Saturday, July 11, 2026

Washington Post: Yes, the DSA Really Does Want to Destroy Capitalism

 HotAir   

"The DSA approach wouldn't restore the monarchy, but it would put all of the power of all of the largest corporations in the hands of the government. Instead of diversifying power centers, it would consolidate them. And before you know it, you're Cuba or Venezuela or China."


"I've written a few of these articles at this point. There was this one with a run-down of what Democratic Socialists want. And there was this one based on a Thomas Edsall column saying the DSA were really just pretending to be working class.

"Today the Washington Post business section has an article which, similar to the first one linked above, walks through the differences between mainstream Dems and the DSA. For instance, on how many hours people should work:

The 40-hour workweek has been the law since 1940. Although some Democrats have advocated a shorter workweek, they are largely content to focus instead on protecting overtime pay, union organizing rights and worker safety. The DSA, on the other hand, has made cutting the standard workweek to 32 hours part of its economic platform.

"On the minimum wage, Dems want to put it up to $15 an hour (or maybe $17) while the DSA is talking about pushing it to $30. But as the story notes, the Dems seem to be moving the DSA's direction. As I wrote here, Sen. Chris Murphy is backing a bill to raise the minimum wage to $30.

"And of course the Dems have been trying to defend and expand Obamacare while the DSA is demanding Medicare for All.

The DSA wants to replace the system entirely, framing health care as a basic need that should be “decommodified,” meaning it shouldn’t be bought and sold on the market like other goods. Their solution is Medicare-for-all, a single-payer government system that would eliminate most private insurance.

"As I pointed out before, Bernie Sanders has been promoting this for years. But there's a very good reason it hasn't happened, not even in California where progressives have a supermajority. The reason is the cost." . . .More...

No comments: