? Nah. The closest ones still will have at least āenthusiasticā in them. The way you use it to say āAmerica has been championing socialist policy for 100 yearsā is incorrect.
America has been actively suppressing socialist policies, socialist movements and even socialist countries. These are facts.
So I donāt know what āEnglishā youāre using, but here in the real world āchampionā doesnāt mean āactively fighting againstā.
āMr. Finā
See you canāt even write Finn, which is the demonym for a Finnish person. You use the noun which means a literal fin. Like those things fish have. :D
āchampioning socialist policyā
If it wasnāt so worrying that people like you exist, itād be kinda hilarious.
I also said a century. I mean when was Social Security setup in your country? I donāt think you understand the ideological war being fought in America.
So nothing I showed matters, the Red Scare doesnāt matter, the current situation doesnāt matter, you ignore (willfully) literally everything that proves your sentence to be insanely inaccurate and very ironic.
Most actual paying social security systems started right around WWII. Do you think your āchampioned for a centuryā will be correct with the first US social security starting in 1940?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welfare_in_Finland
We donāt have people (who are employed even) shitting on the streets. We have guaranteed maternity leaves, limitless sick days.
Just how brainwashed or ignorant does one need to be to say the US was more a āchampion of socialist policiesā than the Nordicsā¦?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_women's_suffrage#:~:text=In 1906%2C the autonomous Grand,women the right to vote.
You still had segregation less than 61 years ago. And still donāt have the labour laws that are considered utterly basic in most developed nations.
I do understand the ideological war fought in America, because I exist on the internet and a significant portion of it deals with US politics.
The only reason weāre speaking English now is because you only know English. Ie I know more than you and are accommodating your level of knowledge and trying to get you to improve it.