In theory yes. In reality all socialist systems had surprisingly few changes of leadership after one guy rose to power of the “socialist” movement or party

There are numerous reasons for this. Stability in protecting revolution and genuine popular support are among the larger and more important reasons.

And they don’t really seem to trust their citizens to be socialist without a lot of fear, censorship, spying, silencing critics…

Neither are Capitalist states, and neither was Marx. Combatting international Capitalist influence was and is key for retaining Socialism.

It’s almost as if the majority of humans reject socialism. Which is weird but true.

Not true at all, actually. Those controlling the media want you to think it though.

DemSoc itself is a bad term. It either is used to refer to Reformist Socialism (which is an impossibility and thus akin to astrology) or to pretend Marxist Socialism isn’t democratic, advocating for factionalism and other possibilities of Socialism itself being destroyed by international moneyed interests and domestic wreckers.

Developing for the future, what a wild concept!

Yep, hopefully their solar production forces mass adoption among other nations and we can get back on track to mitigate environmental damage.

Yep, taking one of the most populous countries on the planet and judging it by total emissions is ludicrous, plus the PRC is drastically improving solar panel production and infrastructure. If the world was set to the same environmental standards as the PRC we wouldn’t have nearly as much worry.

Alright, next we have the blue team, which is the opposite of all those things, at the exceedingly high cost of… getting cockblocked by the red team when they try to implement those things… and… well there was that time Bill lied about getting a blowjob- outrageous! Surely the red team does a better job of keeping it in their pants… *checks* …uhh, nope! Fuck, I’m starting to become aware of my own cognitive dissonance and it feels like absolute shit.

The DNC isn’t to the opposite of the GOP, they are aligned on the vast majority of issues and use the rest to yap loudly in disagreement. Dems aren’t left.

During all ^that I wandered into the military which gave me access to all kinds of socialized resources which have enabled me to get where I’m at now and have made a pretty significant improvement on my life.

Social programs aren’t socialized, that’s a bit of a misnomer.

It’s 100% awful, it’s just a continuation of Nazi ideology.

It’s pretty cut and dry that the original Zionists were anti-yiddish anti-Communist anti-semites that allied with prominent anti-semites against diaspora in order to pursue their settler-colonial project, which the Nazis gleefully worked for.

Yep, correlation, not causation. Getting older doesn’t cause it.

No, there really isn’t. The Nazis collaborated with the founding Zionists, Israel has always been a genocidal settler-colonial project and Germany has retained support of it.

The larger the shadow grows, the more people turn to Socialism.

No, I have a lot of experience in liberal organizations and they are not, despite the memes, closer to conservatism than progressivism.

Perhaps if you redefine progressivism.

The major differences between a liberal and a social democrat or progressive comes down largely to deciding when a market has failed and when to use government intervention, both Liberals and progressives are fine with intervention, only the threshold changea. We want the same things, mostly, but disagree on how to get them.

Yep, you redefined it.

Conservatives, philosophical Conservatives anyway, won’t typically even consider such a thing, and often do not even want the same things as Liberals or progressives.

Conservatives often do, and the distance between genuine progressivism and liberalism is shorter than liberalism and conservativism.

This both sides same stuff just hurts progressive causes, because it sours mushy people with little to no real philosophy on voting for liberal parties. Those people flip flop back to Conservatives when they get angry and we lose the progress we’ve made, as is about to happen in Canada.

Electoralism will not save you.

Conservatives are a subcategory of liberal. They aren’t conflated, that’s like saying thumbs and fingers get conflated.

How’d you get a picture of me?

Per Capita?

Yes, they are rapidly developing and increasing percentages of their overall power comes from renewables, especially Solar, which they have invested tons of money into R&D to make scaling that economical.

Yes, they have a Dictatorship of the Proletariat that carefully manages and plans a market economy in a transitional socialist state.

But first we have to get rid of capitalism and institute democratic socialist planning.

All strains of Socialism are democratic, it’s a bit redundant to include unless you’re trying to emphasize the democratic factor as opposed to our current system.