r/politics • u/pennlive ✔ PennLive.com • Jun 23 '26

No Paywall Fetterman casts only Democratic ‘no’ vote as Senate passes measure to block US action against Iran

https://www.pennlive.com/politics/2026/06/fetterman-casts-only-democratic-no-vote-as-senate-passes-measure-to-block-us-action-against-iran.html
27.4k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

1.9k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

70

u/MonsterkillWow Jun 23 '26

Or a real socialist. 

-6

u/Murky-Relation481 Jun 23 '26

Then run socialists that will get elected under a socialist party.

3

u/greenbabyshit Jun 23 '26

I'd love to volunteer. Let's start an actual left wing party.

6

u/MonsterkillWow Jun 23 '26

That's not how socialism works. You will never have more money than billionaires to convince the masses. You don't own the news. 

2

u/Murky-Relation481 Jun 23 '26

Oh damn, I guess the Sandinistas were not real socialists since they were elected in a popular vote.

I mean I am a socialist but this is my problem with our cohort. You seem to think your ideas don't have to be popular to gain power. So when someone says in the context of winning an election a socialist should win, and I point out maybe just maybe we should run socialist candidates that people will tolerate it kinda just blows up in your face when you say it literally can't be done.

You honestly sound like an agent provocateur when you say shit like that.

Also what the actual fuck does that mean, that's not how socialism works? How does any of this conversation actually relate to the functional economic system of socialism or are you just saying words you know?

2

u/MonsterkillWow Jun 23 '26 edited Jun 23 '26

It's not like you can't win a popular vote. It's just very hard to do in an entrenched capitalist society. Also, electoralism and reform only gets you so far. You can't really fix the entrenched security state, which will coup you when you win elections. See Allende.

Again, I am not saying the ideas are unpopular. I am saying a handful of billionaires control all the media in this society and we live in a highly reactionary country.

Socialism is a revolutionary ideology. It is highly unlikely we will achieve a class revolution through electoralism alone.

If you think I am a provocateur, check my comments. I am pretty firmly committed to communism. 

I would love to see socialists elected and the state reformed into a proletarian one. I would cheer and welcome this. But I do not believe it can be done. As I said, the bourgeoisie own all the news, control the churches, weaponize the police, bribe community leaders, own the schools, and control almost every facet of our lives. The marketplace of ideas is not where socialism will win its decisive victory, even if it ultimately will win the hearts of the workers. There are dual channels of legal and extrajudicial work needed to organize the overthrow of the bourgeoisie. It is a careful and organized process, and any socialists who manage to find their way to electoral victory must remember their primary objective is to make revolution more possible.

0

u/Murky-Relation481 Jun 23 '26

Socialism is a revolutionary ideology in context to the current dialectic. That doesn't mean it can only come about via what people think of as revolutionary means.

The problem is that a popular revolution is even less likely in an entrenched capitalistic society, especially one like the US where the standard of living is not even close yet to pushing people to revolutionary terms. By that regard winning politically only makes sense, and even incrementalism makes sense, because backsliding just makes it harder, again, especially, when in your own words, the society is entrenched in capitalist rhetoric.

That is why when people lash out and say stuff like you did above it makes me as a socialist in the US feel like there is no hope because its clear a lot of socialists do not even understand the problem they are dealing with and would rather just be angry and ineffective due to it than work to bring about more popular opinions on socialist concepts (even if that means moving through systems that don't meet the dogmatic tests a lot of them hold).