Socialism: What do we do now?

[Aguaria Major]

And also, the best way to ring back socialism is just to let the fascists who are gaining power (like Donald Trump or the many Neo-Nazi movements in Europe) get it and fail, so people clamor for the opposite. I hate to say it, but that is the only way I think people will see the good of socialism.

[Sanctissima]

What the Hell are you talking about? There actually are, despite the introduction to this forum, socialist nations, by definition, that exist in the world today (Sweden, Norway, Finland, Denmark, Germany), and they have some of the lowest death tolls, and highest standards of living, in the world today.

I'd rather not have to pay a 50% income tax, or live in one of the rape capitals of Europe, thank you very much.

[Wysten]

And also, the best way to ring back socialism is just to let the fascists who are gaining power (like Donald Trump or the many Neo-Nazi movements in Europe) get it and fail, so people clamor for the opposite. I hate to say it, but that is the only way I think people will see the good of socialism.

1. No matter how much you hate Trump he is not a fascist
2. The neo Nazi groups in Europe are small (unless your the type that belives all right wingers are Nazis)
3. It's going to take a lot more than that for peole en masse clamor for socialism specially after Venezuela.

[Democratic Communist Federation]

And also, the best way to ring back socialism is just to let the fascists who are gaining power (like Donald Trump or the many Neo-Nazi movements in Europe) get it and fail, so people clamor for the opposite. I hate to say it, but that is the only way I think people will see the good of socialism.

I hope you are right (though I don't think that Trump is quite enough on the ball to be a fascist). On the other hand, people do get desensitized rather easily.

[Aguaria Major]

What the Hell are you talking about? There actually are, despite the introduction to this forum, socialist nations, by definition, that exist in the world today (Sweden, Norway, Finland, Denmark, Germany), and they have some of the lowest death tolls, and highest standards of living, in the world today.

I'd rather not have to pay a 50% income tax, or live in one of the rape capitals of Europe, thank you very much.

And where would that be?

[Aguaria Major]

And also, the best way to ring back socialism is just to let the fascists who are gaining power (like Donald Trump or the many Neo-Nazi movements in Europe) get it and fail, so people clamor for the opposite. I hate to say it, but that is the only way I think people will see the good of socialism.

1. No matter how much you hate Trump he is not a fascist
2. The neo Nazi groups in Europe are small (unless your the type that belives all right wingers are Nazis)
3. It's going to take a lot more than that for peole en masse clamor for socialism specially after Venezuela.

1. Here is Merriam Webster's definition of Fascism, which you can check for direct quotation here - https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fascism:
often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition

Even if Trump hasn't managed to get any of these things done, he has openly stated, on multiple occasions, his commitment to several, if not all of these principles. So he is a fascist in belief, if not an incompetent one.

2. They may be small, but statistically, only about 30% of the entire US population (including those who didn't vote, as percentages of support in voter turnout are skewed, due to the fact that only about 60% of the nation actually votes, even in big national elections) supports/supported Trump, constituting a small group, yet here he is in power. All it takes is for someone, in the case of the US, this being Russia, to cheat democratic institutions, and you'll have people like that in power, even if they are small. obviously all right-wingers are Nazis. In fact, most people on the alt-right aren't the Aryan-master-race types, but what I will dispute with you about are the facts that, based on the above definition, the right wing is now represented most publicly, even if these don't constitute their majority. by fascists.

3. That issue is localized. Across the entire world, however, I think you're sadly mistaken.

[Wysten]

1. No matter how much you hate Trump he is not a fascist
2. The neo Nazi groups in Europe are small (unless your the type that belives all right wingers are Nazis)
3. It's going to take a lot more than that for peole en masse clamor for socialism specially after Venezuela.

1. Here is Merriam Webster's definition of Fascism, which you can check for direct quotation here - https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fascism:
often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition

Even if Trump hasn't managed to get any of these things done, he has openly stated, on multiple occasions, his commitment to several, if not all of these principles. So he is a fascist in belief, if not an incompetent one.

2. They may be small, but statistically, only about 30% of the entire US population (including those who didn't vote, as percentages of support in voter turnout are skewed, due to the fact that only about 60% of the nation actually votes, even in big national elections) supports/supported Trump, constituting a small group, yet here he is in power. All it takes is for someone, in the case of the US, this being Russia, to cheat democratic institutions, and you'll have people like that in power, even if they are small. obviously all right-wingers are Nazis. In fact, most people on the alt-right aren't the Aryan-master-race types, but what I will dispute with you about are the facts that, based on the above definition, the right wing is now represented most publicly, even if these don't constitute their majority. by fascists.

3. That issue is localized. Across the entire world, however, I think you're sadly mistaken.

When has he ever said 1. Also there is no evidence of Russian conclusion also that is current not on the election. 3 when people think of socialism what are they going to think the bread lines in Venezuela or people just throwing food out the window saying "Everything is free"

[War Gears]

1. Here is Merriam Webster's definition of Fascism, which you can check for direct quotation here - https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fascism:
often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition

Dictionaries are not reliable sources when it comes to summarizing complex political theory, and however ignorant he may be, it is not an accurate description of Donald Trump. He probably hasn't even dreamed of the repression and social engineering characteristic of the Fascist state, much less put it into action. If you want regimes who fulfilled the qualifications of Fascist, look at the Soviet Union, Maoist China, and other Marxist-Leninist regimes.

[Aguaria Major]

1. Here is Merriam Webster's definition of Fascism, which you can check for direct quotation here - https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fascism:
often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition

Even if Trump hasn't managed to get any of these things done, he has openly stated, on multiple occasions, his commitment to several, if not all of these principles. So he is a fascist in belief, if not an incompetent one.

2. They may be small, but statistically, only about 30% of the entire US population (including those who didn't vote, as percentages of support in voter turnout are skewed, due to the fact that only about 60% of the nation actually votes, even in big national elections) supports/supported Trump, constituting a small group, yet here he is in power. All it takes is for someone, in the case of the US, this being Russia, to cheat democratic institutions, and you'll have people like that in power, even if they are small. obviously all right-wingers are Nazis. In fact, most people on the alt-right aren't the Aryan-master-race types, but what I will dispute with you about are the facts that, based on the above definition, the right wing is now represented most publicly, even if these don't constitute their majority. by fascists.

3. That issue is localized. Across the entire world, however, I think you're sadly mistaken.

When has he ever said 1. Also there is no evidence of Russian conclusion also that is current not on the election. 3 when people think of socialism what are they going to think the bread lines in Venezuela or people just throwing food out the window saying "Everything is free"

1. He has exalted race above the individual in every single one of his racist comments and the Muslim ban, which took individuals' freedoms based on their race, for the prejudiced belief in American Exceptionalism, thus qualifying for exaltation of nation above individual, he has no idea of the workings of the US government and has tried to act as an autocrat with all of his meaningless executive orders and proposals to Congress, thinking it is the job of the President to be an autocrat, and thus a dictator, and tried to sick the secret service on opposition, particularly those involved in incriminating Russian collusion, qualifying for forcible suppression of opposition. He maybe hasn't called for severe economic and social regimentation, but that's 4/5 qualifications.

2. Even with the email chain between Donald Jr. and a lawyer from the frickin' Kremlin that revealed the exchange of foreign evidence between the 2 parties that would help Trump, in the opinion of the lawyer? If that isn't collusion, what the Hell is? I'm not even going to mention the fact that multiple states have been discovered to have had their electoral boards hacked by the Russians to influence the election...

3. Or they'll think of ultra-high-standards Scandinavia, some true socialists, as opposed to the state-capitalism put forth by the Venezuelans.

[Aguaria Major]

Dictionaries are not reliable sources when it comes to summarizing complex political theory, and however ignorant he may be, it is not an accurate description of Donald Trump. He probably hasn't even dreamed of the repression and social engineering characteristic of the Fascist state, much less put it into action. If you want regimes who fulfilled the qualifications of Fascist, look at the Soviet Union, Maoist China, and other Marxist-Leninist regimes.

Well then, what the Hell is? The job of a dictionary, which has literal years of research and planning put into it for every word entry, is to do exactly that. And if you don't trust the most reliable sources in the world for what they're designed to give, I guarantee you that definition, or something similar, is what any political professor, or any non-dictionary source will give when asked, "what is Fascism?" And it is actually pretty accurate, if you look at what he actually believes, which you can see examples of in the last post I put up. Who are you to say what he has and hasn't thought of? But given his tendencies listed again in the above comment to show his accordance with Fascism, it's more likely he has. I don't dispute all of those regimes were Fascist, as they and other Marxist-Leninist regimes, as it were, abandoned the true ideology once they were in power. So don't think I', somehow a proponent of the sham-communism they put forward.

[Secundus Imperium Romanum]

I've always held that the best way to start is flooding the streets with the blood of the upper class. After that we can figure out where to go from there

"socialism is peaceful on behalf of all"
pls destroy itself

[War Gears]

Well then, what the Hell is?

Cited academic works written by historians, political theorists, and other scholars. I can list a number off the tip of my tongue. Sternhall, Payne, Gregor, Griffin, etc.

The job of a dictionary, which has literal years of research and planning put into it for every word entry, is to do exactly that.

Dictionaries are an abbreviated reflection of a currently accepted use of a term, they're less reliable and detailed than encyclopedias which themselves are not the best of sources.

Who are you to say what he has and hasn't thought of?

Someone who can see the simple fact that the degenerate media mogul & liberal individualist has absolutely no reason to support a totalitarian state which tries to modify the very thoughts of it's citizens. Like people have no reason to believe Obama has ever considered nationalizing property and inaugurating the new dictatorship of the proletariat. He could have, but the odds are so astronomically low it's safe to say it isn't the case.

But given his tendencies listed again in the above comment to show his accordance with Fascism, it's more likely he has. I .

No, it is not. Trump is not a corporatist, or a syndicalist, or a supporter of totalitarianism. He's not even a proto-fascist like Maurras or Kita.

[Wysten]

When has he ever said 1. Also there is no evidence of Russian conclusion also that is current not on the election. 3 when people think of socialism what are they going to think the bread lines in Venezuela or people just throwing food out the window saying "Everything is free"

1. He has exalted race above the individual in every single one of his racist comments and the Muslim ban, which took individuals' freedoms based on their race, for the prejudiced belief in American Exceptionalism, thus qualifying for exaltation of nation above individual, he has no idea of the workings of the US government and has tried to act as an autocrat with all of his meaningless executive orders and proposals to Congress, thinking it is the job of the President to be an autocrat, and thus a dictator, and tried to sick the secret service on opposition, particularly those involved in incriminating Russian collusion, qualifying for forcible suppression of opposition. He maybe hasn't called for severe economic and social regimentation, but that's 4/5 qualifications.

2. Even with the email chain between Donald Jr. and a lawyer from the frickin' Kremlin that revealed the exchange of foreign evidence between the 2 parties that would help Trump, in the opinion of the lawyer? If that isn't collusion, what the Hell is? I'm not even going to mention the fact that multiple states have been discovered to have had their electoral boards hacked by the Russians to influence the election...

3. Or they'll think of ultra-high-standards Scandinavia, some true socialists, as opposed to the state-capitalism put forth by the Venezuelans.

Scandinavia is going bankrupt and has one of the highest tax rates also its not a Muslim ban its a travel ban if he wanted to target Muslims why didn't he target Indonesia. He only targeted one nation on the top 10 most populated Muslim countries and that way Iran and Iran isn't all that great. That is not collusion that is attempted collusion and is not illegal in US law. So being proud of your country is racist? Also cant mention a failing socialist country with a "Not True Scotsman".

[War Gears]

Nordic democracies are capitalist, they're known for combining laissez faire capitalism with tripartite corporatism.

In other words, not socialist.

[Autonomous Titoists]

Nordic democracies are capitalist, they're known for combining laissez faire capitalism with tripartite corporatism.

In other words, not socialist.

Thank you. For literally everything. Dictionaries are horrible interpretations of complex political theory, or any theoretical anything. You beat me to the punch.

[Saiwania]

I'd rather not have to pay a 50% income tax, or live in one of the rape capitals of Europe, thank you very much.

I'm not sure how European countries do taxes, but at least so far as the US tax code goes- if you're wealthy enough to fall into a higher income tax bracket, you don't actually wind up paying half or more of your entire income for a given year. Instead, what the IRS does is break your income up into "chunks" where each part of your income that falls into a certain tax bracket gets the equivalent tax rate, and not the higher rate across the board.

As one example- someone makes $80,000 a year, for the first $9,325 they pay 10% on that for $932.50, on the next $28,625 they pay 15% on that for $4,293.75, on the next $42,050 they pay 25% on that for $10,512.50, the taxes for each bracket are then added up.

Their total tax bill for the year on $80,000 would come out to $17,137.50, which would make their effective tax rate a little over 21% if we don't take any deductions into account. Anyone who chooses to not make more money under the mistaken belief that they'll "have to pay more in taxes" is pretty much just shooting themselves in the foot.

[Aguaria Major]

1. He has exalted race above the individual in every single one of his racist comments and the Muslim ban, which took individuals' freedoms based on their race, for the prejudiced belief in American Exceptionalism, thus qualifying for exaltation of nation above individual, he has no idea of the workings of the US government and has tried to act as an autocrat with all of his meaningless executive orders and proposals to Congress, thinking it is the job of the President to be an autocrat, and thus a dictator, and tried to sick the secret service on opposition, particularly those involved in incriminating Russian collusion, qualifying for forcible suppression of opposition. He maybe hasn't called for severe economic and social regimentation, but that's 4/5 qualifications.

2. Even with the email chain between Donald Jr. and a lawyer from the frickin' Kremlin that revealed the exchange of foreign evidence between the 2 parties that would help Trump, in the opinion of the lawyer? If that isn't collusion, what the Hell is? I'm not even going to mention the fact that multiple states have been discovered to have had their electoral boards hacked by the Russians to influence the election...

3. Or they'll think of ultra-high-standards Scandinavia, some true socialists, as opposed to the state-capitalism put forth by the Venezuelans.

Scandinavia is going bankrupt and has one of the highest tax rates also its not a Muslim ban its a travel ban if he wanted to target Muslims why didn't he target Indonesia. He only targeted one nation on the top 10 most populated Muslim countries and that way Iran and Iran isn't all that great. That is not collusion that is attempted collusion and is not illegal in US law. So being proud of your country is racist? Also cant mention a failing socialist country with a "Not True Scotsman".

Yes, but that is because of the rest of the EU, most notably Greece for this next example, and their mega-corporation juntas. it is because these countries had LOTS of revenue, and were members of an organization pledged to helping the rest of its members, thus forcing to, and bailed out an ENTIRE NATION, as well as a significant portion of the GDPs of others, like Spain. so now they don't have any more money. The whole principle that a country goes bankrupt if it is socialist makes absolutely no sense. If they take high percentages of everyone's income, the nations themselves have more money. It's only when state-capitalists like the corrupt Venezuelans, only calling themselves socialist or communist, blow all the revenue on themselves rather than economic projects, that socialist or communist nations go bankrupt. But that is not what Scandinavia is doing. It is only a travel-ban in theory, as he restricted countries, and not overtly people, but if you look at the percentage of people in those countries who are Muslim, some of them being over 95%, and none falling below 86% Muslims, in principle it might as well be a Muslim ban. And also, given Trump's overtly racist comments about Mexicans and Muslims before his election, even if this is not overtly stated in the ban's purpose, you don't have to be a political science major to guess that these sentiments and the actions of this ban are related. Indonesia and Iran weren't targeted, however, because a microscopic number of their population immigrates to the US when you compare the numbers from the 7 on his ban. Just with this list of nations, he was able to target over 90% of Muslim immigrants to this country. And there's also probably the fact that he doesn't know Indonesia is majority Muslim, or probably where it even is. It is only attempted collusion if the Kremlin guy didn't actually give Trump Jr. the information. But he did. And you may argue that this had no effect on the outcome of the election, but regardless of whether or not it helped Trump win, law is all about intent, and any collusion committed with a hostile foreign power in attempt to do anything is illegal. He broke the law. period. No, but using being proud of your country as an excuse to target specific religions and races, like Trump is doing with Muslims and Mexicans, is. Not sure what that last thing is referencing.

[Democratic Communist Federation]

Even if Trump hasn't managed to get any of these things done, he has openly stated, on multiple occasions, his commitment to several, if not all of these principles. So he is a fascist in belief, if not an incompetent one.

Trump is clearly a demogogue. However, Trump appears to live by the motto, Make me (and, if you have time, my family) great, not make America great again. Trump is a corporatist, IMO, not a nationalist.

[Wysten]

Scandinavia is going bankrupt and has one of the highest tax rates also its not a Muslim ban its a travel ban if he wanted to target Muslims why didn't he target Indonesia. He only targeted one nation on the top 10 most populated Muslim countries and that way Iran and Iran isn't all that great. That is not collusion that is attempted collusion and is not illegal in US law. So being proud of your country is racist? Also cant mention a failing socialist country with a "Not True Scotsman".

Yes, but that is because of the rest of the EU, most notably Greece for this next example, and their mega-corporation juntas. it is because these countries had LOTS of revenue, and were members of an organization pledged to helping the rest of its members, thus forcing to, and bailed out an ENTIRE NATION, as well as a significant portion of the GDPs of others, like Spain. so now they don't have any more money. The whole principle that a country goes bankrupt if it is socialist makes absolutely no sense. If they take high percentages of everyone's income, the nations themselves have more money. It's only when state-capitalists like the corrupt Venezuelans, only calling themselves socialist or communist, blow all the revenue on themselves rather than economic projects, that socialist or communist nations go bankrupt. But that is not what Scandinavia is doing. It is only a travel-ban in theory, as he restricted countries, and not overtly people, but if you look at the percentage of people in those countries who are Muslim, some of them being over 95%, and none falling below 86% Muslims, in principle it might as well be a Muslim ban. And also, given Trump's overtly racist comments about Mexicans and Muslims before his election, even if this is not overtly stated in the ban's purpose, you don't have to be a political science major to guess that these sentiments and the actions of this ban are related. Indonesia and Iran weren't targeted, however, because a microscopic number of their population immigrates to the US when you compare the numbers from the 7 on his ban. Just with this list of nations, he was able to target over 90% of Muslim immigrants to this country. And there's also probably the fact that he doesn't know Indonesia is majority Muslim, or probably where it even is. It is only attempted collusion if the Kremlin guy didn't actually give Trump Jr. the information. But he did. And you may argue that this had no effect on the outcome of the election, but regardless of whether or not it helped Trump win, law is all about intent, and any collusion committed with a hostile foreign power in attempt to do anything is illegal. He broke the law. period. No, but using being proud of your country as an excuse to target specific religions and races, like Trump is doing with Muslims and Mexicans, is. Not sure what that last thing is referencing.

You deny Venezuela is not socialist country it's not true socialism.

[Aguaria Major]

Well then, what the Hell is?

Cited academic works written by historians, political theorists, and other scholars. I can list a number off the tip of my tongue. Sternhall, Payne, Gregor, Griffin, etc.

The job of a dictionary, which has literal years of research and planning put into it for every word entry, is to do exactly that.

Dictionaries are an abbreviated reflection of a currently accepted use of a term, they're less reliable and detailed than encyclopedias which themselves are not the best of sources.

Who are you to say what he has and hasn't thought of?

Someone who can see the simple fact that the degenerate media mogul & liberal individualist has absolutely no reason to support a totalitarian state which tries to modify the very thoughts of it's citizens. Like people have no reason to believe Obama has ever considered nationalizing property and inaugurating the new dictatorship of the proletariat. He could have, but the odds are so astronomically low it's safe to say it isn't the case.

But given his tendencies listed again in the above comment to show his accordance with Fascism, it's more likely he has. I .

No, it is not. Trump is not a corporatist, or a syndicalist, or a supporter of totalitarianism. He's not even a proto-fascist like Maurras or Kita.

OK then, so if you won't listen to dictionaries, encyclopedias, or anything that even has the least bit of commonality, colloquialism, or societal acceptance contained within its binding or data bases, how do those guys define it? I guarantee it will be extremely similar to that dictionary definition. I'm serious. Tell me what each and every one of those people says about what Fascism is. Whether or not you believe in dictionaries still doesn't change a word's actual meaning based on who has, in this case, actually practiced Fascism, and that dictionary definition is pretty close to capturing all the aspects of it, when I combine everything I know about Nazi Germany, Mussolini's Italy, the USSR, or any of the other in-name-only Marxist-Leninist countries you listed before. So unless you find something to counter that that is what Fascism is, regardless of the source, please stop arguing that that definition is somehow invalid just because it comes from a non-specialized source. "Liberal individualist"? He definitely is not that, given he is so in favor of laws and executive orders that limit one's personal freedoms, like all this revived war-on-drugs crap, his Muslim Travel ban, his attacks on Planned Parenthood, his health-care bill that will deny people their right to medical coverage, and in some cases, due to some patients' lack of affordability for life-saving procedures, life, and his belief that all members of one religion should wear identification badges. Granted, that will never pass due to the fact the courts will strike it down immediately, but whether or not someone is an anything-ist is all about belief, and Trump definitely believes in this. If he has no reason to support totalitarian though modification, why does he try to convince everyone that media outlet who disagrees with him or paints him in a "negative light", is wrong, and why does he keep going on about how we need more and more centralization, and try to keep acting without the consent of Congress? The latter half of this question could also go double as a response for, "he is not a supporter of totalitarianism". If he isn't a corporatist, then why does he keep deregulating their restrictions, or trying to? I never said he was a syndicalist, don't put words in my mouth.

[Aguaria Major]

Yes, but that is because of the rest of the EU, most notably Greece for this next example, and their mega-corporation juntas. it is because these countries had LOTS of revenue, and were members of an organization pledged to helping the rest of its members, thus forcing to, and bailed out an ENTIRE NATION, as well as a significant portion of the GDPs of others, like Spain. so now they don't have any more money. The whole principle that a country goes bankrupt if it is socialist makes absolutely no sense. If they take high percentages of everyone's income, the nations themselves have more money. It's only when state-capitalists like the corrupt Venezuelans, only calling themselves socialist or communist, blow all the revenue on themselves rather than economic projects, that socialist or communist nations go bankrupt. But that is not what Scandinavia is doing. It is only a travel-ban in theory, as he restricted countries, and not overtly people, but if you look at the percentage of people in those countries who are Muslim, some of them being over 95%, and none falling below 86% Muslims, in principle it might as well be a Muslim ban. And also, given Trump's overtly racist comments about Mexicans and Muslims before his election, even if this is not overtly stated in the ban's purpose, you don't have to be a political science major to guess that these sentiments and the actions of this ban are related. Indonesia and Iran weren't targeted, however, because a microscopic number of their population immigrates to the US when you compare the numbers from the 7 on his ban. Just with this list of nations, he was able to target over 90% of Muslim immigrants to this country. And there's also probably the fact that he doesn't know Indonesia is majority Muslim, or probably where it even is. It is only attempted collusion if the Kremlin guy didn't actually give Trump Jr. the information. But he did. And you may argue that this had no effect on the outcome of the election, but regardless of whether or not it helped Trump win, law is all about intent, and any collusion committed with a hostile foreign power in attempt to do anything is illegal. He broke the law. period. No, but using being proud of your country as an excuse to target specific religions and races, like Trump is doing with Muslims and Mexicans, is. Not sure what that last thing is referencing.

You deny Venezuela is not socialist country it's not true socialism.

What? This does not appear to be a coherent sentence, unless I missed something.

[Washington Resistance Army]

If he isn't a corporatist, then why does he keep deregulating their restrictions, or trying to?

Because that's a really common thing amongst most people on the American right. That doesn't make him a corporatist.

[Aguaria Major]

Nordic democracies are capitalist, they're known for combining laissez faire capitalism with tripartite corporatism.

In other words, not socialist.

Yes, when it comes to the few industries that are still privatized, but most of their major industries are publicized. Socialism allows for some private industry, as long as what are deemed to be, "the commons", by the government, like medical care, water, electricity, and the provision of basic necessities so people do not starve or live in squalor or poverty if they do not have a job, are publicized. If all of the means of economic production are seized, then it becomes communism. For example, I am not a socialist nation, despite my classification, because everyone pays all of their earnings to my government, and then I provide them with equal incomes. Though, someone classified as a, "Civil Rights Lovefest", is actually a socialist.

[Aguaria Major]

If he isn't a corporatist, then why does he keep deregulating their restrictions, or trying to?

Because that's a really common thing amongst most people on the American right. That doesn't make him a corporatist.

But laissez-faire economics ultimately leads to monopoly, which, by the definition of corporatism, organizes a society's economy into a few giant, privately owned corporations. Support laissez-faire and you support a less overt form of corporatism.

[Democratic Communist Federation]

And also, the best way to ring back socialism is just to let the fascists who are gaining power (like Donald Trump or the many Neo-Nazi movements in Europe) get it and fail, so people clamor for the opposite. I hate to say it, but that is the only way I think people will see the good of socialism.

IMO, that would be playing with fire. Already, the Trump administration has issued a directive that all Americans (excepting Red Cross and United Nations workers and others given special permission by the State Department) leave North Korea by September 1ˢᵗ. It certainly appears that Trump at al. are preparing to take out North Korea. The lower Trump’s poll rating fall, the more he may feel he has to prove.