[pmoriarty]

"the left has gone so far left that everyone looks like they are far right comparatively."

When people say stuff like this I wonder what planet they're from.

It's not like the US even has a viable Socialist party, never mind a Marxist or Communist one.

I've never heard a Democrat call for the abolishment of private property or a revolution of the proletariat. In America, dreams of that sort died with end of the 60's and 70s with the destruction of the Weather Underground, the assassinations of MLK, Malcolm X, and RFK, the neutering of unions and the labor movement. The rise to power of Reaganism in the 80s and the switch of former leftists to Neo Cons sealed the left's fate.

Now pretty much everyone in America in any position of power (Republican or Democrat) is pretty solidly capitalist, which isn't exactly a far left position. Most of the leaders are also pretty pro-war and happy to support the military-industrial complex, which are not traditionally leftist positions in the US.

Republicans, on the other hand, have called for revolution, and some have even acted on it. The major terrorist attacks on America since Timothy McVeigh have come from the right (which includes not only "patriot" and "militia" groups and the "lone nut" inspired by the endless hatred and calls for violence on conservative talk radio, but also Muslim fundamenalists, who themselves are pretty right wing and have much more in common with right wing extremists because of their anti-women, anti-progress, and theocratic views than with the left).

The left in America is a complete joke when you compare it to how strong it is in Europe, where you can actually find viable openly Socialist and Communist parties, very strong unions, and solid social safety nets. What passes for the "left" in the US would be considered right wing there.

The only thing remotely left wing that I can see in mainstream American politics today is support for abortion and tolerance of minorities and people of different sexual identities/orientations. While important, that's a pretty small ledge for the left to stand on.

[peyton]

Today’s focus on equity indeed fits many, many definitions of far left: radical abolition of class. But if you restrict far left to abolishing private property, then sure.

[mountainriver]

That’s really just not true overall. Bernie Sanders policies would be considered far left by even European standards, and he almost won the nomination. The abortion and social justice positions are also far left compared to Europe

[welterde]

Which policies do you mean exactly? Because I don't see anything on first glance or from memory that wouldn't be at home at your typical center-left social democrat party here in Europe.

[mountainriver]

Sorry for the Quora link but it has a pretty good overview https://qr.ae/pvFQkJ This also doesn't cover his free housing plan which is very left.

On abortion https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2022/05/06/abortion-acces...

Also the current views of liberals on race and gender are far left by European standards

Totally get that we currently have a significantly smaller welfare state though.

[welterde]

That summary on Quora is pretty decent and supports my statement of center-left positioning and that social democrats are probably the closest match. Some things like free tuition, free school meals are not really far left, but center-left at most. Some things like improving the voting system are not really applicable here, since we have somewhat less problematic voting systems compared to US. Other things like holding big tech accountable is less obviously placed, since it kinda has support and opposition from both ends of the spectrum.

Not sure what your point about abortion is, but kinda seems to me like that is mostly aligned with Europe too? And neither are race and gender issues far-left issues here, but that's also more centrist and only the far-right really fighting against it (depending on what is meant exactly.. kinda broad topic).

[mountainriver]

We are pretty far left on abortion, Roe v. Wade is much more permissive than most European countries.

Race and gender in modern far left US views is also far left by Europes standards and the US is actually leading the way in this regard.

Europe is just way further along on the welfare state than we currently are, but thats only one aspect of liberalism

[tyrolen]

The US might be leading the way, but hopefully other countries won't be following. Redefining what it means to be a woman or a man (or neither, somehow) in terms of gender stereotypes is an awfully regressive idea. And the US obsession with the identity politics of race, sexuality, gender identity, etc. at the expense of class solidarity has been a disaster for the left.

[welterde]

You are aware that even with Roe v. Wade there is still considerable variation in laws between the states? And I wouldn't say that the limits set by Roe v. Wade are at all very permissive compared to most European countries. Neither was the law recently suggested by the Democrats. And keep in mind that the ruling and the suggested law only restricted the limits the states could impose, the states themselves could still decide to be more permissive than that - and that maybe that's where that impression comes from.

I disagree that race and gender is a far left thing here. Of course you never really defined what you meant exactly here.

[Siddarth1977]

So hurray, people learned from the horrors of the 20th century that socialism inevitably leads to rampant corruption, suffering and genocide? Socialism caused 100 deaths for every death the Nazis caused, I don't understand how we don't see someone advocating for it as equally appalling to someone making pro-Nazi statements.

Whether you look at the Soviet Union, China, North Korea, Vietnam, Cambodia, Yugoslavia, Venezuela, anywhere in Africa, you inevitably find that socialism brought horrific suffering, extreme poverty and widespread death. It doesn't matter whether the country is big or small, has lots of natural resources or none, is ethnically diverse or homogeneous, in literally every single data point we have, the empirical truth is clear, that private property and competitive businesses create better outcomes than centralized socialist systems.

[pmoriarty]

"people learned from the horrors of the 20th century that socialism inevitably leads to rampant corruption, suffering and genocide?"

That's not due to socialism but totalitarianism and corruption.

There have been plenty of corrupt totalitarians on the right too, but apparently no one's learned any lessons there, except how to emulate them.

[nomel]

Unfortunately, socialism isn’t a solution for corruption. In fact, many would argue that the centralized power makes it easier/inevitable.

[welterde]

Good start mixing together communism with socialism (which can nicely coexist with capitalism).

And then let me add a nice data point that won't fit your nice narrative: Sweden. While not quite as socialist nowadays compared to maybe in the sixties, but it is still quite a lot more socialist than the US and is actually a pretty decent country to live and work in.

[zozbot234]

That's a nice point. Some people in the U.S. do need to be constantly reminded that "Socialism with Scandinavian Characteristics" is not authoritarian or anti-capitalist at all! But that's more like the exception that proves the rule.

[Siddarth1977]

Sweden isn't socialist.

Sweden has welfare benefits slightly more titled in favor of the benefit receivers relative to the US. California unemployment lasts 26 weeks (182 days) compared to Sweden's 300 days. The USA provides free education from K-12, and then subsidized post-secondary education. Sweden provides citizens free tuition through college (international students pay similar tuition to American universities).

Everything a Swedish citizen might receive from the government, an American would have an analogous program, it just might have a lower payout, shorter duration or have more bureaucratic hassles to get. But it's not like these are fundamentally different systems, they're the same system with some numbers tweaked.

[welterde]

Socialism does not require an entirely different system, one can implement it just fine in whatever democracy one happens to be operating, so large chunks of it are just tweaking some numbers. And some numbers do kinda make a large difference between having to worry about the bank account running dry before the next paycheck or not or being one fall down the stairs away from bankruptcy.

It also declined somewhat since the ~1970s when it was somewhat more socialist than today. But still it is quite a bit more socialist than the US: the points you already mentioned, plus things like universal healthcare, more employee protection, stronger unions (and unions are not a bad word), more paid vacation days (by law not because one has a nice job) and more public/affordable housing.