I mean, yeah. The only way to reform the system is from within the system. Here in lies the ultimate issue with the left: all I ever hear is criticisms and no solutions. We have two options, reform or revolution. Revolution is nearly impossible. So if it’s reform, people need to be elected into the system to make the changes. There is no reform without elections. Even if we were to organize something big like a general strike, it would only make the bourgeoisie afraid. Real changes are legislative and that means elections. Unless you’ve got a better idea, in which case, please share with the class.

Getting a third party to win is the first step into breaking the US political duopoly and fixing the broken electoral system. The first changes a third party will make is regulations that allow third party wins in the future. It’s about making progress towards the left. Democrats do not represent progress, but an upholding of the same tired political duopoly that gives capitalists power. The green party, regardless of whatever ideals you still hate about them, are very intent on changing the electoral system and ending the duopoly.

They use that argument because it’s valid and holds weight. The only other option besides bringing in a third party with ballot access is violent revolution and that was a lot cooler of an idea before drones existed.

That’s dumb. If you think the greens are just as bad as the Dems, then your brain is broken. PSL has ballot access in 17 states and they’re the only other leftists running a candidate. Green party has more ballot access in 37 states and holds a significantly higher chance of meaning anything. But maybe in another 3 or 4 election cycles the PSL will have the ballot access that the greens do now.

They are the leftist party available.

You’re citing a capitalist finance website to prove your point about socialism. You seem to be confused between social democracy and democratic socialism. I understand because they seem so similar that they must be basically the same thing, right? Nope.

The Nordic model is a form of social democracy. They take many of the benefits that socialism provides and builds them into a capitalist economy. Democratic socialism is an actual form of a worker owned an operated economy.

If you’re ever in doubt, ask the question, “who owns the means of production?” If the answer is huge megacorporations and wealthy billionaires, then it’s a capitalist economy. If the answer is the working class, it’s socialist.

Well I don’t see nearly as much ballot access from the PSL or any other minor party. Maybe we should make a new party that’ll lose popularity to the next one in 5 years. No party will ever be leftist enough for leftists in this country and that pretentious mindset will keep us weak forever.

I didn’t say that I did think that. What I do think is that leftists should leverage the biggest third party that’s the closest to representing their core values into the party that they want. It has nothing to do with Jill Stein and more to do with uniting under one generalized leftist party instead of constantly fracturing into weaker more specific parties.

It’s that kind of attitude that weakens the left. If every leftist were involved with the greens, we could create a truly revolutionary party.

It’s not cool that Americans are as dumb as crabs in this analogy. If every leftist just got behind the green party we might stand a chance. But everyone wants their own unique ideology represented.

Why can’t we just vote for the biggest leftist party with the most ballot access? Ya know, the green party

Beneath the surface of every great nation’s collapse is US Interference

I agree prison labor is just a roundabout way of getting away with slave labor and it shouldn’t be done. That being said, China has less slaves than the US and treats them half as badly.

The US has destroyed every socialist country in history that didn’t have a strong enough military to fight them off

None of those are socialist countries. They’re all capitalist

Russia devolved into capitalism. Funding a military is incredibly expensive and necessary when a communist country wants to exist in a world with the United States. This creates a militant economy that must be centrally governed to coordinate this military might. True democratic socialism is impossible as long as the United States exists as an imperialist force.

Weird because China is succeeding quite well.

It only takes one toke to go over the line

Marx coined the term, sure. But he didn’t come up with much more than that and a very rudimentary theory on how it would work. Lenin put it into practice and actually created it as an economic model. Everything else you’re arguing is theoretical semantics. How the thing works is how the thing works.

It’s important to consider the conditions in which state ownership was deemed necessary. Countries with a starving and illiterate working class isn’t as capable at a true worker owned economy as one that already has a well fed and educated working class. A true socialist society needs basic infrastructure and fulfillment of the basic needs of its people before it can be properly implemented.

Lenin’s concept of the Dictatorship of the Proletariat was intended to be a temporary system intended on rapid development and growth of the economy. It was more important to try and stop starvation and establish railroads than build worker co-ops. The mistake was when the leaders that came after decided to never cede power back to the working class.