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.

  • HubertManne@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    24 hours ago

    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.

    • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      23 hours ago

      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.

      • HubertManne@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        23 hours ago

        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.

        • BrainInABox@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          4 hours ago

          the us started a trend for it to be the more common form of government.

          Holy shit. Americans really are the most propagandized people on earth

          • HubertManne@piefed.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            4 hours ago

            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.

            • BrainInABox@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 hours ago

              You already demonstrated how propagandized you are, you don’t have to double down on it.

        • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          22 hours ago

          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.

          • HubertManne@piefed.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            8
            ·
            22 hours ago

            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.

            • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              11
              ·
              22 hours ago

              They have all been thoroughly controlled by and for the wealthiest in society. In what manner is this democratic?

              • HubertManne@piefed.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                8
                ·
                21 hours ago

                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.

                • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  10
                  ·
                  21 hours ago

                  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.

                  • HubertManne@piefed.social
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    8
                    ·
                    21 hours ago

                    that means they control this media, which means they are controlling this, which means are conversation is pointless. A statement like the wealthiest control the parties and media is just ridiculous and yes likely most employees and people working and indeed owning them make more than the 50% line for wealth in the country. So as a statement there is really not much to say. Candidates are individuals who can be influenced but money is not the only way. Rights have always been able to be taken away and would easily be able to even in the most perfect socialist system in the imperfect universe. Again we are talking the best we have seen in democracy based on actual things now and throughout history. We should always be looking to improve of course.