You're shifting the discussion now from what Bernie is to what the Democratic Party is.
If the standard is, "challenging capitalist inequality," arguably even Hillary is doing that. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/17/business/putting-numbers-to-a-tax-increase-for-the-rich.html Robert Naiman Policy Director Just Foreign Policy www.justforeignpolicy.org [email protected] (202) 448-2898 x1 On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 10:54 AM, Louis Proyect <[email protected]> wrote: > Venezuela certainly is capitalist but the Chavistas are using their > party to challenge capitalist inequality. If the DP was capable of > serving as such an instrument, I might be a Democrat myself. But the DP > has been a ruling class party since the time of Andrew Jackson and the > New Deal legacy came to an end nearly a half-century ago. It is time to > move on. > > On 10/20/15 11:43 AM, Robert Naiman wrote: > > > > It's certainly understandable that some people would claim that Bernie > > is more of a "social democrat" than a "socialist." > > > > But, once you go down that road, you have to concede that the same is > > true of "socialists" all over the world who accept a "mixed economy" and > > "bourgeois democracy." By the same argument, Chavez was a "social > > democrat" rather than a "socialist." Anybody who has visited Venezuela > > in the last 15 years can tell you that capitalism is doing just fine in > > Venezuela, thank you very much. Venezuela no more became "socialist" as > > a result of Chavez becoming President than the US became "socialist" as > > a result of FDR becoming President. > > > > What is the point of fighting about this, exactly? > > > > > _______________________________________________ > pen-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l >
_______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
