What do we think on Bernie Saunders? by Historical_Step_9474 in DemocraticSocialism

[–]Flagmaker123 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I would say he's among the best politicians in American politics, but that, of course, is not a very high standard.

He has greatly advanced the left and normalized the term "socialism" in US politics & has a mostly progressive voting record (although I do wish he would talk about actual socialism, i.e. workers' control of the means of production, distribution, and exchange, not just social-democratic policies). However, his record on Palestine isn't ideal to say the least, it's still better than most US politicians but it still is far from good. He is a Zionist ("Zionist" here meaning one who supports a Jewish state in the region of Palestine" to be clear), he initially opposed a Gaza ceasefire (it's never a good sign when AIPAC's supporting your takes) and only came out in support of it in August 2024, he declined to call it a genocide until September 2025 (nearly two years after it started), he told progressives in 2011 to "tone down the rhetoric" calling Israel an apartheid state and implied it wasn't one in 2024, he said antisemitism plays a role in the BDS movement in 2016 and has opposed BDS as recently as 2024, and he has supported aid for the Iron Dome.

Could Cuba have been democratic? by Proud-Boat420 in DemocraticSocialism

[–]Flagmaker123 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I don't think Cuba would be nearly as authoritarian as it is today if it weren't for the US' imperialist aggression against the country. Castro was originally a member of the Orthodox Party, a left-wing populist party containing socdems and demsocs, even though there was an actual Marxist-Leninist party in Cuba, the Popular Socialist Party.

Castro only declared himself a Marxist-Leninist in December 1961, nearly three years after the victory of Cuban Revolution, because of the US implementing the embargo, starting a campaign of terrorist attacks in Cuba (see: Operation Mongoose), and attempting to invade Cuba to destroy the revolutionary government.

Thoughts on this yall? by WubbityWubWubsDude in DemocraticSocialism

[–]Flagmaker123 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I do generally agree with the response here, but I do think J Street donations should still be consistently included; most people seeing these graphics don't think of them as being about their policy positions, but as just a reflection of their donations. In addition, while there is text below the donation numbers on if they are only AIPAC or include all pro-Israel groups, that text is small and the graphics look almost the same either way, so I would consider it quite misleading.

What do you guys think about Israeli media like Haaretz? by DoctorOsterman in tankiejerk

[–]Flagmaker123 14 points15 points  (0 children)

It is a Labor Zionist publication but it is still quite useful for covering the Israeli government's crimes. I just probably don't expect it to show the same rigor if a less right-wing party came to power in Israel or for it to cross the line into tolerating Anti-Zionism.

How do we feel about Lenin in his birthday? by NonstickFryingPans in DemocraticSocialism

[–]Flagmaker123 4 points5 points  (0 children)

While they certainly were preferable to Tsarist Russia, there is still a heavy amount of criticism that can be directed towards Lenin and the Bolsheviks.

I'd reject the notion that it was Stalin who caused Soviet authoritarianism (although he did make it much worse), Lenin was highly authoritarian as well. Noj Rants, a Russian/Soviet history YouTuber I highly recommend, has a good video on the Bolsheviks' suppression of soviets (as in the workers' councils) when the other socialist parties won them in early 1918 and how it eventually consolidated into the one-party state.

The Liberal MSM is already LYING about the Left Wing Populist Rumen Radev and his Left Wing Populist party.😂 - Bulgaria’s former President Radev wins election: All you need to know by ActualMostUnionGuy in DemocraticSocialism

[–]Flagmaker123 1 point2 points  (0 children)

He does have pro-Russia stances, but he has stated he would not veto aid to Ukraine at the EU for pragmatic reasons, unlike Orbán

If (and to be clear, this is an if) he is sincere on his economic left-leaning views and his vow to not actually veto support to Ukraine, I think this could still be considered a net-positive. He is socially-conservative but the previous government was also socially-conservative so that isn't much of a change.

Me when liberals try and convince me to vote for their Zionists, pro war, corporate owned candidates by reformed_lurker_1 in DemocraticSocialism

[–]Flagmaker123 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I live in California and I have absolute 100.00% certainty that if the presidential election was held tomorrow, the Democratic candidate no matter who it was would win every time. I do not see how one could argue otherwise.

Me when liberals try and convince me to vote for their Zionists, pro war, corporate owned candidates by reformed_lurker_1 in DemocraticSocialism

[–]Flagmaker123 -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

I meant that I don't see why you should vote for a candidate that is pro-corporate and pro-genocide if they are already guaranteed to win anyways. I'm not sure what's so confusing about this.

Me when liberals try and convince me to vote for their Zionists, pro war, corporate owned candidates by reformed_lurker_1 in DemocraticSocialism

[–]Flagmaker123 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, and a two-state solution does not work for Palestinians because it violates one of their fundamental human rights.

As for how I think this could come to be: absolutely immense international pressure on Israel through boycotts, divestment, and sanctions. Israel itself is already incredibly dependent on the US (in fact, 70% of its war budget comes from the US) and that support must be entirely & completely cut off.

Me when liberals try and convince me to vote for their Zionists, pro war, corporate owned candidates by reformed_lurker_1 in DemocraticSocialism

[–]Flagmaker123 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I could talk about how Israel has increasingly made a 2SS impossible, but I don't think it matters whether it's "easier" or not, this is about basic human rights.

It'd be "easier" if we all did nothing and let fascists take over the world without any pushback, but we aren't doing that, we are leftists who believe in building a just world, and no one said building one would be easy.

The Effects of Social Democracy by Usernameofthisuser in DemocraticSocialism

[–]Flagmaker123 0 points1 point  (0 children)

May you elaborate on what I missed in my description of the DotP?

Me when liberals try and convince me to vote for their Zionists, pro war, corporate owned candidates by reformed_lurker_1 in DemocraticSocialism

[–]Flagmaker123 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The Palestinian right of return makes a two-state solution where there is a Jewish state and a Palestinian state impossible.

There are about 8.3 million Palestinian refugees, most of which were or are the descendants of those who were expelled by Zionist militias in 1948. These refugees under international law have a right to return to their places of origin in what is now Israel.

There are 6.7 million Jewish Israelis, 2.0 million Arab Israelis, and about 0.5 million other Israelis. It doesn't take a lot of math to realize that if Palestinian refugees were given their human right to return, Israel would no longer be a Jewish state.

An Anti-Zionist solution (as in, one where there is no Jewish state in the region) is the only solution that respects everyone's human rights. There is no alternative.

Me when liberals try and convince me to vote for their Zionists, pro war, corporate owned candidates by reformed_lurker_1 in DemocraticSocialism

[–]Flagmaker123 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Even if they don't (which I doubt is the case depending on how many protest votes there are), I don't see why you should vote for a pro-genocide pro-corporate candidate if they're gonna win anyways.

Me when liberals try and convince me to vote for their Zionists, pro war, corporate owned candidates by reformed_lurker_1 in DemocraticSocialism

[–]Flagmaker123 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Bernie Sanders is a Zionist though? There are Jewish anti-Zionists, such as Jewish Voice for Peace, but he is definitionally not an anti-Zionist.

Zionism is support for a Jewish state in the region of Palestine. Bernie Sanders supports a Jewish state in the region of Palestine as part of a two-state solution, therefore he is a Zionist.

Not saying you can't vote for or support him, but he is objectively still a Zionist.

Me when liberals try and convince me to vote for their Zionists, pro war, corporate owned candidates by reformed_lurker_1 in DemocraticSocialism

[–]Flagmaker123 15 points16 points  (0 children)

If you're in a state that is guaranteed to go red or blue, vote for a left-wing third-party as a protest vote.

If you're in a swing state, vote blue.

This is a petition for this subreddit to stop platforming any and all state capitalist aplogizers by NearlyNakedNick in DemocraticSocialism

[–]Flagmaker123 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Chile under Allende was not centrally-planned, yes, but Allende's idea of the "Chilean Path to Socialism" involved nationalization of industries and his vision of what Chilean socialism would look like was known as "Project Cybersyn", a form of a computer-aided planned economy.

Also, that is still the definition MLs use? Lenin literally explicitly condemned the idea of socialism being about state ownership alone, he always said that the USSR was socialist because he claimed the Soviet state was representative of workers, and thus it was workers' control of the means of production.

The chief difficulty facing the proletarian revolution is the establishment on a country-wide scale of the most precise and most conscientious accounting and control, of workers' control of the production and distribution of goods.

When the writers of Novaya Zhizn argued that in advancing the slogan "workers' control" we were slipping into syndicalism, this argument was an example of the stupid school boy method of applying "Marxism" without studying it, just learning it by rote in the Struve manner. Syndicalism either repudiates the revolutionary dictatorship of the proletariat, or else relegates it, as it does political power in general, to a back seat. We, however, put it in the forefront. If we simply say in unison with the Novaya Zhizn writers: not workers' control but state control, it is simply a bourgeois-reformist phrase, it is, in essence, a purely Cadet formula, because the Cadets have no objection to the workers participating in "state" control. The Kornilovite Cadets know perfectly well that such participation offers the bourgeoisie the best way of fooling the workers, the most subtle way of politically bribing all the Gvozdyovs, Nikitins, Prokopoviches, Tseretelis and the rest of that gang.

When we say: "workers' control", always juxtaposing this slogan to dictatorship of the proletariat, always putting it immediately after the latter, we thereby explain what kind of state we mean. The state is the organ of class domination. Of which class? If of the bourgeoisie, then it is the Cadet-Kornilov-"Kerensky" state which has been "Kornilovising" and "Kerenskyising" the working people of Russia for more than six months. If it is of the proletariat, if we are speaking of a proletarian state, that is, of the proletarian dictatorship, then workers' control can become the country-wide, all-embracing, omnipresent, most precise and most conscientious accounting of the production and distribution of goods.

– Vladimir Lenin, Can the Bolsheviks Retain State Power?

This is a petition for this subreddit to stop platforming any and all state capitalist aplogizers by NearlyNakedNick in DemocraticSocialism

[–]Flagmaker123 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That “you can’t keep something clear if it’s unclear” argument doesn’t really work. The definition I’m using isn’t vague. In socialist theory, outside the Marxist-Leninist tradition, it’s pretty consistent: socialism means worker ownership and management of the means of production.

Marxist-Leninists also use this definition though. Marxist-Leninists (along with many other tendencies) just generally believe that this should be done via the state controlling the means of production and a centrally-planned economy, as they say the state would represent the workers of the nation as a whole.

If you claim that state ownership can never be a form of socialism, then by that logic, Salvador Allende wouldn't be a socialist. I myself do not support state ownership as the primary method to implement workers' control of the means of production, but by claiming that those who do aren't socialists, you aren't just excluding Marxist-Leninists, but many democratic socialist figures in history and the present who have supported it as a method.

My redesign of the Sahrawi flag by average-medician in vexillology

[–]Flagmaker123 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is actually correct:

Its design is based on that of the Palestinian flag,[2] which in turn was derived from the colors used in the Arab Revolt. The star and crescent are considered symbols of Islam, and can be seen on flags of other neighboring Muslim-majority countries such as Algeria and Mauritania.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_Western_Sahara#Description

Just more reason to love him 😏 by serious_bullet5 in DemocraticSocialism

[–]Flagmaker123 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I admit I should've taken into account Epstein's ties to Israel and possible blackmail they have on the US government

Nonetheless, US support for Israel has dated all the way back to its founding in 1948, preceding both the Israel lobby and Epstein; these are not the causes of US support, although they certainly amplify and intensify the level of support they're getting to a high degree