By AMELIA THOMSON-DEVEAUX
Updated 11:08 AM EDT, September 8, 2025
Capitalism’s image has slipped with U.S. adults overall since 2021, the survey finds, and the results show a gradual but persistent shift in Democrats’ support for the two ideologies over the past 15 years, with socialism rising as capitalism falls. The shifts underscore deep divisions within the party about whether open support for socialism will hurt Democrats’ ability to reach moderates or galvanize greater support from people who are concerned about issues like the cost of living.
…But Democrats under 50 are much less likely to view capitalism favorably, while the opinions of Democrats ages 50 and older haven’t shifted meaningfully, according to Gallup.
You don’t create a society in a lab, it arises from existing conditions. You aren’t designing HubertManne-landia and creating it as your perfect society. As a consequence, the state and the mode of production evolve together over time, reshaping and mutually reinforcing each other.
Secondly, the people refers to the working class, the broad majority. It doesn’t matter if a billionaire says they’re “the people,” what matters is if the working class is empowered. I don’t know why you’re minimizing production, it’s how goods are made and resources are distributed, and the manner in which we produce, ie feudalism, capitalism, socialism, etc has dramatic consequences on the form of society we have, government included.
the people is not the working class unless it is. The makeup of the people is determined by democracy. Your first paragraph would apply to you as well as me since you are arguing socialism as the primary objective whereas I am arguing democracy as the primary objective. You say democracy cannot come about without socialism being complete but as you point out it is not created in a lab and they evolve together.
The people being the majority of society. In no society is the working class not the majority.
Secondly, socialism does take into account how society evolves over time. The problems with capitalism leading to intense disparity, imperialism, centralization, etc pave the way for socialism. I’m not advocating for creating a society out of thin air, but revolution and a new state run by the working class that will gradually collectivize production. This working class driven society will be capable of actual democracy because it will be run by and for the majority.
The people should be all of society. Everyone. Disabled people who cannot otherwise work. Everyone. And they drive society through democracy. Im not sure why we are even debating soialism since it already mapps out how it evolves over time regardless. We should sit back and let it happen. Democracy has existed for a long time and the us started a trend for it to be the more common form of government. It can erode though and there must always be vigilance to maximize it along with rights until that time where evolution takes us to the ideal state the prophets tell is to come.
Holy shit. Americans really are the most propagandized people on earth
This is not propaganda. There were no effective democracies in 1776. You had some limited things like parliaments influence on the monarchy and the swiss cantons and the dutch corptocracy. Like it or not it was the start of something. Granted the world wars was a bigger uptick.
You already demonstrated how propagandized you are, you don’t have to double down on it.
The US has never been democratic, though. It’s always been a settler-colony in service of the wealthiest, and has cracked down on the working class. Disabled people should be protected, yes, they aren’t a privledged or ruling class. We aren’t really “debating socialism” here, just what needs to be done.
I disagree. The US and EU have been as democratic as has been seen historically. They are far more commonaly democratic as a group than most countries have been now and through history although how democratic each is can vary greatly if only looking within that group.
They have all been thoroughly controlled by and for the wealthiest in society. In what manner is this democratic?
I disagree. The wealthiest have not had absolute control of them. Its most the voting that makes them democratic but the rights are important to.
The wealthiest are the ones that control the parties and the media, though. If candidates are driven by how well their party satisfies the wealthiest, then there aren’t genuine mechanisms of democracy. Further, rights are taken away very easily, writing it down on a piece of paper doesn’t inherently necessitate it will be actually followed.