#the difference

[reddthekingg]

''to make out?''

''to date?''

[lula2481]

r u fucking serious??????????

[r0binisnotavailable]

Pink Optimus Prime: Beautifully detailed, different shades of pink, adorable and wonderfully done gun and axe accessories

Purple Megatron: Uhhhhh fuck make him uprle or smth

[contemplatingoutlander]

The Difference Between Social Democracy and Democratic Socialism

Democratic Socialism is a term that often gets confused and misused in everyday political conversation. Countries like Norway, Sweden, and Denmark are often incorrectly called Democratic Socialist countries and praised for being a “mix of socialism and capitalism,” when actually they are Social Democracies. These two terms sound similar but their meanings are very different. —source

Many Americans confuse Democratic Socialism with Social Democracy. In fact, a number of US politicians who call themselves Democratic Socialists (including Bernie Sanders and AOC) are more aptly described as Social Democrats in that they are primarily reformers.*

Below is a chart that explains some basic distinctions between these two political movements. Under the chart are some of the reasons I DON'T agree with everything in the chart.

Chart source [reformatted to increase reading legibility]

Although I think that a lot of the above chart accurately describes some differences between Social Democrats and Democratic Socialists, I disagree with the unknown author's position that "Social Democracy is just capitalism with regulations," and that capitalism and socialism are not viewed as being able to co-exist** in either of these political-economic systems.

Social Democrats believe that essential social services (like healthcare, public education, public libraries, elderly services & income, police & fire departments, natural disaster emergency services, welfare programs, public transportation, the military, etc.) and many utilities and infrastructure (like electrical grids, dams, waste disposal, water reserves, public highways and bridges, wireless/ broadband technology, etc.) should be (and in many countries ARE) socialized, and that they can (and DO) coexist with a free market that promotes small businesses and a well-regulated capitalism that discourages monopolies and prevents excessive exploitation of labor and the environment.

The Scandinavian countries (and to a lesser extent the US) already have socialized services, utilities and infrastructure that exist in addition to a free market/ capitalist economy. However, to my knowledge, the Scandinavian countries have more socialized services, utilities and infrastructure than the US, and a more highly-regulated capitalist economy. Consequently, those countries do not have the level of income inequality and exploitation of labor and resources that one can find here in the US.

Meanwhile Trump is busy dismantling many of our labor and environmental regulations and weakening our social safety net here in the US. And it is MAGA's ignorance of what it means to have a social democracy that keeps them cheering Trump on as he destroys the very institutions that make life better for the average working American.

[Below the cut, you can see footnotes that further explain some concepts discussed above, including Marx's definitions of socialism and communism, and why things went wrong with these systems in the 20th and early 21st centuries. Specifically, how the leaders of these movements didn't let these systems evolve naturally in reaction to late stage capitalism, but instead, prematurely imposed them on certain populations.]

[edited]

____________________ *Granted, "Democratic Socialist" US politicians like Bernie Sanders, AOC, etc., might hope that one day society will evolve*** so that the means of production are eventually owned by "We the People," but they are NOT attempting to force that to occur artificially or prematurely anytime in the near future. Consequently, their policy proposals are essentially reform policies consistent with Social Democracy. ** One might wonder what the author of the above chart makes of the fact that Communist China now has a mixed economy where the free market/capitalism co-exist with state-owned businesses. ***Marx believed that first socialism (the workers/masses owning the means of production), and then communism (in which economic classes, private property, and eventually the state no longer exit) would naturally evolve (with some struggle) as a mass reaction to the excesses of late stage capitalism. However, the 20th century communists didn't let communism evolve naturally among the working class in states like Russia and China. Forcing communism prematurely resulted in the communist leaders having to create (rather ironically, given their "stateless" philosophy) a totalitarian state in order to keep the majority of the population (who had not yet "evolved" to want communism) in line. Also in the late 20th, early 21st centuries, socialists like Hugo Chavez prematurely imposed socialism on states like Venezuela, again resulting in authoritarianism in order to keep people in line who didn't support the socialist agenda. In short, communism as it played out in states like Russia and China, and socialism as it played out in states like Venezuela were enforced, premature messes, doomed to failure.

[lorespill]

omg lookit him all grown uppppppp 😭😭😭

[lickitandsendit3]

In the F1 cooldownroom they have puffy seats and a big tv, and assigned places for their helmets.

In Motogp if you win you can sit on the ground put your stuff where you want and watch the replays on a computer screen.🫡

[mooniism]

luka kissing the hyuna poster vs hyuna having a breakdown next to a torn up luka poster