r/technology • u/marketrent • 1d ago

Site altered title “ALL HAIL CHAIRMAN TRUMP! WITH HIS GLORIOUS 10% PURCHASE OF INTEL, THE SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF AMERICA ENTERS A BOLD NEW ERA” -- California governor Newsom riles Republicans with Trump-trolling posts

https://www.barrons.com/news/meme-lord-newsom-riles-republicans-with-trump-trolling-posts-05b74794
51.7k Upvotes

91% Upvoted

1.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

9

u/sw00pr 1d ago

Is it still "socialism" if the state is not in the hands of the people?

3

u/Iohet 1d ago

You could make that argument with Venezuela, but I think it's a bit harder in the US given the 2024 voting results

2

u/sw00pr 1d ago

And the polls too, I guess. While not a majority there is still a significant portion that support these policies.

Follow-up question: If a democracy votes for an autocrat, should supporters of democracy step aside and let it happen? ...It's only consistent to do so. But it don't feel right...

3

u/Iohet 1d ago

Step aside? Absolutely not. But we're still within the elected term, so it's hard to argue that this isn't the majority's will, for better or for worse (obviously for worse for those who would like to continue being a democracy)

2

u/Arndt3002 1d ago

Well, we still called the USSR communist despite being in control of a vanguard party that pretends to be, but is not at all, controlled by the will of the people.

In fact, that's a predominating aspect of Marxist-Lenninist theory, that the people can't actually run things themselves and need a "dictatorship of the Proletariat" to control things for them.

But in a sense, I guess, since it all sort of hinges on who "the people" are and what "their will" is, which often is just code for "things I like" whether you're a right or left wing authoritarian.

2

u/Noughmad 1d ago

Well, we still called the USSR communist

We called it communist, but that's not what they called themselves. The ruling party was communist, but "communism" was a promised end state they were trying to move towards, not the economic model they had. The republics were socialist, which does mean public/shared ownership of the means of production.

However, even Lenin himself realized that the state owning everything does not mean that people control it. He even described their system as "state capitalism", as in, the state is the only capitalist, and workers/people are not in control. The fact that a big factor in its collapse was a giant workers' union protest also doesn't help their case.

1

u/Chrontius 1d ago

<alwayshasbeen.meme>