Home | About | Donate

Conservatives Will Always Call Socialists Hypocrites. Ignore Them.


Conservatives Will Always Call Socialists Hypocrites. Ignore Them.

Elizabeth Bruenig

Shortly after Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a 28-year-old democratic socialist, pulled off a surprise left-flank victory over incumbent Rep. Joseph Crowley in a New York congressional primary last week, pictures of her childhood home began appearing on social media.


This accusation against Ocasio-Cortez was first repeated here, without criticism, by one of CD’s resident Democratic Party hacks. The most vicious and effective attacks against socialism always come from Democrats and self-styled liberals.

Conservatives are still calling Barack Obama a Marxist, and most are still trotting out Cold War vintage arguments that are meaningless to anyone under age 45. What they have to say about socialism is certainly worth ignoring.


Conservatives have brought this nation to the Brink.

Brink of what?

Take your pick.


Of course such claims should be ignored: It’s simply an ad hominem fallacy to rejects x’s ideas based on some purported attribute/possession/etc. of x.


Recall the King of England’s July 4, 1776 diary entry: “Nothing of consequence occurred today”.


Thank You. Lib/progs and Dems are the greatest evil in the fight against capitalist hegemony over the global political economy.


No, the most vicious and effective attacks against socialism are by use of its own history. There are over 100 million corpses as a result of the pure socialist ideology.

No, Barack Obama was not a Marxist. He was a liberal democrat, and acted more to the center than the direction that the Democratic Party is moving.

From the article:

it’ll always be news if Bernie Sanders wears a $700 coat or buys a house by a lake, because his political position on inequality is so obviously moral that the only way to impeach it is to make him seem dishonest about it. The same goes, and will continue to go, for every other candidate who attempts to advance material equality. This stance is hard to supply a persuasive democratic alternative to, so critics instead claim that its standard-bearers don’t really mean it.

No, Bernie Sanders’ ideas are not “so obviously moral.” They are evil. Theft, the lack of economic and political freedom, and forced equality of outcome are all purely evil concepts. There is so much hubris in this quote. It is not difficult to find counter-arguments to Bernie Sanders’ ideology. There are countless countries that have tried it. All have failed and led to the death and starvation of their people, and stagnation of their economies. Cuba, Venezuela, Argentina, Brazil, USSR, Cambodia, North Korea, Vietnam, Zimbabwe, China, India. The list is so long!


That’s not what she said. Nothing in dahlia’s statement can be traced to your claim. Do you know who claimed that Ocasio-Cortez was basically a " champagne socialist "? Who lied about her background? Name them or have a great big cup of STFU! Your smears are tiring and become predictable, very quickly. If you’re pushing some miniscule political movement, read about where Ocasio-Cortez has gotten her support, it’s still a left/progressive coalition. For you, that’s probably a sad. Get over it, dude!
As to the right’s calling out Democratic Socialists or Social Democrats because of their hypocrisy; well, the fascistic right is the more guilty party in this regard. Racist white people from the upper-middle class and those raised from the segregated elite ranks are truly the sickos in this scenario. They’re education and advantages have taught them less than nothing, apparently.
As I said 4-5 months ago about the 2018 mid-terms; if you have to talk to Trump and Neo-White Nationalist apparatchiks simply tell them to " Fxck Off ", and then move on. You’ll never change their willful ignorance and hate into anything approaching " progress ", in the usual meaning of that word. " If you engage pigs in a wrestling match on their ground, you can’t complain about coming away smelling like shit ".
My only ? for Breunig is, " Do you really think the Democrats going after Ocasio-Cortez and her political allies are not center-right and/or just Blue Dog and Corporate-leaning DLC types ". It’s becoming increasingly obvious that the Democratic Party is cleaving into 2-3 ideological camps, pretty much. She’s in the camp that’s in the ascendant positions, btw.


New name, same old horseshxt?


I’m pretty sure this is what dahlia11 meant by “trotting out Cold War vintage arguments.”


The US Reich is terrified of social democracy because it works . .

Kind of a surprise to see the WaPO publish this


Oh, no! Their education and advantages taught them everything they need to know to funnel all the money upward, purchase the government and install plutocracy, avoid taxes, gerrymander voting for a pretense of democracy, start wars of opportunity, evolve systematic racism to stay ahead of or negate civil rights “progress,” deny climate change, establish a police state, etc. If their business, finance, and economic curricula included an “ethics” course, it was for the purpose of enabling them to say, “Hey! I’m ethical. It’s the free market that’s amoral. So don’t blame the player…”


The progressive democratic socialists (social democrats or neo-new-deal) are apparently scaring the right-wing, tax dodging fools enough that they are starting to attack those threatening the status quo. They will start with blatant lies because the poor misled folks that identify with these fools will believe their nonsense. We real progressives have to insure that the ‘real’ or actual truths get disseminated to the masses. Keep the pressure up. The younger folks can get on board and start and keep a real movement moving.


an ugly paradox that applies only to the left: If you care about
material equality and you aren’t destitute, you’re a hypocrite; if you
care about material equality and you are destitute, you’re never going
to have a real shot at political engagement to begin with.

Good point. And a good opinion piece overall - I may have to revise my opinion of the Washington Post editorial staff (who according to Thomas Frank were pretty hard on Bernie overall).


The US govt was a primary reason some, or most of these experiments failed. Wars were started, hot, cold, economic, trade, etc.These experiments failed because the US bullied their way to destroy these experiments. The oligarchs couldn’t allow ‘the people’ become their own owners of systems of production and credit union style banking with no profits to the obscenely wealthy ruling class. The corporations have essentially taken hold of governments around the planet and have no intention of giving up their rule. I say this is the end stage of capitalism. Either it goes or humans perish. Time will tell. By the way, poor Cuba has better education and healthcare than the US. Their lifespans are one step lower than the richest country in the world. US, #31, Cuba, #32


It’s just their sinsiter way of essentially jailing people. They will do anything to keep the static system static. The “jailing part” comes when they intimidate enough to get the Left on the defensive, down to the point that we are watching every fucking thing we do–should we keep an Amex card? etc. It’s worked incredibly welll
For those who dont’ remember, THIS type of thing is where the term “politically correct” started. I used to know gay women in California who used the term a lot in the sense of “conformity to the cause” for lesbian rights-no dresses or lipsitc, on and on.
In more economic terms, it’s the watching of petty shit like: Just how and why did you buy that house in a better neighborhood?
In the case of infightigng (like what still goes on in some quarters of the LGBTQ movement) it’s almost always detrimental to the group. In the case of the right vs. left, the word got co-opted a couple decades ago and now is utterly misused by morons like the slime at Fox News. They apply it without even knowing Occaionally they hit the mark, sort of. Supposedly we are not “politicallly CONSISTENT” if we don’t live in a hovel.


Excuse me, Mao’s Great Leap Forward didn’t murder 45+ million of its own people due to the United States.

Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge didn’t murder 1.5 - 3 million of its own people due to the United States.

Joseph Stalin didn’t murder 20 million of his own people due to the United States.

We can discuss as long as you want about the US’s unnecessary involvement in the affairs of other countries and you and I might find a lot of areas of agreement. But to sweep all of those deaths under the rug due to some overarching claim that the US’s meddling is to blame is preposterous.

The fact that you blindly believe the Cuban government’s own statistics is also disturbing. May I ask, where would you, Olhippy, rather receive an education and healthcare? The US or Cuba? Be honest.


Maoism and Stalinism are not socialism. Neither was “National Socialism” in Germany.

They had ruling elites who did not follow the actual writings of the historical socialists.

In America, we have socialism for the rich and capitalism for everyone else, and it too creates corpses.

The wealthiest in America do not have to worry about medical care; the rest of us do.


What is your definition of “socialism?”


“This accusation against Ocasio-Cortez was first repeated here, without criticism, by one of CD’s resident Democratic Party hacks. The most vicious and effective attacks against socialism always come from Democrats and self-styled liberals.”

And exactly how do these words of dahlia’s and mine clash?