Your basic point about the state of US society's treatment of the poor is beyond dispute. Your adoration of Bobby Kennedy I will ascribe to your youth at the time it was acquired. Bobby was as complete a political opportunist as any American political figure you can name. Don't forget he started out in the service of the House UnAmerican Activities Committee and Joe McCarthy and as total an anti- Communist (socialist) as you can imagine. His adoption of concern for the poor was in the service of finding a platform to challenge Lyndon Johnson and later Hubert Humphrey for the presidential nomination and his resistance to the Vietnam War followed on his supporting his brother's accelerating the staffing of "advisors" begun by Eisenhower. He was also at his brother's shoulder in promotion of the Bay of Pigs and the surveillance and concern of Martin Luther King and King's "radicalism" threatening southern support for the Kennedy administration.
I subscribed so I could feel free to say all of that.
I once again urge you to get behind the welfare state and abandon socialism which is overwhelmingly rejected by the voters in this country. It is even more toxic than "defund the police", one of the most misguided political slogans of all time.
I don't adore Bobby Kennedy; I noted the similarity between his observations and those of the rapporteur 50 years later, and I said one should question the sincerity of any politician on the campaign trail.
I would be fine with a welfare state along the lines of what other countries have, but I don't know how you would expect us to get from what we have now to what you want to see without outside pressure from the left on the political parties we're stuck with. The large majority of Democratic politicians are actively opposed to it.
As for the toxicity of socialism, I'd note that Sanders did very well with voters under 40, of all ethnicities, who know he is a Democratic Socialist. Young people are screwed and looking for an alternative. The toxicity of it is learned, not intrinsic.
Adding, in the edit: thanks for the subscription, Jack. I hope you know you would have been free to say all that in any event.
You referred to your youthful impression. I'd be more impressed with your argument if younger voters voted in larger numbers. I know I could have vented anyway but in these days of every Tom, Dick, and Harry emailing me as though I were an ATM, I had to justify signing up to myself.
I don't agree with you about the attitude of the large majority of Democratic politicians. There aren't enough of them in office to make the changes you want and they have to pay attention to what the voters (who actually vote) in our structurally distorted system will agree to. The toxicity of the word, socialism, may be learned instead of intrinsic but it is there and the use of the word in the political discourse is unnecessary.
My impression was of the conditions Kennedy was describing. I related the conditions he described to the conditions the rapporteur described. I could have thrown John Edwards in there too, since he tried to replicate Kennedy's tour in 2007 and, presumably, the gloss and horror associated with it.
Younger voters get older. Older voters can change their views. "Socialism" is toxic mostly to people who don't know what it is, particularly Democratic Socialism. I'm out t make it cuddly.
And politicians respond to money. I have to refer you back to those studies I wrote about: "[W]hen the affluent prefer policy change and the middle oppose it, the rate of change is nearly identical to when both groups prefer it. When only the middle prefer policy change, the rate of change is the same as when both groups oppose it.”
The problem with Democratic Socialism is the word, socialism. It is totally unnecessary and deceptive in the sense that it distracts from what is really meant. It is a messaging issue and getting people educated to its "real meaning" is creating an obstacle to selling the kinds of policies you desire. Bernie and his supporters could all use a short course in marketing.
Your basic point about the state of US society's treatment of the poor is beyond dispute. Your adoration of Bobby Kennedy I will ascribe to your youth at the time it was acquired. Bobby was as complete a political opportunist as any American political figure you can name. Don't forget he started out in the service of the House UnAmerican Activities Committee and Joe McCarthy and as total an anti- Communist (socialist) as you can imagine. His adoption of concern for the poor was in the service of finding a platform to challenge Lyndon Johnson and later Hubert Humphrey for the presidential nomination and his resistance to the Vietnam War followed on his supporting his brother's accelerating the staffing of "advisors" begun by Eisenhower. He was also at his brother's shoulder in promotion of the Bay of Pigs and the surveillance and concern of Martin Luther King and King's "radicalism" threatening southern support for the Kennedy administration.
I subscribed so I could feel free to say all of that.
I once again urge you to get behind the welfare state and abandon socialism which is overwhelmingly rejected by the voters in this country. It is even more toxic than "defund the police", one of the most misguided political slogans of all time.
Other than that, my Monday has been OK.
Jack
I don't adore Bobby Kennedy; I noted the similarity between his observations and those of the rapporteur 50 years later, and I said one should question the sincerity of any politician on the campaign trail.
I would be fine with a welfare state along the lines of what other countries have, but I don't know how you would expect us to get from what we have now to what you want to see without outside pressure from the left on the political parties we're stuck with. The large majority of Democratic politicians are actively opposed to it.
As for the toxicity of socialism, I'd note that Sanders did very well with voters under 40, of all ethnicities, who know he is a Democratic Socialist. Young people are screwed and looking for an alternative. The toxicity of it is learned, not intrinsic.
Adding, in the edit: thanks for the subscription, Jack. I hope you know you would have been free to say all that in any event.
You referred to your youthful impression. I'd be more impressed with your argument if younger voters voted in larger numbers. I know I could have vented anyway but in these days of every Tom, Dick, and Harry emailing me as though I were an ATM, I had to justify signing up to myself.
I don't agree with you about the attitude of the large majority of Democratic politicians. There aren't enough of them in office to make the changes you want and they have to pay attention to what the voters (who actually vote) in our structurally distorted system will agree to. The toxicity of the word, socialism, may be learned instead of intrinsic but it is there and the use of the word in the political discourse is unnecessary.
My impression was of the conditions Kennedy was describing. I related the conditions he described to the conditions the rapporteur described. I could have thrown John Edwards in there too, since he tried to replicate Kennedy's tour in 2007 and, presumably, the gloss and horror associated with it.
Younger voters get older. Older voters can change their views. "Socialism" is toxic mostly to people who don't know what it is, particularly Democratic Socialism. I'm out t make it cuddly.
And politicians respond to money. I have to refer you back to those studies I wrote about: "[W]hen the affluent prefer policy change and the middle oppose it, the rate of change is nearly identical to when both groups prefer it. When only the middle prefer policy change, the rate of change is the same as when both groups oppose it.”
The problem with Democratic Socialism is the word, socialism. It is totally unnecessary and deceptive in the sense that it distracts from what is really meant. It is a messaging issue and getting people educated to its "real meaning" is creating an obstacle to selling the kinds of policies you desire. Bernie and his supporters could all use a short course in marketing.
What would you call it?
The New Deal? Maybe "A Better Deal". But in the immortal words of Johnny Cash, "Don't call me Sue. . . "