“Socialism is a gorgeous idea, and I know it doesn’t work perfectly, or that people understand what the word actually means,” she continued. “For me, it’s taking care of each other. If I have more money, I can spend more money on other people.”
“Socialism is a gorgeous idea, and I know it doesn’t work perfectly, or that people understand what the word actually means,” she continued. “For me, it’s taking care of each other. If I have more money, I can spend more money on other people.”
I agree with you, but the explaining has to happen. It does no good (actually, it’s probably worse) for “socialism” to become popular, but exclusively as imperialist social democracy with vague “helping people” characteristics.
This is encouraging, but as you say, we must never stop explaining.
yeah agree! it can also go the direction of co-opting the term without the right interventions/education. a pithy way to summarize how we approach outreach in
is “always meet people where they’re at…but don’t leave them where they’re at” (i.e., make sure they walk away from a convo having been eased a step or two toward the right answers/analysis)
This is good. She doesn’t need to do the explaining.
Agreed, it’s good, but the explaining has to be done for that good to be realized. Not by her, you’re right. By communists.
We can’t all be Jane Fonda.
Jane Fonda couldn’t even be Jane Fonda, she walked that back and then left Vanessa Redgrave out to dry when she was being genuinely radical.