No other liberal news outlets are covering this.
“Vote blue no matter who! Wait, no, not like that!”
So, I now know what dem scum is top of the list to get primaried
Nah, that’s the future of the Democratic party. If he doesn’t like it, he can quit, and join the MAGAs. He’s already talking like them.
“Capitalism has raised more people out of poverty than any other system in the history of the world. Create more innovation. Socialism has failed everywhere,” Suozzi said in the interview, which he even posted to his social media accounts.
Oh? Like social security, medicare, medicaid, public schooling, and stimulus packages? All socialist policies that make America work. But no, it must be the billionaires and billion dollar corporations.
This country would have broken before World War 1 if not for socialist policies that were enacted to save it from total collapse. And here we are at the precipice once again and this fuckweed is calling for everyone to abandon their parachute and commit a trust fall with the greediest most insubstantial people to have ever existed. AKA capitalists
I dare say, capitalism, by it’s very definition, has CREATED all poverty.
Capitalism needs homelessness, joblessness and poverty in order to function. Probably preaching to the choir, but it doesn’t create poverty because it is bad as an economic system, it creates poverty because it works so well.
I more meant that it’s very nature is that it is a system where wealth both exists and is accumulated. If we didn’t have money, we wouldn’t have poverty.
True but the problem isn’t just money, its private property. Money is how social relations under capitalism are managed. It isn’t the root of the problem, but it creates lots of avenues for exploitation. I would like to live in a world without money but we have to organize and fight for it.
I think the way forward is to create a hybrid of socialism and capitalism - the social to address all basic needs of people, such as healthcare, generic food, a boring car, free shelter, utilities, ect. Capitalism should be solely reserved for luxuries, such as yachts, vacations, fancy meals, figurines, art, media, and so on.
It is my belief that capitalism is an optimization method, but like all optimizations, it can detract from the results if it exists for its own sake, rather than to facilitate the goal. In the case of society, that would be to promote goods and services that help individuals grow as humans.
We don’t want merch of a given fulfillment to be given to everyone, because not everyone is a fan of HP Lovecraft or My Little Pony, so that would waste lots of resources if we didn’t have capitalism to adjust their supply for cultural demands. However, all humans need to eat, rest, and have agency. In such a case, it is much better to “waste” resources to make sure everyone does alright.
I think there are some misunderstandings about what capitalism is and how it actually works as a mechanism of class rule and oppression rather than a neutral system. I absolutely think your heart is in the right place, but I’ll try to help clear up common misunderstanding.
First, you are confusing capitalism with markets. Capitalism isn’t markets, that would be like marketalism or something. Capital is assets that that produce more than they cost to maintain. Basically its stuff that creates profit, not stuff that is sold on a market, though it is the market where a particular transformation occurs, its where potential profit is transformed into real profit.
But what is done with the extra is the fundamental contradiction of capitalism. The production process is socialized, which means that it is many people involved. But the excess, the profits, are individualized, not socialized.
Because of this dynamic, capitalism is not an optimization. It is not efficient, it extracts social productive value, and shunts it into private coffers, or more accurately, private bank accounts. Those banks are part of a global system of finance, that every country in the world is paying into in various ways. In endless ways these banks distribute resources according to a particular set of rules that benefit a particular sort of set of incentives: the incentives of imperialist capitalism.
Every link in the chain of production bleeds money. A parts manufacturer has to turn a profit, those parts are shipped to an assembler that has to turn a profit, the assembled commodities have to be sold on a market that had to earn a profit. The shipping companies that are moving parts and commodities, has to turn a profit. The warehouses that store the goods have to be profitable. Does an object have to be profitable in order to exist in the real world? Absolutely not. Things have to be profitable in order to fulfill a certain set of obligations imposed on the real world.
You want to separate socialism from capital, the social from the economic. This way of thinking creates illusions. Capitalism is not rational, it’s anarchistic. Things are not created and distributed according to human needs, they are created according to the desire for profit. The competitive drive for profit eliminates firms who fail to take more profit, which leads to monopolization, vertical integration, etc., Large firms are able to influence legislation, to create laws which are enforced with violence to make the consequences real.
Your view is not unique. It was the view of the capitalist class during the heyday of the new deal. After pushing workers to the brink of actually overthrowing the capitalist system (see 1934 nationwide rail strikes) in 1935 we got our new deal, and the capitalists were all saying “we just need responsible, kinder capitalism. Social democracy will be a big improvement!” But 90 years later, the new deal is a done deal. Even European social democracies are at least majorly funded by defense industrialists that extract value from the 3rd world, and are experiencing waves of well funded and politically organized fascist movements, like ourselves. There is no profit in social democracy, and it only came about in the first place because of the global expansion of socialism, which actively fought to eliminate capitalism but was defeated in various ways.
Capitalism is in fact extremely wasteful, and is optimized only to move value from workers to owners. A recent study shows that a better way of life for everyone, secure safe housing, healthcare, quality education; could be achieved with 1/3 of our current global productive capacity. That means there is in fact room for luxuries! But not under capitalism. We will have to dramatically change the global order, by the workers coming together and organizing for our own benefit, at the expense of capital and private property. We will have to seize the means.
I think the sort of compromise that you are trying to make is actually a historically settled issue. Concern about what to do about demand for luxury goods is very correct IMO, as well as is the belief that the economy should be organized around human need rather than the hunt for profit. This is one of the pillars of socialism! And I welcome you as a fellow traveller in these spaces. But there will be no compromise with capitalism this time. The new deal saved the ruling class of capitalists from extinction. And that view of having a good capitalism was the justification of the ruling class for their own parasitic existence. The sun has set on even the feasibility of a middle way.
I think if you want to join the movement for democratic socialism, you’ll be able try and work with others for ways to make sure that human needs such as housing, food, education, healthcare are not commodified on a market. But there will be no compromise. That happened before we were even born. Capitalism is more than just markets, it is the way that the ruling class is organized against the working class. This IMO is the missing piece from your analysis, the class analysis. But we live in a time where the class character and distinctions between the owning capitalists and the workers is becoming clear to many many more people. I def sympathise with your urge to find a compromise, I think it is admirable and a quality that our movements desperately need.
But in this particular instance, it is not possible to strike a compromise between the people who get their wealth from stealing the value of others work, and the people who are having their work stolen.
How about you leave. Like, what are y’all even fucking doing anymore? You guys are more unpopular than you ever have been and it’s literally your own fault.
The DNC Dems are there to prevent a progressive party from forming. The DNC Dems are working together with the Reps to fight against the people of America for the rich oligarchs running the country.
We warned that this is what is going on before the last presidential election and before that. But people wouldn’t want to listen, instead defending “slow genocide” and “lesser of two evils” and other insane statements. Now they keep getting screwed as the DNC Dems understand that they will keep getting away with it.
They’ll just go Republican and cash in on their servitude to the rich
Collecting their kickbacks.
They could become the traditional republicans with what their views are these days.
Does Tom Suozzi get to determine who joins the party? Sounds like he should leave the democratic party if he takes issue with what the party members clearly want.
The Democrats aren’t a party. They’re a voting blob. When DSA becomes an actual party it will shake the foundations of the whole political system.
80000 members, and they’re terrified. Not because we are socialists, but because we are organized. Wanna scare the ruling class, give em a taste of DSA derangement syndrome? Join.
The Democrats aren’t a party. They’re a voting blob.
They are a blow job to the wealthy disguised as a party.
Buddy, Mamdani won the primary. He is what the democrats in NYC want. The DSA just needs to lean into this and start running lower level candidates for all roles.
Why are you calling me buddy? It comes off patronising, so i would love to hear about your involvement in left wing organizing, or any actual organizing. Are you in DSA? Or are you a democrat talking down to DSA, as dems do compulsively to the working class, telling us to stay in our lane? I honestly cant tell. DSA should run lower level campaigns in addition, i agree, and I think Mamdani is going to inspire much much more of that.
Thank you Tom Suozzi for outing yourself you fucking fuck.
The Democratic Party leadership and establishment is not there to help you. They are there to stop you. They are there to act as a honey trap to capture and neutralize progressive/leftist politicians and policies while the Republicans implement the authoritarian police state that the donors of both parties need to quell the inevitable rebellion that will occur once the general population fully realizes the existential crisis we are in.
Primaries are where we can fight. Every DINO needs to be primaried, and we need to start fucking showing up to primaries. IIRC primary elections are voted in by only like 10-20% of eligible voters.
You can see in this post how the DNC tries to invalidate even fighting in the primaries.
- Mamdani wins the primary
- The DNC does everything in their power to make him lose in the general election
- When he loses, they can point to that and go “see voters just don’t want that!” In the next primary.
So even after winning in a primary, anyone left of Nixon is going to get rat fucked by the party so they can keep up their bullshit electability narrative.
Blue no matter who!
Not like that.
Honestly, I think the DNC is doing everything in their power to make him win, and it’s fun to see them do it.
If the dems use skullduggery to avoid primaries, they are no longer ‘the lesser evil’ and the old blue-no-matter-who arguments do not apply anymore.
It’s not that deep. Give me a real choice in a primary.
Yeah, primary this guy. Let him give his seat to a better representative.
That’s the DSA’s ultimate goal, my guy. Use DNC infrastructure to its advantage, and use that as a spring board to breaking with the Dems. At what point that happens is debated within the organization. But this guy will get his wish, sooner or later, especially if the DNC continues to have zero sense of self preservation
Debatable, as you mentioned, but I love your energy. It was shocking how much of a party focus we had this year compared to 2023.
What a time to be a democratic socialist!
Here’s another one to primary. Get on it, America!
“…don’t want that in my party…”
Is this guy the new owner or something? I’ve never heard of him.
“I just bought a bunch of Democrat senators. What can I do about all these pesky socialists in my party? They won’t accept any of my bribes.”
Party purge is very Lenin. Borderline Stalin. How socialist of you.
Non-Post link here:
https://www.newsday.com/long-island/politics/suozzi-mamdani-ucap9t7r
Ideally we should have four parties:
Progressive
Corporate Democrat
Corporate Republican
Batshit CrazyAs it stands now, the Batshit Crazies have taken over and the Progressives are disenfranchised.
Batshit Crazy
The name lacks symmetry. How about “regressives”
Thanks. Most of the other news outlets are less sensational, focusing on his drawing parallels between Mamdani and Trump, as well as drawing lines between capitalism and socialism. He’s… not very progressive at all…
https://www.cbsnews.com/newyork/news/tom-suozzi-democratic-party-donald-trump/
YES PLEASE START A LEFTIST PARTY
Vote blue no matter who, am I right?
In a general election, where the other possible office-winner is a literal fascist, yes.
Yes, and yet this guy is actively undermining the winners of the primaries…
That’s a stupid oversimplification to make it look like both sides are the same.
So I’ll call that an attempt of a false equivalence to discourage the opposition.I have always seen it as a “Perfection is the enemy of progress.” phrase.
I.E. Yes, that blue candidate is funded by target, but the red candidate will do so much worse things to the people.
I read it as sarcastic, that these are the same guys that say “blue no matter who” when it’s their guy, but the second it isn’t, suddenly they actively undermine the primary winners of"their" party.
Also true.