|
|
|
|
|
|
by norea-armozel
3221 days ago
|
|
|
>It has nothing to do with nerves being struck and everything to do with your 150 year out of date social analysis being so absurd that it's not even wrong. Tell that to the US DSA which is seeing record membership increases. And tell that to Kamala Harris who's an astute politician that co-signed Sander's single-payer bill. If the winds of change aren't blowing leftward then explain the current trend. Also, Trump's ascendancy is the result of the capitalists not the working class. Robert Mercer (one of Trump's key supporters) has as much in common with you and me than does a mouse with a moose. Essentially, Trump is the carefully created result of decades of right wing propaganda and concerted destruction of the welfare state. Want to see less of Trump? Then tax the living heck out of the super rich and/or ban their right to fund any kind of think tank or PAC forever (down to a constitution amendment if necessary). |
|
|
Some bad news: Bernie Sanders' support is substantially middle class. His policies are only very generously described as socialism at all, crucially he does not even begin to propose a fundamental break with private property or capitalism.
The rise of Bernie Sanders may be a nice development, and his hypothetical election might well bring benefits. But it's not going to be a workers revolution in any meaningful 20th century sense of the word.
Trump may be all that, but he was elected by appealing to the working class. Bernie Sanders has as much in common with you and I as a mouse has with a slightly smaller moose. Few of the revolutionary icons of the 20th century were themselves working class (Marx himself was remarkably posh). The important metric for a working class uprising is what the working class does (specifically, that it rises up), not the class background of the person they rise behind.