Current Events > "Socialists* don't care about the poor, they just hate the rich."

(+) Yeah! (+)

What are your reasons for agreeing/disagreeing?

*You can replace socialists with communists or any other similar ideologies
---

True for some, sure

the amount of violent/dehumanizing rhetoric can get pretty bad

Its probably more accurate to say that a lot of them hate the rich in a way that has nothing to do with helping the poor
---

I agree somewhat in the sense that it's selfishly motivated, but you don't need to really care about the poor or even hate the rich to vote for socialist-y type things. For most people it should be just a gamble between voting for one system which will help you a little bit or the other system which is dismantling every safety net you could possibly have.

Unless you are part of the 1% you should have no business voting for corporate greed.

---

yes for the most part

---

a socialist suddenly stops advocating for socialism if they happen to become rich

Kaiganeer posted...

a socialist suddenly stops advocating for socialism if they happen to become rich

What was the russel brand quote -

When I was poor and complained about inequality they said I was bitter; now that I'm rich and I complain about inequality they say I'm a hypocrite. I'm beginning to think they just don't want to talk about inequality.

---

I think you all need to seperate people who thinks it's cool to be a "socialist" vs actual socialists, and even then what definition or group of socialists you're referring to, because saying that "socialists" don't care about the poor is a hypocritical statement, even if you're using the most basic or general definition.

---

If you think socialists don't care about the poor, I don't think you really know what socialism is.

---

I am a socialist because I am poor

Xavier_On_High posted...

If you think socialists don't care about the poor, I don't think you really know what socialism is.

I think the crux of the question is the people and their motivations, not the tenets of the ism
---

Pretty much. Exploitation comes from power, and socialists have a problem with that. Socialists are not necessarily loving nice people, they are cold-blooded materialists ffs.

I think some of them are poor, and some would like to see abject poverty disappear. But socialist action isn't necessarily direct action against poverty under capitalism.

Labour organising does help the poor, too.

---

Although I will point out a hilarious character stereotype. The tinder Marxist girls with short fringes and tattoos and dr marten shoes that smoke cigarettes. They talk about the revolution and such but if they ever met an actual working class person - like gary from stockton who's passions in life are his car and Liverpool FC - they absolutely despise them. She lives in a decent flat in hackney paid for by the bank of mum and dad while they go to art school.

I'm totally hot for this kind of girl but they are ridiculous, lol

---

Change starts from within...!

my basement

g980 posted...

I think the crux of the question is the people and their motivations, not the tenets of the ism

I get that. I think most people who are socialists genuinely want to see the betterment of the poorest members of our society. I don't think most socialists are socialists out of envy or hatred for the rich.

---

Kaiganeer posted...

a socialist suddenly stops advocating for socialism if they happen to become rich

Bernie never stopped. Pretty sure he is considered rich. Then again most people are not Bernie.

---

Xavier_On_High posted...

I get that. I think most people who are socialists genuinely want to see the betterment of the poorest members of our society. I don't think most socialists are socialists out of envy or hatred for the rich.

I suppose I'm socialist and my motivations aren't really either, although they are somewhat both.

My main motivation is that I want MY life to get better, and I think socialist policies that benefit everyone work better for me than capitalist policies that benefit the 1%. My personal issues aren't the tax man taking 50% of my net wealth or how to offshore my investment portfolio. My personal issues are things like those fucking potholes on the road that never get repaired.

---

It's especially true on this board.

---

pinky0926 posted...

Although I will point out a hilarious character stereotype. The tinder Marxist girls with short fringes and tattoos and dr marten shoes that smoke cigarettes. They talk about the revolution and such but if they ever met an actual working class person - like gary from stockton who's passions in life are his car and Liverpool FC - they absolutely despise them. She lives in a decent flat in hackney paid for by the bank of mum and dad while they go to art school.

I'm totally hot for this kind of girl but they are ridiculous, lol

Closest she gets to a working class person is opening the door for the lad who drops off her charlie.

---

Socialists despise the poor. Especially the rural, religious ones in middle America.

---

I don't think you can strawman the entire group based on bad examples. Certainly tankies don't actually care about the poor, but many leftists seem to genuinely want to help the least well off.

---

Socialism is good in theory, but it never worked in practice.

I do think the people who advocate for higher minimum wage, affordable houses and health care and access to education care more about the poor than those who don't, yeah.

Some real hot takes itt.

---

Certainly, it seems there are a lot of people who despise socialists ITT.
I recall a tech quote from Civ IV as I recall many, Nimoy was a legend.
When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why they are poor, they call me a communist. -Dom Helder Camara, Brazilian Archbishop

The reason, of course, is that charity fundamentally maintains the existing social order. But asking why there is poverty challenges it directly. Theres more than enough wealth in society that the rich could remain rich while the poor could be made comfortable, and yet what is happening is that the mega rich are becoming exponentially richer and everyone else struggles more and more.
People with any sort of stake(whether real or imagined) in the way things are would much rather believe the wealthy deserve to be wealthy and the poor deserve to be poor.

Hornezz posted...

I do think the people who advocate for higher minimum wage, affordable houses and health care and access to education care more about the poor than those who don't, yeah.

Some real hot takes itt.

Technically none of the things you mentioned are socialist. Those are welfare policies seen in capitalist states. In a socialist society the means of production would be in the hands of the workers so you wouldn't need a minimum wage. You also wouldn't be able to own private property (different from personal property), so housing couldn't be owned by someone not living in it. Lot of Americans use socialism go mean "government doing things".

---

ssjevot posted...

Technically none of the things you mentioned are socialist. Those are welfare policies seen in capitalist states. In a socialist society the means of production would be in the hands of the workers so you wouldn't need a minimum wage. You also wouldn't be able to own private property (different from personal property), so housing couldn't be owned by someone not living in it. Lot of Americans use socialism go mean "government doing things".

this made me a lil hard
---

Kaiganeer posted...

a socialist suddenly stops advocating for socialism if they happen to become rich

Just like Bernie Sanders!

---

Kolibri X posted...

Socialists despise the poor. Especially the rural, religious ones in middle America.

This is true I've noticed

ssjevot posted...

Technically none of the things you mentioned are socialist. Those are welfare policies seen in capitalist states. In a socialist society the means of production would be in the hands of the workers so you wouldn't need a minimum wage. You also wouldn't be able to own private property (different from personal property), so housing couldn't be owned by someone not living in it. Lot of Americans use socialism go mean "government doing things".

Yeah, I was going by the currently popular American definition. When a large amount of people consider Joe Biden a radical socialist, it's safe to say the word got a different meaning.
As far as I know there's not really a significant socialist movement in the US. I wouldn't consider Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez socialist either, even though they do use that label themselves.

---

Hornezz posted...

Yeah, I was going by the currently popular American definition. When a large amount of people consider Joe Biden a radical socialist, it's safe to say the word got a different meaning.
As far as I know there's not really a significant socialist movement in the US. I wouldn't consider Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez socialist either, even though they do use that label themselves.

Remember there is a lot of world that isn't America. The things Americans are calling socialist are literally policies conservatives have implemented here and in many other capitalist countries.

Sanders is definitely not a socialist. He is confused and calling his social democracy policies democratic socialism. It's fine though, I don't really expect professional politicians to study and understand political theory. He says what his positions are publicly and what he calls them isn't that important.

---

Kolibri X posted...

Socialists despise the poor. Especially the rural, religious ones in middle America.

That has less to do with them being poor and more to do with many of them being bigoted and supporting bigoted right wing hyper capitalist politicians. But bigots love to use liberal elitism as a deflection.

What they really want is to replace them.

---

I think to hate the rich is to care about the poor, at least a little bit.

---

Is this some weird "empathy is a myth" train of thought?

---

Ilishe posted...

What they really want is to replace them.

That's the bourgeoisie

---

I think this is a no true scottsman situation.

The progressive movement in the US, however, has certainly devalued discussions of the poor in recent years, in favor of populist policy.

---

Nukleen posted...

*You can replace socialists with communists or any other similar ideologies

Socialism is a gamut and can be more similar to Biden policy than Karl Marx.

A Public Option is a collective control on a market but it's also free market because it achieves that control by operating like a non-profit.

weirdneighbor posted...

That has less to do with them being poor and more to do with many of them being bigoted and supporting bigoted right wing hyper capitalist politicians. But bigots love to use liberal elitism as a deflection.

Point proven, can't even pretend to hide your own accepted bigotry and contempt for one topic.

---

There's all kinds

---

Kolibri X posted...

Point proven, can't even pretend to hide your own accepted bigotry and contempt for one topic.

You proved water is wet, that deserves a pat on your back.

Kolibri X posted...

Socialists despise the poor. Especially the rural, religious ones in middle America.

Everyone should hate people who ignore the first amendment and hypocritically the teachings of their own faith.

MrMallard posted...

I think to hate the rich is to care about the poor, at least a little bit.

g980 posted...

Its probably more accurate to say that a lot of them hate the rich in a way that has nothing to do with helping the poor

see i was right
---

CyricZ posted...

Is this some weird "empathy is a myth" train of thought?

People have long painted socialists (or really anyone who advocates against massive wealth disparity and economic gaps) as simply "jealous of the super awesome" rich. It's largely bull, but its had success as a line of propaganda. As evident by this topic.
---

CyricZ posted...

Is this some weird "empathy is a myth" train of thought?

some conservatives can't understand how people could do something to help others that isn't in their own interest

it's like that weird mentality of "you only helped so people would like you/want to help you later"
uhhh no buddy I was just being nice

---

Most socialists dont even know what socialism is

Scandinavian countries and most of Europe are liberal countries, yet theyre always pointed to by American socialists as socialist utopias.

Venezuela and Cuba are literally the only two remotely socialist countries in the world today. China is Communist (with a heavy market influence) and Laos and Vietnam are both (slowly) moving to a market economy

---

Samurontai posted...

Most socialists dont even know what socialism is

Scandinavian countries and most of Europe are liberal countries, yet theyre always pointed to by American socialists as socialist utopias.

Venezuela and Cuba are literally the only two remotely socialist countries in the world today. China is Communist (with a heavy market influence) and Laos and Vietnam are both (slowly) moving to a market economy

What about Bolivia?

Samurontai posted...

Most socialists dont even know what socialism is

Scandinavian countries and most of Europe are liberal countries, yet theyre always pointed to by American socialists as socialist utopias.

Venezuela and Cuba are literally the only two remotely socialist countries in the world today. China is Communist (with a heavy market influence) and Laos and Vietnam are both (slowly) moving to a market economy

China is Communist in name only--you can't be communist with a heavy market influence; that's a literal contradiction. China is the strongest captialist autocracy in the world. Fact

---

ButteryMales posted...

What about Bolivia?

Its not truly socialist. Iirc, Bolivia shares profits with private businesses when it comes to gas, but doesnt actually control the means of production

---

Samurontai posted...

Its not truly socialist. Iirc, Bolivia shares profits with private businesses when it comes to gas, but doesnt actually control the means of production

Or the CIA backed coup failed there and people are on to OAS's crimes.

ButteryMales posted...

You proved water is wet, that deserves a pat on your back.

Everyone should hate people who ignore the first amendment and hypocritically the teachings of their own faith.

All you're proving is why the working class do not and should not vote for socialists, (or democrats for that matter) who hate them. But don't let me stop you. Go on.

---