I was sobered to see some of the details of the revised DSA platform.

[wnylib]

97. FDR would have approved of freely crossing borders

for work without any restrictions of any kind? I seriously doubt that.

FDR was not a socialist, despite several posts at DU claiming that he was. He was a mainstream Democrat who implemented some socialist programs. He also saved capitalism through regulations. I strongly favor regulations on capitalism and have opposed the RW deregulation policies. But I do not believe that capitalism is an evil to be abolished. Unregulated, raw capitalism is evil. It promotes oligarchs and authoritarian control. But regulations against business monopolies and fraudulent or excessively risky practices on Wall Street are absolutely essential in a nation for a stable economy, general prosperity, and to avoid the kind of wide income gap that exists in the US today. Such regulations are essential in maintaining a democracy. No need t9 abolish capitalism. Just regulated it and enforce the regulations.

Socialism can exist side by side with capitalism as a mixed economy in democratic nations. It does in several European nations. Mixed economies in a democracy is even included in definitions of socialism as a distinguishing trait in comparison with communism.

You are OK with a splinter group highjacking a political party? Like MAGAs and the earlier Tea Party did with the Republicans? They pushed out moderates who became Independents, then anti Trumpers, and eventually allies of the Dems in the common cause of preserving democracy. Pushing moderates out of both major parties is a bit like throwing out the baby with the bath water.

As most DUers know, we are at a very critical stage in the US, with our future as a democracy vs. a fascist dictatorship or a throwback to the robber barons or earlier, to Medieval Europe in wealth and power, being very real threats. We need strong leadership to oppose the destruction of democracy by dictatorial oligarchs. So I agree with most DU posters that we are beyond politics as usual.

Working and middle class Americans need strong representation that the Trump regime and its backers completely lack for us. There are some Dem moderates who are not taking strong enough positions and actions on our behalf. But there are also moderates who are working hard for us in actively fighting for the preservation of democracy and the rule of law over personality cults and the corrupt rule of millionaires and billionaires who use their wealth to control the government. Thise moderates are currently fighting to maintain the integrity of the midterm elections in November. I am grateful to them for the work they are doing for all of us, so I do not demonize all moderates across the board. But I am seeing that view being expressed by some socialists in DU posts.

For many decades RW politicians equated governance with economics and some said outright that business interests represented true democracy. The latest and worst example was the push for a well known "businessman" to become the R candidate and president. Aside from the fact that Trump's promoted image of a successful businessman was a complete lie, there is more to running a country than a commercial business. Economics certainly are a thread that runs throughout governance, but it is not the sum total of governance. Even if Trump had actually been a successful businessman, that would not have not qualified him as a leader in areas of international diplomacy, civil rights, Constitutional law, epidemiology, immigration, and many more areas in the best interests of a nation's people.

Socialism, like capitalism, is primarily an economic policy. As I said, economics permeate and overlap in many (most) areas of a country and its government. But economics are not the sum total of governance. They are important for the funding of numerous governmental departments and policies, but nations are not businesses and cannot be run as businesses.

Socialism is also economic policy, but not the sum total of governance. Employee ownership of businesses is not the only way to ensure a good working environment and pay, although it can be a choice for employees and businesses where that is preferred. Collective bargaining through unions is another way. Regulations against monopolies and actual ENFORCEMENT of them promotes more opportunities for smaller businesses to develop, while also preventing conglomerates that support excessive wealth at the top and political control by the wealthy.

But employee ownership of businesses, small or large, is not a guarantee of a well run business. There are some behaviors that are intrinsic to human nature. Persuasion is one of them, and is the basis of democracy -- persuasion vs. dictatorial force. Yet a persuasive employee or group of employees within a business can choose to promote practices through peer pressure and persuasion that end up harming the business and employees in the long run. Employee ownership can work well, but it depends on the integrity, skills, and knowledge of the employees. An enclosed group like that can also slip into various discriminations. That's where governance comes in as an aspect of democracy apart from economics.

Some universal laws, e.g. universal health care, are beneficial to everyone regardless of income. They allow people to change jobs and not be dependent on employers for health care or on their own income for it. It also allows employers to save on operations expenses.

But universal laws on rent, as in the post that cites the socialist platform, can infringe on owners' rights and won't necessarily solve the problem of inadequate housing and high rents. Other solutions could include building more affordable housing and anti monoply laws against large companies buying up property and fixing prices in a housing market. Helping small property owners to obtain mortgages on available rental properties, with limits on how many they can own would help. So would low interest loans for people to build small rental properties or renovate old houses into apartment units. When larger real estate and construction companies build rental properties, they want them to be high rent in order to yield high profits for their investment. Smaller property owners, like people who own a large one family building converted to apartments, are mostly looking for rent to cover the mortgage and provide some income for retirement. They are not seeking the high rents for exclusive apartments that real estate developers want from their projects.

A mixed economy under a democratic constitutional government allows a variety of solutions to problems under a governing system that protects civil rights, individual rights, and freedoms.