‘Should We Be Socialists?’ - Politicon Panel 2018



[Applause] [Applause] [Applause] [Applause] [Applause] everybody introduce themselves let us bury Margo's and just tell us who you are why you're here and where you from and then if you want one fun fact about yourself my name is Marcos malicious I am the founder of d-glucose which is online actually and I'm here because we have a lot of work to dinner this whatever you're interested so that's what hearing that cut myself I when I was in high school in suburban Chicago I [Applause] did Mark South Carolina where we have three stoplights in a blinking light so very nice to be here today I was in the South Carolina State House of Representatives for nearly a decade are transferred to the governor in 2014 and the reason I'm here with you guys today is because I didn't like that race one fun fact about myself is I went to law school because they outside of the only exam that doesn't have [Applause] [Applause] [Applause] [Applause] alright let me just start by addressing forgive upon the elephant in the room this is a panel asking the question should we be socialists there are no to my knowledge socialists on this panel and and I think I think to a certain extent people up here are interested in some socialistic policies about 7 degree or another for the sake of this panel I think the the idea of socialism is different and speak too but for the sake of this panel socialism will meet the total Democratic control of the means of production small T not the Democratic Party means control of production and I should just say a lot of minds of my point about socialism changing if you look at the Socialist Party platform from 1912 which listener sent me many of the proposals that were proposed at that time we now see already implemented in the country a five-day workweek an eight-hour workday no child labor something to along the lines of Social Security minimum wage freedom of the press was already there progressive income tax and so what I'd like this panel to look at is to what extent should we embrace socialistic policies and to what extent as those of us on the web as within the context of electoral politics were you know a month away less from 2018 midterms to what extent should we embrace the labels of socialism and the policies from an electoral standpoint but where the houses are like to do now starting identities just give us a sense without justifying it where you are on that spectrum from the left to the idea of total democratic control the means of production which would be basically the major industries controlled by workers perhaps the student so just give us a sense so that we get a sense of where everybody is over the spectrum sure I I don't know exactly where I fall on that spectrum but what I do know is that I'm a proponent of a mixed economy so I do believe that there are certain programs that should be socialized whereas other things should be left to private industry so just to give you a quick example I want to yeah I think that prisons of course education so for me having actually served and been an elected official I find myself someone who understands and believes that government should play a role when we're promoting equality and fairness and justice right and just like you and I think everyone on this panel there is no role for a for-profit prison system not absolutely none right but they're there for example it coming from the poor rules out there are there are rules with private industry there are roles for a banana tree to come in supplement what government is not doing well for example and our public school systems in the south many times we don't have the opportunities one of the things I voted for which I'm very proud of was with some people we call corporate welfare but it was a 750 million dollar package we probably could have spend it elsewhere but to bring Boeing to South Carolina why was that important because in the South you can't improve your schools unless you bring an industry but you can't bring industry in unless you improve your schools and so here we are attempting to kind of find that balance but government should play a role when we're talking about equality when we talk justice so I would say I'm largely in agreement with what Anna said and what David said I my personal politics or more social democratic than anything else but at the same time I think that what needs to happen in this country we need to shift the over to the window and wave back to the left because as of right now that over to the window is pretty full right we have Democratic politicians like Joe Manchin for example the time that's an actual number that's you know they track everything when you have a democratic politician voting with Trump 61% of time and you've had the so-called moderate Republicans who vote the Republicans eighty nine percent of the time it's a rigged game so even though I personally don't believe in the social ownership of all of the means of production I think there's actually a space for that in the conversation where people can drag that over to you go back to the left because I think the only blame actually dead social democratic reform is if you have actual socialists in the conversation because you're going to find that middle ground you're going to find that you know that's the compromise point and I want the compromise point to be Medicare football free college living wage ending the wars [Applause] that point is to have people who are to the left [Applause] [Applause] [Applause] absolutely sure can opener I really liked that point because I think that the left can actually use that framing in that language car advantage because oftentimes people say about the left oh you guys just believe in big government when in reality it depends what the question is it depends what the issue is so I actually wanted much smaller government when it comes to the NSA for example who's doing the world of spying on everybody I won't much smaller government when it comes to the drug war and the fact that we have people locked up when they really shouldn't be locked up so I think it's very anybody comes to something like abortion most people on the Left would say I've got about three more out than the way that some regulations so I feel like we can take that frame name of freedom that we could use to our advantage and the left never does that they deceived the ground to the right and let Danny define you know what isn't isn't freedom and they get to pretend like they're the only ones freedom I'll argue exactly the opposite all right so let's start with you because I think to a certain extent the you know from your perspective someone has run for office to what extent should there be socialistic message like how much it's certainly I mean you know talking for 15 years at a time we're coming out using the word liberal was completely derided by the way people would run with the word liberal on the left because of their fear of being labeled right now to the extent that there's any hesitation it usually at work is because concerns from the left so I actually think it's it's vastly different because I think that individuals have to run their own races in their particular space like you have to run your own races wherever you are whether or not it's school board or your local elected office you have to be able to fit the community that you're running in that that's part because in order to get to the values and policy points that we want you have to be elected so I differ slightly because because for me for me it's a practical reality that if I want to Supreme Court justice I have to have 51 United States senators Brett and for me to give you one United States senators I have that I have to be a party of not just Bernie Sanders and a little Elizabeth Warren but also have to be a party of doug jones of joe Manchin right and for me that's a very practical reality because we just went through an entire because of you give you if for example when joe Manchin leaves the United States Senate you're not going to have anyone there who espouses your beliefs or my beliefs or anyone believes close to I think to win in West Virginia I think dimension is a big point of that is that the reason that we have a cabin on the reason that we are we do not have a justice Merrick garland is because we do not have the majority of the United States Senate because you come on like if we fight will get machardie yes that sounds amazing I mean to sidetrack you but what would be the primary data [Applause] by 49 points there's now a Democrat leading by five points and the reason is I'm in a district under [Applause] the strategies that these witness the strategy is that litmus test right though strategy the strategy is that litmus test no way and the reason that they suck is that because then if you were to have a litmus test you would not have a United States Senator that's a Democrat from Alabama correct you would not have you would not have a you would not have a Stacey Abrams you would not have a engine feeling you would not have these individuals for able to be progressive for their particular state and manage their own values if we want to have a litmus test then we then you can have a litmus test all you want however you will not be able to effectuate the change that we want to stay so I think that the important thing to focus on is not left versus right but more importantly the issues that both sides seem to care a lot about and those are the populist issues so let me do an example when Donald Trump was running one of the things that he said over and over again was that he was going to protect Medicare then we do not want to cut Medicare now that we've passed these insane tax cuts for the wealthy there's talk about cutting Medicare admitted we're gonna have to cut these very popular programs politicians don't want to do it because it's popular that is not a right versus left district that is a populist issue so I think the issue that we're having with some of the more moderate Democrats is not that they're trying to cater to their constituents [Applause] because Joe mentioned within the Democratic Party the Challenger was from the left eye Joe Manchin I think I would say is anything possible in terms of like this panel we could separate to the left we have two separate I think it's important for the links to the sickness conversation ideology from I agree I will go further than any of this panel [Applause] you walk out in the hallway you're concerned way to the left that's fine I mean you know politics is movements waves but this is this is when we talk about messaging just from pure messaging when you make swipes based on ideology someone like brocco bomb right that is when there is a large population in this country that then says that we don't want to hear the rest of the message right and so and I thought was just to your point when you were talking about the politics of Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama and that's the reason we have down tonight you know I understand what you're saying but from a messaging perspective I mean if you want to have issues with whatever the policy is that's fine but it's very hard for people to what's that once that swipe is Levin is very hard for people who want to listen to the rest of the message that's all I'm saying and just I'm not sure there's a data point for that one I don't believe there is just name so the thing that I'm concerned about it is I don't want to ultimately leave defeatists for left-wing populist Falls that are overwhelmingly popular I want people to acknowledge and recognize that a lot of these left ideas are actually really popular and oftentimes we'll just kind of run away from them and act like well obviously the right is correct and their framing and we need to pretend like they're not for Medicare for all because we don't want to lose an election but the reality is we look at the polling data seventy percent of the American people are for Medicare for all [Applause] it's not the Democratic Party it seems now I would say this is the the the average Democrat running for Congress I think that's embraced at least nominally medicare-for-all let's say joe Manchin for example just to use his keep using his example let's say you came out tomorrow for Medicare for all and as you guys know me he would consider it okay so let's say he actually gives a hard yes on it do you think that will help them in what's going to do the politics necessary for there to be a difference between the difference between 50 and 49 is exponential when we're talking about the policies that all of us up here are advocating the difference between 50 United States senators and 40 million United States senators is huge and so my only point is that whatever politics mobily joe Manchin has to do to come back we need Joe Manchin right there because we need that deep from West Virginia we want to move towards you know a socialistic policy why focus on the joe Manchin's as opposed to let's say the chuck schumer's and i would be reliably safe blue state should there be you know and there's there's two things that separate leaders which actually one is the argument is do politics very with all this money would seem in terms of the past thirty Republican judges which is skated through chuck Grassley bulldozer the facile versus versus the the question of like is he for somebody with money makes of a blue stain sufficiently to the left to pull that over to the window or the center of the dinner party to the left reliably again that's when we fight these battles the general election once known as a nomination so for instance you have to keep in mind that one of the most important one of the most important factors in being a competitor in politics is may recognition and media attention and it's incredible the type of block game that new candidates have to deal with when it comes to the media didn't word out about what you know what they advocate for what they stand for what they're running on so that was an issue that [Applause] [Applause] [Applause] [Applause] example a perfect example of this and I think that citizens united is like one of the worst things to ever happen into the United States of America however we were talking about good candidates winning races being able to achieve that level of media attention good candidates being able to win in those primaries when I say I'm not a fan of unilateral disarmament I don't want to take away resources from them right I want to make sure that Bernie did it I heard somebody that cover Bernie did it correct but we can count on one hand or two hands how many candidates have been able to actually do that and so while we well democracy we also here are advocating for very similar positions on the left and I think the only difference we have on that we have on stages I want to actually make sure that individual get elected to implement that change and it's not just the platform that people are running on I want them to have the resources necessary it's actually get to the finish line and win because then they can get them at the platform that we're talking about by team ASE one in a blue district with 25,000 votes right and that is very important replicated across the country but it's obviously possible in certain areas for anything they build upon if we build upon our successes let me ask this I got one fact I got a drop on everybody first directly it directly relates to this so there was a great honor on intercept that came out last week there are four Congress people right now who don't take corporate equity after the next election there's going to be over 40 saying we're not going to take your BS anymore that's what's moving the party and I think this shows that you when you tell the people I'm not disagreeing with that I am I am saying though that if you are in a poor rural area right now you're running to give somebody who's been established and been there for 20 years right and it's taking money from advance American name all the bad actors that you could possibly make right from payday lending to private prisons etc etc and you're in this poor area yes you tell your constituency then did you tell them that you have these grassroots activists that believe in it right and people are giving you all they hat I'm just telling you that there are certain parts in this country where all they have will still not be enough to we're all set we're also living in a fairly energized tongue and the Russ Feingold and if there was ever a a poster senator for not taking it was so so the idea is it is definitely possible the fact that 40 members of the house theoretically could be in Congress come November January we're not taking that we see money where you know it's going to state Senate races as well as hopefully it's both sustainable and not that's because they don't report we don't know they don't abort theoretically could become a senator from Texas and not only be concerned you know the issues not just how he raised money to get that sleep but how his opponent six years from now how much money they're able and how much money's going to be spent during that time you can talk to any senator right there's nothing this gets back to that represents the people and democratic values the more likely they are to get elected even in red districts despite everything you've been told propaganda [Applause] somebody ran in 2010 somebody we ran in 2014 that is not propaganda so these races that people are running the race that Doug Jones ran in Alabama was a very hyper local race they focused on Alabama issues right because that's how and he still barely won he won because of Selma when he came in late in the middle of the night and so that's actually my point is that these things are very very difficult that's why again to piggyback on what you were saying how litmus test and you actually gave a good litmus to this litmus test are not have that people who fit their districts and I think that that is the whole debt that is important first and foremost that's where you just take a joe manchin that's it well the point is is that none of us live in West Virginia experience in terms of like Linda's best recharging water are largely irrelevant in the sense that like okay I mean there's nothing I can have a little you know beyond [Applause] but we don't want that elected pretty much everyone in the country people who not voted for Trump or on his side yes right Google wanted change and we kept getting 5% change we kept getting incremental change the Affordable Care Act dismantled they have not dismantled it though there are there are millions of people in this country because a Medicaid expansion law that you get from the Affordable Care Act does now have health insurance we have lilly Ledbetter which was passed in his first this legacy of an individual before they had the plan of majority for two years battle-ax dry fruits of use in the house in the house and say you actually have the Affordable Care Act you have people who are now covered I mean did you know that c-section that means c-sections were not covered by Blue Cross and Blue Shield because they meant to be a pre-existing condition so to say the incremental to say that incremental change is is a [Applause] there are still 20 million Americans who are uninsured we're dealing with unaffordable premiums we're dealing with unaffordable deductibles I should know as someone who has good insurance but still have to pay $3,000 an out-of-pocket shoulder surgery we could have accomplished more that's what I'm saying if Republicans what Republicans have people you see what they do is we ready a hero though we're the Democrats and I think it's it's very hard to present the counterfactual that without without the ACA you would be at this point or not it's very difficult to sort of make that assessment I'm not sure I got a bet no I can tell you as someone who my distinct your Lieberman is unrivaled but perhaps anybody breathing air today and Joe Lieberman was not going to go that much further there's there's I think there is an argument that the Democrats would be more aggressive on doing the stuff of reconciliation and whatnot but the durability of the ACA and I think the ACA part was oversold the patient protections like we're talking about pre-existing conditions are durable enough that you're Republicans who are running all those genes they're simultaneously doing a lawsuit to try and take them away which is problematic for them because you have like I say almost every Democrat running for Congress in the country maybe 80% is running all that very thing and and so from a political standpoint I think there's two things that happen one that we have that baseline that was moved up a little bit and we had other groups that have come in and we had against the the lack of aggressiveness that are filling the groups like justice Democrats like the DSA are silly 18 months I'm sorry [Applause] [Applause] [Applause] [Applause] politicians who lose that there is a central Politburo exploiting the leaders of all these Democratic politicians as opposed to them all acting in their own interests or out of their own counties or whatever it is there's no one entity that controls these people so there's no lobbyists are pretty because if a politician reasons they don't go back if you can show me what I mean this has been said a lot about corporate interest and all this other stuff is related to Barack Obama but I want everyone to understand that the largest gains we've made when he came to criminal justice reform Barack Obama the ban of the DOJ actually doing business in contracting for for-profit prisons actually happened under the Laurentian brock obama this would say this was been a good panel to do the legacy of obama I think there's some relevant to do it but I think you know a lot of what we see here is a function of frustration on some level just better not but we've got another question listen for the sake of any questions possible question two sentences the premise in order to design of the country from the right what do you think how do you think Democrats should respond to the to the procedural war that's been for the past another sensation felt on the courses actually played the game very well was very brief I mean reasons everybody came now we're talking about proceeding and there's nobody can put this in it enough and was able to push through things like hello my name's No Mas my question is you call for socialist policies within our Democratic Democratic Republic and announce centralized power of multinational corporations housing increasing clunky governance and socialist policies going to protect the average American when the commonality to big government and big corporations is that big equals back you two-thirds of this room if we were a general human population would be living in poverty in our retirement or not for Social Security [Applause] oh listen you would be you also you may be richer than the rest of the world I'm talking about in America yeah when Social Security was you are not to the population social social insurance when you get to you have insurance that the event some tragedy happens you the entrepreneurial state how much money our federal government invests in private companies private corporations so just to give you one quick example of that our federal government actually gave you on Maas five billion dollars [Applause] but you can't vomit when is that we can't get to a point where you would you would overrule the citizens united for example or anything like that until you actually have the votes [Applause] [Applause] [Applause] I was wondering how we could bring the attention using the argument of socialism against the incremental change that we all hate including me especially what we saw how horribly the Democrats botched up their chances to upgrade doc up being a doctor recipient myself is there a way to brings attention through to issues like that using socialism the Democrats in a fight they identified say no no no they didn't fight for it Rock City no they did Chuck Schumer took a promise from Mitch my freaking car [Applause] that was technically the stupidest but in December of 2017 the Republicans were looking at a nightmare of a December and Chuck to run into plus you walked in and took we'll take a couple things off point to you and I think that was that was probably I think again [Applause] [Applause] it's kind of the writers kind of dug himself into a little hole when it comes to socialism because they for eight years every single day they woke up in like brocco bombers associates you're a social is your socialism in an option stick and anywhere none of it all makes a mention but what happened was what happened was we saw and stock market go from six thousand twenty thousand we saw income levels rise among all demographic groups we saw unemployment rate for all demographic groups cut in half and so when people started raining in him in the socialist of socialist of socialist even you saw this economy just grow it boom now people like wait a minute he's a moderate Republican the bottom line to I think is that we are far enough away from what people who grew up with the Cold War proceed you know socialism was what was used a dirty word word was further out from that I I should [Applause] [Applause] so my question is for the shelter sellout so earlier we were talking about Joe Manchin and the impact that he has right now so if the both I would have made their life a living hell unless they know because I'm here to fight for the American people I mean you might have hated when he really went off the reservation after he was it's more disciplined in terms of final democratic party but if I'm buying by the Democratic army like but people protofilaments and what people are holding on I think like you know ultimately as the party moves to the left it's much easier to discipline but you imagine once he's in office you know yes Joe Manchin will definitely be somewhat problematic if the Democrats take over but the idea is that you've got to have enough ballast so that joe Manchin becomes irrelevant and I think when you think long term my whole point could be some down to this [Applause] I want to be in super 129 so that we can start when she saw me coming you want you know those two sitting on this is we gotta be gonna end it here for 30 I don't know can we treat [Applause] [Applause] [Applause] [Applause] [Applause] [Applause]




Comments
  1. Don't do litmus tests for social issues. Only do them for economic issues. For ex: no litmus test for abortion but have litmus test for Medicare for all

  2. Basic, essential medical care should be under single payer system, the rest of services should be under private insurance.

  3. The audio sucks so much that it must be a preview of Socialized _________ (Fill in the Blank) And it will also certainly suck.

  4. All of them except for kyle are corporate fake liberals, especially bakari sellers. i used to like ana but not anymore. I used to watch the young turks but since after the last election, I stopped watching them, tyt are the new msnbc for sure. I don't blame jimmy dore for not going at all.

  5. I live in Canada which is capitalist with a welfare state and Im young with my single mom and 2 other sisters we live perfectly comfortably while my mom doesn't have a job all a socialist government would do is inflate the currency which would make our welfare check be worth less or they would raise taxes witch would cause divestment hurting the middle and upper class there is no argument for socialism in a capitalist country with a safety net its blind ideology

  6. Why would I be interested in a panel about socialism without a single socialist present? Also, shit audio.

  7. Poor audio makes it difficult to appreciate how ridiculous this panel was, or mis-titled. There were a couple of social democrats present but no socialists per se — and why were Kos and Bakari Sellers on the panel at all, when they obsessively sabotage progressives?

    Sam was a poor moderator. Why is Sellers wasting precious time defending corporate donors and Joe Manchin, and scolding us for criticizing Obama, yet David Pakman hardly said a word?!

    For better audio check out CSPAN: https://www.c-span.org/video/?452931-4/politicon-discussion-democratic-socialism

    Kyle did a decent job but the panel composition was total bullshit.

  8. Not sure I'm wild about the framing here. Control of the means of production by the working class is the original socialism. If someone is for government or corporate control of the means of production: they're not socialist.

  9. Politicon has the worst sound techs and mixers. Why is the crowd louder than the panel? The panel sounds like they are in a barrel.

  10. I admire the amount these people care when it is obvious no one in power gives a sh*t about their opinions. The USA was bought and paid for a long time ago and within the next few decades will continue to get worse and eventually be a land of complete poverty, if it isn't almost there already.

  11. the actual topic being stayed on was doomed from the start by not having even one actual socialist on the panel, still interesting

  12. I feel like this panel didn't really address the question of whether the left "should be socialists".

  13. I like how the Pink Shirt Guy says "Manchin would have voted no on Kavanaugh if Collins Voted No." As if it was a positive.

  14. As a social democrat lefty, I've come to respect conservatives more than liberals (still not much respect in the end). They're all liars, manipulators, and users…but at least the conservatives have spines. We need to push the weasels and schemers out of the Democratic party.

  15. Dang they aren't loud enough can't hear a damn thing the only time I can hear anything is when the crowd chears.

  16. lmao at americans cheering for socialism as soon as they hear “legalise weed” – yall getting in a shit hole by wanting socialism. coming from a post socialist country.. wow unbelievable someone actually wants it

  17. All of their understanding of socialism is terrible, the concept that labour is the source of all value is completely absent from the discussion and the need for a militantly organized working class is the only way to achieve socialism in our lifetime

  18. This host is terrible. He overrides every opinion the pannel puts forward if he doesn't like it. It's meant to be a discusion and he shuts down every discusion the panel goes on.
    I've heart more minutes of the host rambeling than most of the pannel combined.

  19. Kyle was awesome as usual, Sam was the best moderator for this panel— wish Pakman got more room to talk.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *