Bernie Sanders

[DMC]

muh wiki

Question pending.

When did he describe himself as in favor of the government's control of the publishing industry?

It's a simple question.

Answer it.

Your question is without merit. It has no bearing on the discussion.

Now define the term since you dismissed the Wiki description or simply settle for my version of it, like you did with Bernie.

[ChumpDumper]

Your question is without merit. It has no bearing on the discussion.

I accept your folding on your original premise.

As for the rest, I'll let Bernie speak for himself.

Mr. Sanders identifies as a democratic socialist, but when asked on Tuesday how he defined that, he described something closer to social democracy.

“What democratic socialism essentially means to me is completing the vision that Franklin Delano Roosevelt started some 85 years ago, and that is to go forward in the wealthiest country in the history of the world and guarantee a decent economic standard of living in life for all of our people,” he said. “And to do that, obviously we have to combat oligarchy and the incredibly unfair and unequal distribution of wealth and income, and to take on the incredible political power that the 1 percent have.”

The policies Mr. Sanders supports — like single-payer health care, free public college, and higher taxes on the wealthy to fund safety-net programs — are also standard in social democracies.

“His practical program is a program that would be pretty comfortable within the confines of any European country,” said Sheri Berman, a professor of political science at Barnard College. “As far as the policies he’s advocating, those are probably better viewed as social democratic — that’s what they would be in another place in which there are more left options.”

But “because we don’t have a social-democratic party in this country,” Professor Berman said, “the only way to indicate that you want to go further than the Democratic Party — that you are more critical of capitalism than the Democratic Party has been — has been to identify yourself as a democratic socialist.”

And so, even on a question as basic as whether democratic socialism and capitalism can coexist, there is disagreement.

“There are some democratic socialists that would say, ‘Absolutely not,’” Ms. Ocasio-Cortez, who identifies as a democratic socialist, told MSNBC in February. Others — herself included, she said — “would say, ‘I think it’s possible.’”

So we can conclude that your lazy-ass wiki definition is bull when it comes to Bernie as well as AOC and probably a large part of the group calling themselves Democratic Socialists in this country. All that's left for you is to flail about and attempt to change the subject. We can now call it the No True Democratic Socialist fallacy.

[DMC]

I accept your folding on your original premise.

As for the rest, I'll let Bernie speak for himself.



So we can conclude that your lazy-ass wiki definition is bull when it comes to Bernie as well as AOC. All that's left for you is to flail about and attempt to change the subject. We can now call it the No True Democratic Socialist fallacy.

So Bernie is delusional or ignorant since he describes himself as something different than he claims to be.

And since you like quotes:

"If we wanted to quibble about terminology, I’d say this approach is less “democratic socialist” than it is “social democratic.” But the “socialist” label is core to Sanders’s iden y — both as a matter of branding and his own political past. Decades ago, Sanders used to be much more radical. In 1976, he gave an interview endorsing “the public ownership of utilities, banks, and major industries.” He has spent his life marinating in anti-capitalist political ideas and communities; his political vision and language reflect that.

This is what separates him even from Warren, whose rhetoric hits many of the same themes about the threat posed by the greedy rich and the need for a popular movement to oppose them. Warren is a more natural heir to FDR than Sanders — a liberal who explicitly wants to save capitalism from itself, and a product of a left-liberal political tradition rather than a socialist one." -Vox

Sanders didn't "come around". He's still who he was. He just tries to package it more user friendly to get elected.

[spurraider21]

That's why I said "path back".

You must have initially been somewhere to even qualify to find your way back. All these times you agreed he's not what he claims to be. Researching Bernie even a little gives a clear image that Bernie is indeed socialist but he's trying to soften the image because the country still isn't ready to accept that term as anything other than communism. Warren knows this. Bernie is moving slowly but his political beliefs from 40 years ago were even more radical then than they would be now, but somehow he's moved closer to the center? I don't buy that.

no. I never considered him a pure socialist so there’s no need for me to “find a path back” whatever the that means.

researching him a little bit gives a clear image that he is a socialist. What research? So far the closest thing you’ve done to research him is to look up wiki definitions and try to apply them wholesale in an incredibly lazy way after i specifically said that’s an awful way to go about this discussion

[ChumpDumper]

So Bernie is delusional or ignorant since he describes himself as something different than he claims to be.

And since you like quotes:

"If we wanted to quibble about terminology, I’d say this approach is less “democratic socialist” than it is “social democratic.” But the “socialist” label is core to Sanders’s iden y — both as a matter of branding and his own political past. Decades ago, Sanders used to be much more radical. In 1976, he gave an interview endorsing “the public ownership of utilities, banks, and major industries.” He has spent his life marinating in anti-capitalist political ideas and communities; his political vision and language reflect that.

This is what separates him even from Warren, whose rhetoric hits many of the same themes about the threat posed by the greedy rich and the need for a popular movement to oppose them. Warren is a more natural heir to FDR than Sanders — a liberal who explicitly wants to save capitalism from itself, and a product of a left-liberal political tradition rather than a socialist one." -Vox

Sanders didn't "come around". He's still who he was. He just tries to package it more user friendly to get elected.

I saw no quotes from Bernie in there at all.

You're flailing.

And you deluded yourself into quadrupling down on your No True Democratic Socialist fallacy.

There is zero evidence supporting your deluded claim he wants government to run the publishing industry.

[ChumpDumper]

no. I never considered him a pure socialist so there’s no need for me to “find a path back” whatever the that means.

researching him a little bit gives a clear image that he is a socialist. What research? So far the closest thing you’ve done to research him is to look up wiki definitions and try to apply them wholesale in an incredibly lazy way after i specifically said that’s an awful way to go about this discussion

The herculean effort he has put into defending such a lazy premise is amusing.

[DMC]

no. I never considered him a pure socialist so there’s no need for me to “find a path back” whatever the that means.

You're lost. Agreeing with me that he's not a real socialist because he profits from capitalism is where you were originally. You even said so. Try to keep up, Philo.

researching him a little bit gives a clear image that he is a socialist. What research? So far the closest thing you’ve done to research him is to look up wiki definitions and try to apply them wholesale in an incredibly lazy way after i specifically said that’s an awful way to go about this discussion

You have no idea what I've done. How could you?

Your disingenuous shtick is tiring. The definition was only used to get a basis for discussion. You agreed with it. Now you're on the "lol Wiki" bandwagon. Speaking of lazy, non of you has offered an alternative definition for democratic socialist, and instead keep deferring to Bernie for a customized definition. You seem unable to accept the choices that either Bernie is delusional, dishonest or ignorant. You've avoided that entirely in your fervor to misrepresent my position so you can more easily defend yours.

[DMC]

I saw no quotes from Bernie in there at all.

You're flailing.

And you deluded yourself into quadrupling down on your No True Democratic Socialist fallacy.

There is zero evidence supporting your deluded claim he wants government to run the publishing industry.

You assumed I was quoting Bernie. I never said that. You make too many assumptions.

You're using circular reasoning (Bernie is a democratic socialist because Bernie says so, and we know it's true even though Bernie defines it differently, because Bernie says so), as if the term has no actual definition. Bernie doesn't get to redefine terms. Neither do you.

[spurraider21]

You're lost. Agreeing with me that he's not a real socialist because he profits from capitalism is where you were originally. You even said so. Try to keep up, Philo.

of course it was. That’s why your whole “path back” shtick made no sense

You have no idea what I've done. How could you?

Your disingenuous shtick is tiring. The definition was only used to get a basis for discussion. You agreed with it. Now you're on the "lol Wiki" bandwagon. Speaking of lazy, non of you has offered an alternative definition for democratic socialist, and instead keep deferring to Bernie for a customized definition. You seem unable to accept the choices that either Bernie is delusional, dishonest or ignorant. You've avoided that entirely in your fervor to misrepresent my position so you can more easily defend yours.

It’s not a “lol wiki” situation. I have said numerous times in this discussion that taking any long definition and trying to apply it wholesale is lazy. I proffered the social democrat description because i said it better describes his positions than the definition you offered. I again, in that very post, cautioned against lazily claiming that he subscribes to the entirety of that article/definition

[spurraider21]

Ratchet down the drama. It's unnecessary.

Bernie describes himself one way - you and a few others here allow for a customized definition of that. Bernie has an entire career of preaching socialism, why you are here now pretending he's not a socialist is beyond me. What do you hope to achieve?

Socialist relying on capitalism? Ya I have a problem with it.

You said you had a problem with it. I said angry. THATS your big issue?

”why you are here now pretending he’s not a socialist”

im not pretending. I’m familiar with his policy goals. Having the state run all industry including publishing isn’t among them. On the spectrum between socialism and capitalism, he’s closer to the socialism side than just about any American politician.

[spurraider21]

If we are sticking to that rigid definition then it’s an inaccurate description of what Sanders stands for.

Now look up Social Democracy on wiki and that’s a much better description of what he advocates for.

However you want to slice it, it’s lazy to just slap on a label and then assume he subscribes to every word of a paragraphs-long definition you found online. better approach is to actually learn the guys positions. He hadn’t called for the state to take over the market and to eliminate private businesses, property, etc. it’s just an absurd strawman

For reference

[DMC]

of course it was. That’s why your whole “path back” shtick made no sense

Because you kept getting away from it with your hyperbole about anger and being upset. You keep trying to separate Bernie from the socialism ideology as if I didn't already do that in my initial comment. You agreed that Bernie isn't a true socialist, but he does claim to be a democratic socialist. You accepted the definition of democratic socialist (with the option to provide an alternative one).

It’s not a “lol wiki” situation. I have said numerous times in this discussion that taking any long definition and trying to apply it wholesale is lazy. I proffered the social democrat description because i said it better describes his positions than the definition you offered. I again, in that very post, cautioned against lazily claiming that he subscribes to the entirety of that article/definition

I left that up to you. You accepted it. You can recall that and provide a different definition if you like. I just refuse to accept "whatever Bernie says" as a definition for it.

So is Bernie dishonest, delusional or ignorant?

If Bernie creates his own customized definition for democratic socialist, that's either dishonest or delusional
If he accepts the common description and just doesn't adhere to it, then he's dishonest to use that term.
If he doesn't understand the difference between his actual position and democratic socialism, then he's ignorant.

Which is it? Do you see another alternative?

[ChumpDumper]

You assumed I was quoting Bernie. I never said that. You make too many assumptions.

You're using circular reasoning (Bernie is a democratic socialist because Bernie says so, and we know it's true even though Bernie defines it differently, because Bernie says so), as if the term has no actual definition. Bernie doesn't get to redefine terms. Neither do you.

quintupling down on muh wiki and your No True Democratic Socialist fallacy.

Bernie has his own definition. AOC has hers. Both include capitalism. Somehow they're still US Democratic Socialists-- that's been succinctly explained to you.

Despite you demand for wiki orthodoxy.

[DMC]

For reference

That was about socialism.

Bernie claims to be a democratic socialist. I did post the description of that as well. It's not my claim that he's a democratic socialist, but his.

[ChumpDumper]

Because you kept getting away from it with your hyperbole about anger and being upset. You keep trying to separate Bernie from the socialism ideology as if I didn't already do that in my initial comment. You agreed that Bernie isn't a true socialist, but he does claim to be a democratic socialist. You accepted the definition of democratic socialist (with the option to provide an alternative one).
I left that up to you. You accepted it. You can recall that and provide a different definition if you like. I just refuse to accept "whatever Bernie says" as a definition for it.

So is Bernie dishonest, delusional or ignorant?

If Bernie creates his own customized definition for democratic socialist, that's either dishonest or delusional
If he accepts the common description and just doesn't adhere to it, then he's dishonest to use that term.
If he doesn't understand the difference between his actual position and democratic socialism, then he's ignorant.

Which is it? Do you see another alternative?

I mean your own Vox article says

“Democratic socialism” in Sanders’s definition

You can reject it all you want, but he does have his own definition-- as does AOC. Both include capitalism. You can speculate on their motives, honesty or ignorance, but it just looks like in the US a lot of social democrats fall under the Democratic Socialist label.

And it's not that big a deal.

[DMC]

I mean your own Vox article says


You can reject it all you want, but he does have his own definition-- as does AOC. Both include capitalism. You can speculate on their motives, honesty or ignorance, but it just looks like in the US a lot of social democrats fall under the Democratic Socialist label.

And it's not that big a deal.

We'll see come election won't we?

[ChumpDumper]

We'll see come election won't we?

What would that have to do with the election?

Explain.

[spurraider21]

"you know, i WAS going to vote for bernie but then i realized he calls himself a democratic socialist instead of a social democrat, so instead im going to vote for trump"

[DMC]

"you know, i WAS going to vote for bernie but then i realized he calls himself a democratic socialist instead of a social democrat, so instead im going to vote for trump"

Go with that strawman.

[DMC]

What would that have to do with the election?

Explain.

You think dems are going to vote for a self professed socialist? Even if his stance is not actually socialist, how many voters actually know anything about the candidate they are voting for? Bernie will get beaten in his own party by self professed capitalists who aren't really capitalists.

[ChumpDumper]

You think dems are going to vote for a self professed socialist? Even if his stance is not actually socialist, how many voters actually know anything about the candidate they are voting for? Bernie will get beaten in his own party by self professed capitalists who aren't really capitalists.

Oh, so nothing you were actually trying to argue is relevant to the election.

I agree.

[spurraider21]

I mean your own Vox article says


You can reject it all you want, but he does have his own definition-- as does AOC. Both include capitalism. You can speculate on their motives, honesty or ignorance, but it just looks like in the US a lot of social democrats fall under the Democratic Socialist label.

And it's not that big a deal.

We'll see come election won't we?

you straight up said "we'll see come election" in response to bernie using his own definition of what democratic socialist... and now are changing that to

You think dems are going to vote for a self professed socialist? Even if his stance is not actually socialist, how many voters actually know anything about the candidate they are voting for? Bernie will get beaten in his own party by self professed capitalists who aren't really capitalists.

[DMC]

you straight up said "we'll see come election" in response to bernie using his own definition of what democratic socialist... and now are changing that to

This is how it works with you folks. You respond to my answer to Chump and he responds to my answer to you.

You're so lost now I don't know if I can get you back on track.

[boutons_deux]

ClintonNN intent on cratering Bernie

CNN: Bernie Sanders’ Plans Could Cost $60 Trillion or More in Extra Federal Spending

https://www.mediaite.com/news/cnn-bernie-sanders-plans-could-cost-60-trillion-or-more-in-extra-federal-spending/

[DMC]

Oh, so nothing you were actually trying to argue is relevant to the election.

I agree.

Of course it's relevant. You said it's no big deal whether someone identifies as a democrat or socialist. Socialist democrat is one thing, but democratic socialist is something else, and the 2nd is how Bernie self identifies because he won't let go of socialism. It will affect his chances. You can deny it after the fact all you like, and find other causes but if Bernie loses to Warren or Biden, it's probably due to him claiming to be a socialist.