United States Politics Thread 46

[Ares Land]

I can't find a similar poll for France, but adding up votes in the first round of the 2022 elections, it doesn't look terribly different. (I recognize that this isn't really the same thing, e.g. due to strategic voting.)

Finding an opinion on socialism is going to be next to impossible -- "socialisme" typically refers to the party, which was not socialist, and left a very bad impression.
That poll suggests 64% of French people have a poor opinion of capitalism. Combined with election results this suggests most French people dislike capitalism but don't want to do anything about it
I think going by election results as you did is sounder.
Another difficulty is that we probably don't mean the same thing when using 'capitalisme'. We think we're a capitalist country; pretty sure an American Republican would think France is a socialist dystopia.

A lot of views of the US, domestic and foreign, haven't moved past the 90s. Polarization has advanced a lot; there are far fewer conservative Democrats and next to no Republican liberals. Biden himself is from the centrist half of the party, but he has a much more left-wing party than Obama did.

Yes, definitely. I'm always a little surprised to find Americans agreeing with me on politics, and a fair amount of them being to my left. That just never happened 20 years ago.

Wait... you mean there used to be Republican liberals? I never knew there was such a thing!

[zompist]

Another difficulty is that we probably don't mean the same thing when using 'capitalisme'. We think we're a capitalist country; pretty sure an American Republican would think France is a socialist dystopia.

Yes, but they think the US is, too.

Wait... you mean there used to be Republican liberals? I never knew there was such a thing!

Oh yes. You can see a good visualization in the trio of charts at the top of this page. Both parties used to be very mixed... that was why they could cooperate much of the time, also why, for 50 years, the country didn't depart too far from Roosevelt's model.

[Raphael]

Are Americans that interested in socialism? If the answer turns out to be'not that much' well, it still sucks but the situation does reflect public opinion.

The key thing is that the vast majority of Americans don't know what socialism is and confuse "socialism" with either social democracy or Soviet big-C Communism (not surprising consider that's what they have been told as being "socialism" their whole lives); actual socialism is primarily about worker ownership and self-management of capital, and while the things that come along with social democracy are nice, they aren't actually core elements of socialism itself.

And then there's all those Americans who think any government action they don't like is "socialism"... as zompist pointed out, a lot of Republicans see the current USA as a socialist dystopia.

zompist: Re: your report that polls say that 14 percent of Republicans have a positive view of socialism - keep in mind that a certain share of people give joke answers to pollsters, as in, "Yes, dear Person from Gallup, I completely approve of foot fungus!" A small number telling pollsters "My party is Republican, and I like socialism!" fits in with that.

[Ares Land]

zompist: Re: your report that polls say that 14 percent of Republicans have a positive view of socialism - keep in mind that a certain share of people give joke answers to pollsters, as in, "Yes, dear Person from Gallup, I completely approve of foot fungus!" A small number telling pollsters "My party is Republican, and I like socialism!" fits in with that.

I'm not surprised. I've met very socially conservative people who are otherwise socialist. People can be socialists and disapprove of all immigration, for instance. Unusual but it happens.
Well, it's not unusual at all here in France where I think about half the RN voters are left-wingers on economic matters and on the far right on everything else.
Anyway, socialist conservatives do exist. I think often their 'socialism' doesn't bear close scrutiny (ie, while for socialism in favor they'll disapprove of just about any specific measure) but they think they approve of socialism -- and show up as such on opinion polls.
FWIW you also meet people who think of themselves as liberal on social issues and conservative on economics. Though again that belief doesn't really stand under examination (they'll also disapprove of just about any specific socially liberal measure).
I guess the conclusion is that people tend to think their political views are more original than they actually are.

[zompist]

zompist: Re: your report that polls say that 14 percent of Republicans have a positive view of socialism - keep in mind that a certain share of people give joke answers to pollsters, as in, "Yes, dear Person from Gallup, I completely approve of foot fungus!" A small number telling pollsters "My party is Republican, and I like socialism!" fits in with that.

Polls have to be taken with some skepticism, sure; but they are a useful check about common assumptions, such as "all Americans hate socialism."

If you look at the chart (it's halfway down the page), note
* there is a clear trend by generations among the Reps
* also a very clear trend by income: it's lower-income people who are more interested in socialism

So, it could be that 23% of Republican youth are trolling, but it's odd that they do so in precisely the numbers to match the overall age and income trendlines.

What we really can't know from such polls is what the respondents think is "socialism". Heck, it means very different things to people on this board. Also recall that the majority of people are not politics junkies and do not feel any need to be either well-informed, or consistent.

[masako]

Polls have to be taken with some skepticism...

This is very dependent on the methodology of the poll, who is conducting it, and how it's funded. I would say the majority of modern political polling should be met with a healthy amount of skepticism until those questions have been answered. The propaganda machines across the political spectrum love nothing more than to present the results of such polling in a way that favors their cause and/or goals.

[Nortaneous]

"the left used to care about workers; now it only cares about minorities"
"the theoretical innovation of the New Left after Communism failed to materialize in the developed world was abandoning the proletariat in favor of the lumpenproles as the revolutionary class"
"the problem with capitalism is not that there are too many capitalists, but too few" (Chesterton)
"this country's so-called left is a product of the [coastal elites/professional-managerial class/professors and journalists]; it doesn't give a damn about normal people, and the social nonsense is a distraction from more important economic issues"

"this identity stuff was made up by unchecked corporate power to create demographics to market to"
- "...and every marketing department knows that childless urbanites are the best market demographic"
- "...and the trans wave is Big Pharma medicalization. there's a lot of money to be made in putting kids on puberty blockers and billing insurance for cosmetic surgeries"

all neither uncommon opinions in conservative circles nor incompatible with [some definitions of] socialism!

it helps if you think of capital-C Conservatism, the product that is formulated and sold by Tucker Carlson, talk radio admaxxers, and the weirdest quarter of the NYT's opinion section, as a decentralized but coordinated set of attempts to shape public opinion (esp. among the young, who, if you are a politics marketer, are not an important demographic to win), not a reflection of it. sometimes (e.g. now) they retain enough narrative control to direct people's attention; other times (e.g. the 2010s) their credibility dies and falls to the bottom of the ocean and a whole ecosystem springs up to feast on its corpse, for a while, before the usual forces retake control

[Moose-tache]

On the question of polls, you could ask people "Are you responding to this poll right now, yes or no?" and the nos would not dip below ten percent. People always assume the floor is zero for poll responses, but it never is.

[Moose-tache]

all neither uncommon opinions in conservative circles nor incompatible with [some definitions of] socialism!

I'm happy to throw the Democratic apparatchiks, journalism professors, Clinton donors, and White suburbanites with ally bumper stickers into the volcano when the revolution comes. The problem is, if you try to throw one actual Systemic Cause Of Inequality into the volcano, those "conservatives compatible with socialism" complaining about "rich men north of Richmond" change their tune remarkably fast.

[Nortaneous]

On the question of polls, you could ask people "Are you responding to this poll right now, yes or no?" and the nos would not dip below ten percent. People always assume the floor is zero for poll responses, but it never is.

4%

all neither uncommon opinions in conservative circles nor incompatible with [some definitions of] socialism!

I'm happy to throw the Democratic apparatchiks, journalism professors, Clinton donors, and White suburbanites with ally bumper stickers into the volcano when the revolution comes. The problem is, if you try to throw one actual Systemic Cause Of Inequality into the volcano, those "conservatives compatible with socialism" complaining about "rich men north of Richmond" change their tune remarkably fast.

You don't even need to go that far - just remind them that unions would benefit people who'd look out of place in a Norman Rockwell painting.

(And I don't know about the ally bumper stickers. I live in the suburbs now and, unfortunately, if I put a rainbow flag on my car I would have a number of worries, some of which the letter of anti-discrimination law says I shouldn't.)

[Ares Land]

all neither uncommon opinions in conservative circles nor incompatible with [some definitions of] socialism!

Yes, exactly that. All opinions that aren't uncommon here either.

[Linguoboy]

From the Nietzsche thread:

Well ok. I have never actually watched Southpark so I didn't get the reference. Pretty much everyone I know considers the show intensely bigoted and reactionary, for what it's worth.

They were libertarians, but they do oppose Trump. Penn Jillette was libertarian too until 2020.

I've always had a lot of respect for Jillette and it's only increased as a consequence of this. Apparently it was the pandemic that convinced him that sometimes you really do need the State to step in and protect everyone.

Stone and Parker have never been principled (or capital-L) libertarians like Jillette. They're openly centrist but really they just think all politics is stupid and their privilege insulates them from having to care or think too deeply about issues.

[Raphael]

From the Nietzsche thread:

Well ok. I have never actually watched Southpark so I didn't get the reference. Pretty much everyone I know considers the show intensely bigoted and reactionary, for what it's worth.

They were libertarians, but they do oppose Trump. Penn Jillette was libertarian too until 2020.

I've always had a lot of respect for Jillette and it's only increased as a consequence of this. Apparently it was the pandemic that convinced him that sometimes you really do need the State to step in and protect everyone.

Stone and Parker have never been principled (or capital-L) libertarians like Jillette. They're openly centrist but really they just think all politics is stupid and their privilege insulates them from having to care or think too deeply about issues.

Tangentially related to this, long ago, I saw a forum or comment section post by someone who claimed to be a former libertarian. That person claimed that, back in their libertarian days, when they were visiting libertarian forums, in the internal libertarian flamewars, they could always tell the people who would have been regular right-wingers if they hadn't been libertarians from the people who would have been the one or other kind of leftists if they hadn't been libertarians.

[Travis B.]

Tangentially related to this, long ago, I saw a forum or comment section post by someone who claimed to be a former libertarian. That person claimed that, back in their libertarian days, when they were visiting libertarian forums, in the internal libertarian flamewars, they could always tell the people who would have been regular right-wingers if they hadn't been libertarians from the people who would have been the one or other kind of leftists if they hadn't been libertarians.

This reminds me of the clear delineation between left-libertarians (e.g. anarchists and council communists) and right-"libertarians" (e.g. so-called "anarchocapitalists" and many big-L Libertarians), which really have very little in common with one another.

[Linguoboy]

This reminds me of the clear delineation between left-libertarians (e.g. anarchists and council communists) and right-"libertarians" (e.g. so-called "anarchocapitalists" and many big-L Libertarians), which really have very little in common with one another.

There are plenty of fantasists in both camps, but I feel like most anarchists have at least some experience trying to create governing structures which could conceivably replace the state whereas right-wing libertarians subscribe to a sort of magical thinking where you just eliminate the Government and yet everything that was getting done before continues to get done regardless.

[alice]

Tangentially related to this, long ago, I saw a forum or comment section post by someone who claimed to be a former libertarian. That person claimed that, back in their libertarian days, when they were visiting libertarian forums, in the internal libertarian flamewars, they could always tell the people who would have been regular right-wingers if they hadn't been libertarians from the people who would have been the one or other kind of leftists if they hadn't been libertarians.

This reminds me of the clear delineation between left-libertarians (e.g. anarchists and council communists) and right-"libertarians" (e.g. so-called "anarchocapitalists" and many big-L Libertarians), which really have very little in common with one another.

Yes, it's very People's Front of Judea, isn't it?

[Travis B.]

This reminds me of the clear delineation between left-libertarians (e.g. anarchists and council communists) and right-"libertarians" (e.g. so-called "anarchocapitalists" and many big-L Libertarians), which really have very little in common with one another.

There are plenty of fantasists in both camps, but I feel like most anarchists have at least some experience trying to create governing structures which could conceivably replace the state whereas right-wing libertarians subscribe to a sort of magical thinking where you just eliminate the Government and yet everything that was getting done before continues to get done regardless.

It's worse than that -- the "anarchocapitalists" effectively want to replace the authority of the state with a patchwork of fiefdoms based on the authority of the capitalist, which they justify with absurd doctrines based in absolutist notions of "private property" (e.g. I once encountered an "anarchocapitalist" who insisted that public schools were "theft").

[Travis B.]

Tangentially related to this, long ago, I saw a forum or comment section post by someone who claimed to be a former libertarian. That person claimed that, back in their libertarian days, when they were visiting libertarian forums, in the internal libertarian flamewars, they could always tell the people who would have been regular right-wingers if they hadn't been libertarians from the people who would have been the one or other kind of leftists if they hadn't been libertarians.

This reminds me of the clear delineation between left-libertarians (e.g. anarchists and council communists) and right-"libertarians" (e.g. so-called "anarchocapitalists" and many big-L Libertarians), which really have very little in common with one another.

Yes, it's very People's Front of Judea, isn't it?

There's a reason why most left-libertarians today who use the term "libertarian" today in the first place combine it with socialist as libertarian socialist, as while the term "libertarian" originally referred to left-libertarians (IIRC French "libertaire" still refers to anarchists), it has been taken over by right-"libertarians" in the English-speaking world.

[Ares Land]

There's a reason why most left-libertarians today who use the term "libertarian" today in the first place combine it with socialist as libertarian socialist, as while the term "libertarian" originally referred to left-libertarians (IIRC French "libertaire" still refers to anarchists), it has been taken over by right-"libertarians" in the English-speaking world.

"libertaire" is anarchist, yes. Libertarian is either 'libéral' or (increasingly) 'libertarien.'

Tangentially related to this, long ago, I saw a forum or comment section post by someone who claimed to be a former libertarian. That person claimed that, back in their libertarian days, when they were visiting libertarian forums, in the internal libertarian flamewars, they could always tell the people who would have been regular right-wingers if they hadn't been libertarians from the people who would have been the one or other kind of leftists if they hadn't been libertarians.

I had a few libertarian friends back when libertarianism was in fashion. I did check out the internal flamewars occasionally. I'd put it less charitably: as I recall, there were two types of libertarians: the racist ones and the other kind.
Though I remember that basic income used to be a libertarian proposal.

Whatever happened to libertarians anyway? There used to be a lot of them, especially online, but they all seemed to have switched to more traditional views. Most of my libertarian friends I stopped seeing between, I don't know, 2012 to 2017. (I can be friends with a libertarian but not with a Trumpist.)

[Travis B.]

Whatever happened to libertarians anyway? There used to be a lot of them, especially online, but they all seemed to have switched to more traditional views. Most of my libertarian friends I stopped seeing between, I don't know, 2012 to 2017. (I can be friends with a libertarian but not with a Trumpist.)

That is because most big-L Libertarians are really rightists at heart, and those who are not are typically leftists at heart.