The Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Thread

Clark Kent

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2008
Location
Kansas
I don’t like AOC. She seems sneaky.BUT she has done a lot of great things lately and I appreciate all that she is doing.
 

Anchorpunch

Well-Known Member
Site Donor
Joined
Nov 29, 2014
I don’t like AOC. She seems sneaky.BUT she has done a lot of great things lately and I appreciate all that she is doing.
Dude, I'm with you in not loving her but she's a pretty straightforward person what I can tell. I disagree with the idea that the government needs to seize the means of production and I think it would be both dangerous and the end of female sexual rights if we did that. So I can't support a socialist.

That said, everything else about her is surprisingly chill. I'd give her a shot if you can stomach socialism. For the record, I'm a non-market capitalist.
 

Nebraska

Poindexter For President
Site Donor
NFL S.P. Champion
Joined
Oct 12, 2008
Location
Omaha, NE
something about her face seems like she would stab you in the back or is trying to scheme against you.
I mean, she's probably the most surface level and outspoken representative in congress, but ok.
Yeah, I mean her whole deal is that she’s always got time for whomever whenever. If there is something she’s not up front about at this point it’s only some serial killer level shit.
 

Anchorpunch

Well-Known Member
Site Donor
Joined
Nov 29, 2014
Did she say somewhere to seize the means of production, exactly?
It's a very fair question. I struggle with this because it's literally the only part of socialism that isn't in non-market capitalism or social democratic examples. So, like, maybe she doesn't mean it literally? That's the part I don't get about socialists.

I know this is contentious, but I feel like "if you don't want to seize the means of production, you don't want socialism so just say you want social safety nets (i.e. non-market capitalism)."
 

GingerPowerBottom

mortality, ka, and the Tower
Joined
Nov 25, 2011
I don’t feel one way or another about her as I don’t know/care to, but I enjoy that she makes my uncle uncomfortable. And for that I like her.
 

Bran

Don't you feel like desperadoes under the eaves?
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Location
Chicago, Thrillinois
It's a very fair question. I struggle with this because it's literally the only part of socialism that isn't in non-market capitalism or social democratic examples. So, like, maybe she doesn't mean it literally? That's the part I don't get about socialists.

I know this is contentious, but I feel like "if you don't want to seize the means of production, you don't want socialism so just say you want social safety nets (i.e. non-market capitalism)."
In a country where 40% of the population have been calling Joe Biden a socialist for a year, I’m guessing most people aren’t worried about the exact definition of the word these days
 

Anchorpunch

Well-Known Member
Site Donor
Joined
Nov 29, 2014
In a country where 40% of the population have been calling Joe Biden a socialist for a year, I’m guessing most people aren’t worried about the exact definition of the word these days
I get that, but I don't know how to have a debate without definitions and common meanings. Socialism has a very specific meaning. Why pretend it doesn't?
 

Poindexter

Reputation: ∞
Staff member
Joined
Aug 26, 2008
Location
The Abyss
It's a very fair question. I struggle with this because it's literally the only part of socialism that isn't in non-market capitalism or social democratic examples. So, like, maybe she doesn't mean it literally? That's the part I don't get about socialists.

I know this is contentious, but I feel like "if you don't want to seize the means of production, you don't want socialism so just say you want social safety nets (i.e. non-market capitalism)."
The impression I get is that there is a significant misunderstanding of how our country has worked in terms of social programs, etc. historically. I've never heard her say anything about seizing the means of production.

Social democracies are not equal to socialism, as far as I understand.

Also, equating AOC with that sentiment just furthers the ignorance of a large percentage of the population and electorate that benefits from government regulation and services, yet votes against their own interests due to propaganda from the few who control and "own" the vast majority of resources.
 

Anchorpunch

Well-Known Member
Site Donor
Joined
Nov 29, 2014
Because that is alot of people's best argument. You know like using catch phrases when you don't know what you're talking about.
HOME OF THE WHOPPER!

Ok, I'm just kidding with that catch phrase. I honestly don't get that. Like, If I haven't at least read one journal article on a topic, I generally don't engage. What happened to curiosity? I blame social media, but I feel like we're all so needy to lecture without listening. Is that a fair criticism of this? Or is the meaning of socialism just changing into something different, but nonetheless specific?
 

Bran

Don't you feel like desperadoes under the eaves?
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Location
Chicago, Thrillinois
I get that, but I don't know how to have a debate without definitions and common meanings. Socialism has a very specific meaning. Why pretend it doesn't?
I call myself a leftist, but that doesn’t mean I believe 100% of leftist ideals. Like with most things, there’s degrees, and democratic socialist probably describes her opinions more accurately than any other label, so that’s what gets used
 

Nebraska

Poindexter For President
Site Donor
NFL S.P. Champion
Joined
Oct 12, 2008
Location
Omaha, NE
I get that, but I don't know how to have a debate without definitions and common meanings. Socialism has a very specific meaning. Why pretend it doesn't?
Because it’s not a self prescribed label. Like “defund the police” the conservatives won the battle of the buzzword. After that takes hold, most people either don’t understand what’s beneath the surface or they just flat out don’t care to learn.
 

Anchorpunch

Well-Known Member
Site Donor
Joined
Nov 29, 2014
The impression I get is that there is a significant misunderstanding of how our country has worked in terms of social programs, etc. historically. I've never heard her say anything about seizing the means of production.

Social democracies are not equal to socialism, as far as I understand.

Also, equating AOC with that sentiment just furthers the ignorance of a large percentage of the population and electorate that benefits from government regulation and services, yet votes against their own interests due to propaganda from the few who control and "own" the vast majority of resources.
For the record, I referenced social democracies explicitly because they are different (they are capitalist).

But I'm a bit taken aback by your second statement. As I understand, you are accusing me of equating AOC with something she doesn't believe or represent. But I am equating her with the explicit definition of what she purports to believe. She is the one equating herself with socialism, not me. Nor did I create the English language with definitions for words.

I wish this elicited the reaction of asking her to call herself a progressive instead of a socialist, instead of trying to turn this on what is the literal definition of her stated belief.
Post automatically merged:

Because it’s not a self prescribed label. Like “defund the police” the conservatives won the battle of the buzzword. After that takes hold, most people either don’t understand what’s beneath the surface or they just flat out don’t care to learn.
Whoa, no way. AOC is explicitly a socialist. It's on her for not reading the definition.

But I am glad to hear about defund the police? So that wasn't the supporters calling it that? I'm honestly glad, I'm bugged when causes I believe in fail to maximize persuasion.
 

Poindexter

Reputation: ∞
Staff member
Joined
Aug 26, 2008
Location
The Abyss
She is the one equating herself with socialism, not me. Nor did I create the English language with definitions for words.
Which is why I asked if she stated something about seizing the means of production. I don't really follow her every pronouncement. I wasn't aware that she suggested anything in terms of governance or legislation that called for that.
 

Anchorpunch

Well-Known Member
Site Donor
Joined
Nov 29, 2014
I call myself a leftist, but that doesn’t mean I believe 100% of leftist ideals. Like with most things, there’s degrees, and democratic socialist probably describes her opinions more accurately than any other label, so that’s what gets used
I think it's a MASSIVE mistake of the democrats to lose independents via a word they don't believe in. If you don't want to seize the means of production, don't say you're a socialist! People will love you for it.

There are so many ways to articulate her position, from "putting an American twist on the learnings from the successes of countries like Finland" to "making sure the government supports better wages and employment opportunities."

Why die on this hill???
 

Nebraska

Poindexter For President
Site Donor
NFL S.P. Champion
Joined
Oct 12, 2008
Location
Omaha, NE
For the record, I referenced social democracies explicitly because they are different (they are capitalist).

But I'm a bit taken aback by your second statement. As I understand, you are accusing me of equating AOC with something she doesn't believe or represent. But I am equating her with the explicit definition of what she purports to believe. She is the one equating herself with socialism, not me. Nor did I create the English language with definitions for words.

I wish this elicited the reaction of asking her to call herself a progressive instead of a socialist, instead of trying to turn this on what is the literal definition of her stated belief.
Post automatically merged:



Whoa, no way. AOC is explicitly a socialist. It's on her for not reading the definition.

But I am glad to hear about defund the police? So that wasn't the supporters calling it that? I'm honestly glad, I'm bugged when causes I believe in fail to maximize persuasion.
If you want to pretend that there isn’t any room for nuance, then sure, she is explicitly in favor of socialism in all its forms.
 

Anchorpunch

Well-Known Member
Site Donor
Joined
Nov 29, 2014
Which is why I asked if she stated something about seizing the means of production. I don't really follow her every pronouncement. I wasn't aware that she suggested anything in terms of governance or legislation that called for that.
But she literally called herself a socialist. A political view that literally requires the government seize the means of production and, otherwise, requires no changes to the existing American system. There's literally NO OTHER CHANGE from current American to socialism other than then seizing the means of production. Once that's done, you're socialist.

I earnestly do not understand why her supporters can't admit this one particular area of her experience is flawed.
 

Poindexter

Reputation: ∞
Staff member
Joined
Aug 26, 2008
Location
The Abyss

Anchorpunch

Well-Known Member
Site Donor
Joined
Nov 29, 2014
If you want to pretend that there isn’t any room for nuance, then sure, she is explicitly in favor of socialism in all its forms.
But, you get the point right? Like the denotation of socialism doesn't actually include much else. You're dying on a hill (and I am too) that only hurts you politically.
 

Bran

Don't you feel like desperadoes under the eaves?
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Location
Chicago, Thrillinois
The Republican party just tried to end our republic. Words have a sliding scale for definitions and maybe 50+ years of demonizing most forms of government assistance and infrastructure as socialism has altered that word’s definition
 

Anchorpunch

Well-Known Member
Site Donor
Joined
Nov 29, 2014
Seems like a hill manufactured by the right from all the evidence I've seen—a convenient, if illegitimate, boogeyman.
To you. To me, I don't know what to do other than to listen to the definition of words. I believe the government seizing the means of production is extremely dangerous (like "Trump and McConnell determining what chemicals we manufacture and leaving any required for birth control off the list" dangerous).

If you have a new definition for socialism, that's cool. That's why I asked Bran if there was one. But if you don't, why are you using a word you don't mean and don't plan to define? That's objectively poor interpersonal communication. And objectively poor political leadership.
 

Nebraska

Poindexter For President
Site Donor
NFL S.P. Champion
Joined
Oct 12, 2008
Location
Omaha, NE
But, you get the point right? Like the denotation of socialism doesn't actually include much else. You're dying on a hill (and I am too) that only hurts you politically.
I do. I completely understand your point.

I’m just saying that she has been upfront and detailed enough about her stances for people to see that there are productive ways around the literal definition of full-blown socialism as it pertains to policy change. At some point the onus is on the public to understand that.
 

Poindexter

Reputation: ∞
Staff member
Joined
Aug 26, 2008
Location
The Abyss
To you. To me, I don't know what to do other than to listen to the definition of words. I believe the government seizing the means of production is extremely dangerous (like "Trump and McConnell determining what chemicals we manufacture and leaving any required for birth control off the list" dangerous).

If you have a new definition for socialism, that's cool. That's why I asked Bran if there was one. But if you don't, why are you using a word you don't mean and don't plan to define? That's objectively poor interpersonal communication. And objectively poor political leadership.
Please link where she declares she is a socialist (by your definitions) intent on seizing the means of production. Also, totally bizarre that raising 2 million for Texans in the midst of a crisis becomes this conversation. And even more hilarious that it is termed "poor political leadership" in the context of Cruz and Abbot. Kind of resembles a classic Republican bait and switch, no?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Members online

Latest posts

Latest profile posts

Stand aside to better men, or blaze a trail and become one.
The mind-killer fears reality
Mind-killer is the mind-killer
Reality is the mind-killer.
You know you're old when you are hyped that you got a breadmaker for your birthday. Thing is it makes cakes and jams too.

Forum statistics

Threads
42,182
Messages
1,092,564
Members
2,345
Latest member
Rayphatty
Top Bottom