Do you support the transformation of the United States into a social democracy?

[Writer]

Here is a basic definition of 'social democracy' pulled from Wikipedia:

Social democracy is a political ideology of the centre-left on the classic political spectrum. The contemporary social democratic movement seeks to reform capitalism to align it with the ethical ideals of social justice while maintaining the capitalist mode of production, as opposed to creating an alternative socialist economic system.<1> Practical modern social democratic policies include the promotion of a welfare state, and the creation of economic democracy as a means to secure workers' rights.<2>

[RaleighNCDUer]

1. Out of curiosity, would the 'no, I don't' vote care to elaborate?

What's YOUR preference to the system we pretty much had pre-Reagan (though Taft-Hartley, which pretty much killed progress in that direction, did precede Reagan by a generation)?

[Lilith Velkor]

8. Probably full-on socialism.

I voted 'maybe,' because while I would prefer that, I would find social democracy an acceptable compromise.

[DonCoquixote]

21. in what country

has there been, or ever been full on socialism? The closest were the Soviets, and they were not a success.

[Jokerman]

2. We ARE a social democracy, or at least we used to be.

I oppose the efforts to transform us into something else.

[HereSince1628]

4. Thanks, I thought I was in a nightmare.

But on second thought it seems, I AM in a nightmare.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

3. Yes.

Heck, that was easy. :shrug: :D

[dkofos]

5. YES, it's better than the fascist country we have now.

[blondeatlast]

6. I voted yes, but I thought we once were. nt

[blondeatlast]

7. I'm sensing a trend here.

:shrug:

[Writer]

9. Interesting articles on the United States as a 'social democracy.'

For your reading plea-sure.

Social Democracy in America?
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/20/opinion/20iht-edzimmermann.html

It Can't Happen Here: Why Obama won't bring European social democracy to America.
http://www.slate.com/id/2213040/

[hunter]

10. It would be a start...

There are a few capitalist modes of production that need to be killed quickly. Unsustainable economic structures and environmental destruction lead to severe social injustice. Two current examples of industries that have got to go would be the health insurance industry and the coal industry.

[old mark]

11. It would actually be very refreshing. nt

[Demeter]

12. I will never live long enough for that

There would have to be a swiftly fatal disease that attacks stupidity...and it would have to scour the land. Not even in science fiction does the planet get that lucky.

[blindpig]

13. Other: there is no compromise with Capitalism

As long as those bastards got their foot in the door they will go for the whole ball of wax, even as they are commodifying education today. The Capitalist necessity of 'growth' requires them to, there's no getting along with a beast like that.

[MineralMan]

14. Yes, I'd support that, but I can't see a path toward that goal

anytime in the near future. How would this happen? We can barely get the Democrats we do have elected. What are the chances of getting enough genuine progressives elects so this could happen? I think they're very slim.

[damntexdem]

15. Once again, I can't vote because of an ad across the link. But yes.

And I WILL NOT donate in order to be freed of such ads -- not when I am being abused by the placement of the ads.

And, yes, I have donated in the past, so am not a free rider on DU.

[SidDithers]

20. Use Firefox, and install the Ad Block Plus plugin...

poof! no more ads, even if you're not a donor.

Sid

[VMI Dem]

16. As long as it is done in an orderly fashion and with surveys to verify its approval by everyone.

[readmoreoften]

19. Including the capitalists, right?

Because this system is done with surveys of approval. :eyes:

[nadinbrzezinski]

17. Yep

[readmoreoften]

18. How exactly would that happen? Capitalists won't allow it here.

And they're trying to disallow it in Europe as well. The idea of "social democracy" is a late 19th/early 20th century 'centrist' position made possible by the threat of socialist revolutions.

No threat of socialist revolution? No reason for capital to accept reforms.