• Bruno Finger@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    Why couldn’t that what you just described be called something different other than “socialism” then? Sounds like a bad move to make it fall under that same umbrella especially since that term is very frowned upon if not straight out forbidden in a few European countries for example.

    • xe3@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      30
      ·
      1 year ago

      It is, the term for this type of system is called Social Democracy which is not a synonym for socialism, but people (Americans at least) confused and conflate the two terms to the point that they’ve become one and the same in the minds of many people who don’t really understand the terms or their origins.

    • Lukario@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      1 year ago

      Because we’re too busy categorizing this stupid shit into bins of “good” and “bad” when reality is a greyscale between these two. These are fairly reasonable points and should be viewed as a more centrist POV, but since we (read: primarily North America) have a tribal “us vs. them” animosity about it we lump many reasonable ideas together on each end of the spectrum. Things like not having to go bankrupt when you or a loved one needs an emergency hospital visit somehow automatically gets lumped in with the other extreme “socialist” ideas just to solely argue against it and not budge from their end of the extreme.

      • ParsnipWitch@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Wow, yes this is so true for many discussions online and increasingly offline as well. Nuance seems to be not welcomed. Sometimes even suggesting there might be nuance or the topic might be more complicated than black and white already puts you firmly in the enemy camp.

    • PetDinosaurs@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Words, used in non technical contexts, mean what people mean when they use them.

      Descriptive. Not proscriptive.

          • HuntressHimbo@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            So in your view these people are inherently more ‘great’ than others? What would you call these people who are so above average? The over people? The overmen? The ubermensch… oh whoops

            • PetDinosaurs@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              Are you seriously trying to compare that statement to Nazi ideology?

              Yes. I think that great artists and scientists and chefs and authors and teachers and those that work hard contribute more to society than others.

              The Nobel prizes are being announced this week.

              The work of Katalin Karikó and Drew Weissman saved millions. Most people are not capable of that.

              • HuntressHimbo@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Yes I think subdividing humanity into the great people who perform all the work, and the lowly masses that exist to serve them is at the heart of Nazi ideology so I am making that comparison.

                • PetDinosaurs@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Wtf is wrong with you?

                  Why on earth is what I said any more Nazi than the OP’s “most people suck at communicating”?

                  No one is saying anything remotely like what you’re proposing.

                  Unless you’re proposing some brave new world dystopia, some people will achieve more than others.