a demsoc (not socdem) is anti-capitalist and wants to achieve socialism by means of reform. I call myself a demsoc because im a pacifist and IDEALLY would like to achieve socialism without violence or war. But I recognize that with today's political climate and also ACTUAL climate (change), it probably won't happen that way and needs to be forced, so that's when I casually call myself a commie.
In reality dem Soc wants to reform ,they keep themselves in denial by joining hands with liberals in this case in usa is the democrats and entices the demsoc to have in the capitalists area so the demsoc give in for for their own interest forget whatever they were fighting for in the past ( even though that wasn't even enough for progression) Half assed approach will influence the laymen to think that yeah we can achieve equality and distribution of power by keeping the current standards If u donot agree with the description of demsoc here so u rnot a demsoc u r a socialist then Also violence is not inherently a bad thing Like if u see a person is being harrassed and u can gather up some people to stop the harasser physically but u don't bc u don't believe in violence or imposing ur beliefs on to the harasser Just like meat eaters like to say to the vegans that stop forcing ur views on us let me kill the non human animals Socialist is not a monolith but personally I like to have as many people to get educated ( class consciousness)with that knowledge people will have a idea how to run the country properly with a new system when there is change it doesn't have to succumb to revolution bc do you think laymen who guns can comabat with the us military which is most funded millitary in the world that is impossible to have revolution the capitalists will use and push the spineless govt to gaurd themselves (capitalist) from the poorly armed people who want revolution.
honestly, not even real healthcare - TRUE healthcare would include tackling the social determinants of health, or causes of the causes. prevention not just treatment after the fact.
Some SocDem American: Socialism can work, just look at Norway! Me, a Norwegian worried about the amount of political parties mostly concerned with lowering taxes, stopping immigration and “protecting our Christian culture” in the current election: …What?
Social democracies are still capitalist, so they still have a profit incentive. And the only way to make huge profits is to underpay and overwork the working class, so because we arent exploiting people in our countries, we do it in foreign countries. This has been made especially easy because of the colonisation of the global south. Social democracies thrive from the exploitation of african and south asian countries. SocDems believe that we can erase all of the bad aspects of capitalism with a bit of social Reform, but you cant compromise two polar opposite ideas. Social Democrats/Liberals might call themselves left wing, but they still support the status quo. You cant claim to be a leftist just because you support marginalised people if you still support the systems that oppress these people. At the end of the day, Liberals/SocDems will never allow leftists to make any meaningful changes to our society. Liberals will claim to disavow fascism, but they have proven time and time again that when it comes to taking a side between fascism and leftism, they will always choose the status quo.
I agree that the current political system can’t be reformed, but I would be interested in your opinion on how we go from this system to another, I know you don’t like politicians (which is fair) but how would we go about dismantling such a system because currently the thought process for many Americans is that you must elect better leaders, which is why so many people love aoc and Bernie (whether they are better or not is up to you) (and the fact that many people still need fundamental rights within this country which they promise (again whether they will deliver that or not is up in the air) but in electing more leaders you undermine the ability to have radical change. I will admit I have not done enough research so I may be able to answer my own question eventually but I wanted to know your take. Also if you have mentioned how you think this could happen in another video I’m happy to just watch that. Great video!
A lot of the work that needs to be done is in the community first, because, exactly as you said, there’s an unfortunate mindset Americans have where they rely on centralized government and idolize politicians. Being openly anarchist and engaging with the community in a humanitarian and environmentalist way will start to change people’s minds. Funnily enough there’s a lot of debate on the left, specifically between anarchists, about revolution. Some 100% agree with me that an overnight revolution is not realistic, especially going up against a military state. The revolution needs to start with community organizing imo, because you’re absolutely right about the people needing to be radicalized first. A lot of international leftists see no revolutionary potential within the United States so….maybe that’s the place to start. (Not to be that guy, but reading some theory would probably help answer this question better.)
@@NicholasBlack thanks! And don’t worry about being that guy I know I am definitely behind on theory (life is getting in the way as much as it pains me)
@@NicholasBlack as an indigenous anarchist, you're onto something. there is a historical precedent for your theory. part of the reason that indigenous people were moved to reservations wasn't just to steal the land, it was to legally control the way indigenous communities organized. sure, it gave control to the tribes in theory, but it forced us to sign over principles of community owned land (at least for my tribe). people were forced into a system of rigid politicans and privatized land ownership to weaken and destroy not only our culture, but our organization. the more confederalist, community based organization many tribes like my own (cherokee) had made it so we could fight even against a large scale army (so instead some chiefs were tricked into signing bogus treaties that falsely said to represent us all) and that widespread community organization both prevented capitalistic destruction and widespread conquering on an easy scale without some blatant brutal and genocidal force. and it's happened to other tribes. and now that we're locked in this piss poor politician system made by this government, now the treaties suddenly matter when they limit community organization on a legal and recognizable matter. so I very much think you're on the right track.
PS: it takes a ton of courage to say something that's so historically clear (sadly), because you'll get smeared as every ridiculous label these people can think of, so thank you.
I'm pretty much willing to work with socdems on short term stuff, like trying to get people to vote blue, trying to get healthcare, trying to unionize more people, etc. Imo we need more revolutionary change, but the current world isn't going to change overnight, so I'm also going to do the best I can in the current system. I can multitask, yk? Go vote, do all the boring "pragmatic" stuff which doesn't take much time, and also more revolutionary action when it's possible.
The way you pronounce SocDem is making me relive my 9th grade English class when we read the Outsiders and in my head I always read Soc as “sock” even though it was short for socialite
Stop talking about getting rid of capitalism because we all know it won’t happen. Instead let’s be pragMAAAATIC and talk about these ten policies that will never be implemented.
Completely unrelated to the video, but when Nick was talking about how SocDems scream about pragmatism and realism a lot, I opened up to a part of a page I was browsing headed with the word pragmatism and it freaked me out a bit lol
Idk why but when I first clicked on this video I honestly thought this was going to be “How Nick Feels About Social Documentaries” and honestly I was down but I’m also down for this
Came to this video to unsubscribe because I didn’t want to be lectured only to let the video play a couple seconds and be like oh… OH. Shit. I’ve been thoroughly schooled, thank you. I do think people shift into this mode of believing in “reform” and that their preferred party will make everything better because the reality is extremely and horrifically bleak. Too much realism can damage the soul. But it’s definitely worth reminding and educating people about because boy is the world fucked.
Hey Nick, may I ask since when does Sweden have a right-wing foreign policy? They have been very open for anyone willing to apply for an asylum in Sweden. They never deport.
Ive been waiting for you too post again so I can tell you, I've watched your communism video, and school system video a lot, I love them, but the important part is that I was in class last week (8th grade social studies) and my teacher said that the government is legally requireing them to tell us that communism is bad and doesn't work. I hate it here
Hey 3ish other Canadians in the comments we have a federal election this month. Register to vote maybe. I know we kinda trashed on voting in this one but still exercise the power you do have.
Me slowly realizing I need to get armed and organized because I don’t see us fighting the effects of climate change so it’s only a matter of time before conflict
Hello Nicholas, thank you for the interesting video. I may have to watch it again and do further research on this though. I am probably too idealistic, but I would hope that a government/state would work towards taking care of and helping the people that make up its country. Living wages/UBI, affordable and quality housing, free/affordable childcare, less work hours so people can rest and be involved in their community, programs to ensure everyone has food. I guess what some would call a "Nanny State". I don't know, I try to take care of people I care about, so I would expect an ideal government to do the same. I don't know if that's considered Social Democracy or Democratic Socialist or anything (need more research). I do agree that both political parties are essentially the same, and neither really wants progressive changes like this. Maybe something like term limits, making the pay the same as the minimum wage of their state, banning lobbyist money, essentially making sure that the job has no perks so that only those who truly want to work for the people would be willing to take it. But I doubt people in power would opt to limit their power and benefits. So I dunno. It would just be nice if humans could work together so we could all have good lives and enjoy the time we have on this planet. I would like humanity to not cause it's own extinction.
I think the problem is that the way most states are organized today is around profit and not peoples needs- the state you describe would need to be self sustainable and not rely on exploiting their people (for eg labor), other countries and continents, animals, nature, etc. for resources and in the end profit like it happens with capitalism ever since but to change that we need to change the systems but this will probably not come peacefully or through reforming because those who hold the power (and exploit and profit the most) are not interested in changing their fortuned situation and therefor will not like to give that away. And ultimately a new form of government could be formed to give the power to the masses of working people (because no one would make money from other peoples labor because the goal isnt gaining money) and not through a few people so we could thrive for „power to the people“ and create a system where the majority has the power and not the minority and where the goal is not to create profit but to be able to care for everyone. then it would be equally valued if youd like to be a doctor or an artist because both benefits the humans and you wouldnt have to chose a career path regarding money/being able to feed yourself or whatever but rather regarding what you like to do and what youre good at because you are cared for no matter what Edited for typos
While I agree with a lot of the things being said in this video, I really don't understand where you got the impression that Sweden is an ethnostate? It's true that fascism and general anti-immigrant sentiment is on the rise here and that segregation, especially in the education system, is getting worse. But we're still a decently racially diverse country (by European standards anyway) with the native sami in the north and a sizeable Arabic and north African minority that came here largely during the refugee crises of the 80s and early 2010s. This idea that Sweden is a racially homogenous land of blue-eyed blondes has been outdated since the eighties. If you're going to state something so confidently, please be more careful with where you're getting your information.
Hello, I just found your Channel and while I don't agree with everything you say I really think you bring a good bit to the conversation, plus some of your skits are pretty funny! I think being a socdem is a good stepping stone for becoming more left-leaning, and I think there are a lot of positions they have which are generally good for how things currently are like deprivitizing prisons, schools and medical insurence. I identified as one for the longest time, but I realized more can be done than what was given. However, I know the US still sees socdems as radicals, and there is a lot to go for. I don't mind voting in a socdem even if the payout is small in return as alternatives can be much worse. I currently really don't hold a specific identification for my politics, but there still are a lot of values of socdems that I'd like to make at the very least the ground we start off at.
are there any specific books or essays or other media that brought you to this viewpoint? i fear collapse and revolution, i don't understand anarchism or non-hierarchical ways of being (and the groups i've been a part of that have functioned this way have almost always been chaotic) -- but i want to learn
I really respect how thoughtful you are, especially for your age. I hope you’re involved with a socialist party, I think you would have a lot of great ideas in meetings.
United forever in friendship and labour our mighty republics will never endure ! Long live our motherland ,built by the people's mighty hand!long live our people united and free!
Kinda correct, but you're an anarchist. Also calling Sweden an ethnostate is hillarious, guess what, not every country developed like the settler colonialist USA ;P
So, how do we keep a new state from forming? If we’re anarchists, what stops some dickhead building a militia and forming a new dictatorship? If someone could point me to a video or article, itd be much appreciated. Im just not seeing how life on earth without militaries is possible (and Im not happy about that btw).
I don't mean any of this negatively, really I liked the video and am not trying to attack you or anything just to state some thoughts I had watching this video, which overall has a lot of good points imo. While I do see how the ideal of SocDems / the democratic party are flawed, I don't agree with vilifying people who vote for it (that's at least the feeling I get from the video). I mean it's a sad truth that that's basically the only option anyone remotely on the left has at least for now. It's still the better thing to do compared to voting republican. Regarding nordic countries, I think while it might be true that they are still dependent on the third world/ have some questionable foreign policies they are still rather forward-thinking on other fronts where other first world countries might still be struggling, like maternity leave, prison policy or equality Lastly while I do appreciate criticism I don't think it's very helpful if no alternative is provided. You say democrats are bad, liberals are bad (I mean agreed) but then what is good? what should you vote for? And if Sweden shouldn't be the role model what other country should? Or if no country fits, how should they be changed exactly? It might be easy to just yell at everything you don't like but it won't help people change their minds just make them angry.
Shaun (the UA-camr, though the discussion took place primarily on Twitter) a while back was in mild controversy for basically suggesting people shouldn’t vote for the Labour Party since they’d shown they will actively fight against leftist policies and even sabotage their own party in favour of conservatives to avoid more leftist policy. So basically I think he was suggesting even if a third party is less likely to actually get enough power to do much, we should vote for those who actually represent our ideals best rather than continually voting for the lesser of two evils since we need to show we want to vote for leftist policies. Voting for the lesser of two evils just shows the lesser evil that they can continue getting more and more evil as the greater evil continues growing more and more evil and people will still vote for the lesser of the two evils. We should start sending the message that we won’t support the lesser evil, make it clear if they want our support then they need to move further left rather than continue drifting right. This stance received backlash because many applied that reasoning to America, where many many more poor and disabled people would die if the greater evil won. They don’t always have the luxury of not voting for the lesser evil. In the UK the fear is often of losing rights that Americans already lack. They aren’t as desperate as Americans so they should arguably do what they can to send a message before they become too desperate to really have even that choice. It’s also different in America because the political system is completely different. Your comment reminded me of that discussion. People are desperate and don’t have much choice. They shouldn’t be vilified for supporting those they have no choice but to support, but they should also recognise that this isn’t how things should be.
im not gonna claim to know a metric ton about politics, but i think the thing that everyone forgets is that people always have agendas, and no amount of reform is gonna change that. you cant put someone in power and expect them to be impartial.
I recommend watching Vaush if you want more leftist content. He does debates and has a degree in sociology. If you like video essays I recommend Contrapoints and PhilosophyTube. Especially Contrapoints video on voting.
@@bongosmcdongos4190 makes sense because there will always be someone with more power it just depends on what we put that to in current day that means wealthy but if we go back to primitive living it’s who has the most water and food
4:35 on the sign, i'd say it's mostly correct, but steps 3 and 4 are kinda off. step 3 would be "the powerful figureheads of the democratic party co-opt the loudest members of the Grassroots, Social reform movement." step 4 is "the demands and policies are altered, the once "radical" movement is defanged. energy is funneled back into the electoral system." step 5, 1, and 2 remain. somewhere in there we get publicity stunts as part of P.R campaigns, twitter threads, general mob pandering, etc (is any et left to cetera?) today, i discovered i'm a SocDem.
I’d like to see you do a sort of review/analysis on the BBC series Years and Years. I believe with your knowledge and political stance, you’d have a lot to say on the tiny details and larger arches of that show.
i'm gonna sound rly dumb rn but i need clarification on a couple things since i've been trying to research politics as of recent but everyone's different definitions for everything makes it impossible for me to understand what they're talking about. so here goes nothing 1. what the difference between liberal and leftist? i see the terms used interchangeably by everyone but leftists so i'm kinda lost 2. what's the difference between socialism and communism? (for same reason as above lol) 3. what are neoliberals? and for questions about anarcho-communism that i was gonna put on your other video but i'll just put here instead 1. how would widespread infrastructure work under anarcho-communism, considering some things like roads and large buildings need a lot of construction workers? like how would that happen without a government and just a bunch of small communities? 2. how would an efficient system of higher education work under anarcho-communism? 3. how would it work with the sheer number of people on the planet? 4. how is anarcho-communism supposed to ever happen at the state the world is currently in? i'm tryna picture it but with how politics are currently running, especially in the US, i really can't visualize the steps it would take it achieve it without feeling overly idealistic i think those are all my questions for now, sorry for sounding really ignorant but the internet is a hellhole for doing research. if anyone could answer that would be really cool :)
My ideology: II. 1.: any work would be done to benefit everybody not for money so everybody work do what they could eg to built a road and you wouldnt necessarily have to be paid in money bc ppl would habe what they need (food, house, hobby, culture, healthcare, … provided by the „state“) II. 2.: higher education could be pursued by anyone who would want to higher educate themselves and would be taught by ppl who are fitted and would like to teach- as above not for a paycheck by the end of the month but to benefit the humans II. 3. thats a tricky one for me bc humans seem to work best in smaller groups (like cavemen were oragnized in larger familes) so i think as lifestyle would change (no luxury items for status eg) the planet could more easlily provide for a large number of ppl- ppl need to organize themselves in somewhat smaller communities. Heres a potential that those commuities will be at war with each other for religious or ideologist reasons bc humans are trash at least the way they were since we can keep track II. 4.: spread the word
The ending of the video is literally that thing that actual German radical leftists used to say: Wer hat uns verraten ? Die Sozialdemokraten Which is one of the few things I still know in German and mean Who has betrayed us ? The Social Democrats
demsocs: basically socialists who believe in bringing socialism about by gradual reform via the democratic process socdems: basically capitalists who believe in a strong welfare state etc
I support capitalism with a wealth cap to prevent wealth hoarding, but I also don’t think even things like that will be achieved through our current politicians and political system. The idea that they’d willingly throw away capitalism altogether is silly imo. If you’re a socialist/communist then obviously no mainstream politician is actually on your side. I’m Aussie and also find it odd when Americans think things like healthcare or other basic things are socialist/communist. We have some conservative politicians who’ll admit to not wanting to support healthcare but typically even our Conservative party knows it’d be like saying “hey, please don’t vote for us. We will actively try to take your lives if you do” if they publicly supported removing our healthcare to make it more like how things are in America. The idea that our conservatives are progressive is absurd though. The idea that they’re in any way socialist is just ridiculous. Americans just aren’t used to governments taking care of even the basic needs of the people I guess.
@@jlord9638 I want both. Capitalism can’t function as it’s supposedly meant to when there are billionaires hoarding wealth and even using the power that that gives them to influence global politics. There are people deliberately exploiting and manipulating people for profit when they don’t even need the extra money they gain from the exploitation. There are wealthy people deliberately destroying the environment for profit. If you remove the wealth hoarding as a motivator then you remove the main motivation for exploitation and many other destructive practices. The wealth cap can still be ridiculously high while discouraging endless wealth hoarding.
@@jlord9638 a lot of exploitation happens overseas. The power of billionaires does not begin and end in the country they are from. And while people here are generally pretty well off, many are very much not, especially in many rural communities that have been neglected. There are also differences in things like education that even at the state schools privilege the wealthy, not only because of the obvious reality wealthy people can hire extra help for students and buy the best resources, but also because some people deliberately buy expensive homes that surround the best schools so they’re guaranteed to fall in the catchment areas, and when those kids do better academically due to having better backgrounds the government rewards the school by providing them with more resources, which attracts more privileged students, etc. I know it’s been very common in Queensland for teachers to give EAL/D learners and disabled students suspensions during testing periods so those students don’t lead to the appearance of poor student academic performance and as a result less government funding. Schools with more EAL/D learners in Australia are often schools with high numbers of Indigenous Australian students too, and there’s a lot written about how the government and schools fail those students. A result is often a focus being put on the education of those who have the best resources at home and who will perform well academically, neglecting the education of others. The idea that it’s bogan mentality preventing class improvement is so ignorant and classist it’s absurd. There will always be poverty in a pure capitalist system because poverty leads to desperation and desperation leads to easier to exploit workers, and when the people in your own country aren’t desperate enough we can take advantage of the poverty elsewhere, which also isn’t good for our country because it means jobs are going elsewhere, which leads to increased risk of poverty over here moving forward. If people aren’t poor enough sometimes things are done that force people into poverty, so they’ll be more desperate. It’s not the lower classes who have the power to change these things but the very wealthy. The idea that people are poor simply because they have a mentality that makes them poor is dumb btw.
Thank you for this video!! And yes, please don't idolise Swedish politics. We have a racist party (with connections to n*zism) in parliament. We have n*zis "demonstrating" in our streets, being protected by the police. It's really not ideal =-)
Just like to point out that any socialist politician that engages in liberal democracy is technically a social democrat. That's where the state of affairs that is loosely defined as Social Democracy gets its name. TLDR same words can mean different things not all Soc Dems are the same different things are different.
small (or not that small but you won’t get it any shorter, probably, this is over 150 years of history) history lesson (this is primarily about Germany because that’s where I‘m from and that’s the history i learned but i can imagine that this happened in various european countries as well, feel free to correct me if i’m wrong, this is purely from memory): the social democratic party is the oldest party that is still in place in German governments today. but as with many parties, even just in the context of German parties, they have very much lost most, if not all of radical ideals they were founded on. they were founded in 1863, years before Germany would eventually become a whole country and years after a revolution that attempted to unite the small independent German states in a democratic state that failed because there was no consensus between revolutionary parties on whether they wanted a monarchy, a democratic republic or something in the middle, on top of a bunch of other reasons. (for context, Germany before the 1879‘s where a bunch of small states that happened to speak some sort German and had history as a bigger monarchy, it was loosely united as the Deutscher Bund. there were trade systems to avoid taxes and there was a northern alliance but everyone was kinda doing their own thing. the two biggest states were prussia and austria, austria later split and became its own country, prussias king later became emporer of germany) so anyway, in this mess of a bunch of countries that were getting rolled over by industrial progress they couldn’t keep up with at first a whole bunch of people thought ‚huh, socialism is kinda neat, did you read what this Karl Marx guy was saying‘ and founded a party, the social democratic party germany. they would become the party for the working class, after the country finally became one in the 1870’s, thar is responsible for things like health insurance. the party had some big successes and further radicalized and became more marxist. after ww1 the emporer and monarchy was abolished and the Weimar Republic was founded which was so liberal that it would eventually abolish itself and result in ww2. the republic was off to a rough start. the republic was declared not once but twice, one time by socdem Scheidemann and a couple hours later on the same day by communist Liebknecht. the social democrats at the time were deeply in conflict and would soon split into the social democrats (spd) and the communist party (kpd). after an initial government run there were new elections in 1920 and the spd would lose a lot of votes to the kpd, a trend that would continue as the years of the republic went by and the politics became more radical and the spd less radical. in the beginning of the 30‘s the two leading parties were the kpd and the nsdap (the nazis, if you somehow missed that in your history class). the radicalisation can be explained by a look at the young republic which was a whole dumpster fire, going through not one but two major economic crisis and having to deal with the general aftermath of ww1. during the holocause being a socdem or anything that wasn’t a nazi could get you a one way ticket to a concentration camp. after the war it put some chancellors into office but mostly it just sat in the Bundestag, sometimes in a government with the conservative christian democratic union (cdu), sometimes leading the opposition against them. but in either position it was very disconnected from its origins in socialism and communism. in the current election they want to stop climate change and stop the pandemic, safe the economy, raise the minimum wage and give tablets to students - just like every other big party. the spd survived both world wars and 3 different Germanies so far. at first it stuck to it’s radical origins, becoming more radical at one point but after ww1 and it split and the remaining spd became more conservative as the years went by. today they’re not unique in any way, they’re still the party of the working class but that role also applies to other parties who have different main personality traits. this year is election year in Germany and if you happen to be a german adult, go and vote. you got the letter, don’t just throw it away. i looked up the political compass for this election and it does make you think when the party that calls itself the left is closer to the center than the party that has origins in the center party. i brushed over a very important stage in German history, split Germany. that is simply because i don’t know enough about that era to give anyone an overview.
Hello Nick, I’m not sure if you will read this, but I wanted to say thank you for making these videos. I was greatly influenced by libright sources just a year ago and just like every country in the world, my country also only has right wing. You’ve educated me about politics more than anybody and I was able to get over so many prejudices and propagandas thanks to you. I’m extremely grateful and still working on myself. However I don’t want to just call it a day with the information you gather for us. I’m curious about your favorite writers, philosophers, scientists, articles, books and how you shaped your ideology in general. I want to learn more about politics and economics but I don’t know where should I start. Do you have any suggestions?
The fact that you guys mentally read SocDem as Sock Dem knowing full well that Soc is short for socialist is absolutely sending me.
I agree with you especially your point that we cannot reform with the democratic party
I’m guilty of this lol
We’re hooked on phonics
Gotta love internet politics, we are broken lol can't wait to consume the tea, always love to hear your perspective!!
@@grumpykitten126 that's the Liberian flag
Nicks on his villan arc and we all know the villans are the ones we all admire
"The 'soshe' dems 🧦"
This is gonna be a good one🔥
Nice to see you here. You come here often? 😏
What is this, a crossover episode?
Hello Andrew !
All my favorite funny men here together
Duuuuude
I love your videos!!!
i usually can't concentrate and sit down but listening to your "rants" helps me focus... like my anger/voice is voiced by you....
Literally this. My mom is slowing spiraling into a MLM ‘white woman’ phase, fucking help.
Thank god someone gets it
@@pettyprincess028 I hope she’s doing better. If not, I hope you have/had a means of escape soon if not now.
a demsoc (not socdem) is anti-capitalist and wants to achieve socialism by means of reform. I call myself a demsoc because im a pacifist and IDEALLY would like to achieve socialism without violence or war. But I recognize that with today's political climate and also ACTUAL climate (change), it probably won't happen that way and needs to be forced, so that's when I casually call myself a commie.
@@SmokestalDude420 I was thinking that too, but really a lot of these terms intersect and overlap
@@SmokestalDude420 is anarcho-pragmatic a thing? wanting to be peaceful ideally, but being pragmatic in whatever is necessary?
@@sambradley9091 anarcho-pragmatic is just Marxist-Leninism with more steps
I mean these comments are too complicated for me but I'm happy that people are discussing peacefully
In reality dem Soc wants to reform ,they keep themselves in denial by joining hands with liberals in this case in usa is the democrats and entices the demsoc to have in the capitalists area so the demsoc give in for for their own interest forget whatever they were fighting for in the past ( even though that wasn't even enough for progression)
Half assed approach will influence the laymen to think that yeah we can achieve equality and distribution of power by keeping the current standards
If u donot agree with the description of demsoc here so u rnot a demsoc u r a socialist then
Also violence is not inherently a bad thing
Like if u see a person is being harrassed and u can gather up some people to stop the harasser physically but u don't bc u don't believe in violence or imposing ur beliefs on to the harasser
Just like meat eaters like to say to the vegans that stop forcing ur views on us let me kill the non human animals
Socialist is not a monolith but personally I like to have as many people to get educated ( class consciousness)with that knowledge people will have a idea how to run the country properly with a new system when there is change it doesn't have to succumb to revolution bc do you think laymen who guns can comabat with the us military which is most funded millitary in the world that is impossible to have revolution the capitalists will use and push the spineless govt to gaurd themselves (capitalist) from the poorly armed people who want revolution.
“Now that I’m on my villain arc.”
It’s canon.
Unlike Danaerys' arc, Nicholas descent into madness was greatly forshadowed since the beginning.
10/10 writing y'all
@ Nicholas Black Hex what do you think of Game of Thrones' message? please gimme a rant givit to uss
Capitalsim with healthcare, is the perfect way of describing socdem ideology
Because it's the only way of describing it properly
honestly, not even real healthcare - TRUE healthcare would include tackling the social determinants of health, or causes of the causes. prevention not just treatment after the fact.
you deserve this villian arc
hello fellow killjoy
Some SocDem American: Socialism can work, just look at Norway!
Me, a Norwegian worried about the amount of political parties mostly concerned with lowering taxes, stopping immigration and “protecting our Christian culture” in the current election: …What?
God I wish Norway was socialist
Social democracies are still capitalist, so they still have a profit incentive. And the only way to make huge profits is to underpay and overwork the working class, so because we arent exploiting people in our countries, we do it in foreign countries. This has been made especially easy because of the colonisation of the global south. Social democracies thrive from the exploitation of african and south asian countries. SocDems believe that we can erase all of the bad aspects of capitalism with a bit of social Reform, but you cant compromise two polar opposite ideas. Social Democrats/Liberals might call themselves left wing, but they still support the status quo. You cant claim to be a leftist just because you support marginalised people if you still support the systems that oppress these people. At the end of the day, Liberals/SocDems will never allow leftists to make any meaningful changes to our society. Liberals will claim to disavow fascism, but they have proven time and time again that when it comes to taking a side between fascism and leftism, they will always choose the status quo.
I thought we talked about this in "liberals are irritating" lmao /lh
You’d think, but they think they’re leftists lol
we love nick starting his villain arc
Momento mori
I agree that the current political system can’t be reformed, but I would be interested in your opinion on how we go from this system to another, I know you don’t like politicians (which is fair) but how would we go about dismantling such a system because currently the thought process for many Americans is that you must elect better leaders, which is why so many people love aoc and Bernie (whether they are better or not is up to you) (and the fact that many people still need fundamental rights within this country which they promise (again whether they will deliver that or not is up in the air) but in electing more leaders you undermine the ability to have radical change. I will admit I have not done enough research so I may be able to answer my own question eventually but I wanted to know your take. Also if you have mentioned how you think this could happen in another video I’m happy to just watch that. Great video!
A lot of the work that needs to be done is in the community first, because, exactly as you said, there’s an unfortunate mindset Americans have where they rely on centralized government and idolize politicians. Being openly anarchist and engaging with the community in a humanitarian and environmentalist way will start to change people’s minds.
Funnily enough there’s a lot of debate on the left, specifically between anarchists, about revolution. Some 100% agree with me that an overnight revolution is not realistic, especially going up against a military state. The revolution needs to start with community organizing imo, because you’re absolutely right about the people needing to be radicalized first. A lot of international leftists see no revolutionary potential within the United States so….maybe that’s the place to start. (Not to be that guy, but reading some theory would probably help answer this question better.)
@@NicholasBlack thanks! And don’t worry about being that guy I know I am definitely behind on theory (life is getting in the way as much as it pains me)
@@NicholasBlack as an indigenous anarchist, you're onto something. there is a historical precedent for your theory. part of the reason that indigenous people were moved to reservations wasn't just to steal the land, it was to legally control the way indigenous communities organized. sure, it gave control to the tribes in theory, but it forced us to sign over principles of community owned land (at least for my tribe). people were forced into a system of rigid politicans and privatized land ownership to weaken and destroy not only our culture, but our organization. the more confederalist, community based organization many tribes like my own (cherokee) had made it so we could fight even against a large scale army (so instead some chiefs were tricked into signing bogus treaties that falsely said to represent us all) and that widespread community organization both prevented capitalistic destruction and widespread conquering on an easy scale without some blatant brutal and genocidal force. and it's happened to other tribes. and now that we're locked in this piss poor politician system made by this government, now the treaties suddenly matter when they limit community organization on a legal and recognizable matter. so I very much think you're on the right track.
Everytime you upload it literally makes my day, I could listen to you talk for hours
So true!!!
He could scream in my ears and I wouldn't mind.
@@cursedalmondcookie5880 yeah pretty much
was this a question? i thought the answer was obvious. you made a 40 minute video saying you’re a communist
You’d be surprised how many people were like “but what about me 🥺 uwu”. Like, bestie…idk what to tell you
PS: it takes a ton of courage to say something that's so historically clear (sadly), because you'll get smeared as every ridiculous label these people can think of, so thank you.
The lord has posted again! It still feels so weird to hear it pronounced ‘sosh dem’ lol
I'm pretty much willing to work with socdems on short term stuff, like trying to get people to vote blue, trying to get healthcare, trying to unionize more people, etc. Imo we need more revolutionary change, but the current world isn't going to change overnight, so I'm also going to do the best I can in the current system. I can multitask, yk? Go vote, do all the boring "pragmatic" stuff which doesn't take much time, and also more revolutionary action when it's possible.
Sock dems > Socdems
Same
soc dems are definitely just spicy liberals LOL
lmao
Popping the biggest bottles to celebrate the official kickoff of Nick’s Joker arc
Literally just clicked to see if he still pronounces it as sochdems
Did not dissapoint
Better than the alternative susdems
I still pronounce it as sockdems in my head
Sussy Democrats
They do be kinda sus
Everyone reading this
GO DRINK WATER AND EAT SOMETHING! Don't lie, your watching nicks videos. you need water firend. Please take care of yourself!
Ik it's short for social but I can only read soc dem as Sock Dem
"Please stop idolizing politicians"
Literally thank you so much.
The way you pronounce SocDem is making me relive my 9th grade English class when we read the Outsiders and in my head I always read Soc as “sock” even though it was short for socialite
Stop talking about getting rid of capitalism because we all know it won’t happen. Instead let’s be pragMAAAATIC and talk about these ten policies that will never be implemented.
nick when will the continuation of your villain arc come out? I cant keep aimlessly waiting like this!
I sped the video up to x1.75 so my brain could properly process the video bUT NICK ENDED UP SOUNDING LIKE BEN SHAPIRO PLS 😭😭😭
gdhdgshdjdhsksjdhaldfhdjjk
Completely unrelated to the video, but when Nick was talking about how SocDems scream about pragmatism and realism a lot, I opened up to a part of a page I was browsing headed with the word pragmatism and it freaked me out a bit lol
Hah I'm early. I knew today was gonna be great. Perfect way to start off the day! :D
Idk why but when I first clicked on this video I honestly thought this was going to be “How Nick Feels About Social Documentaries” and honestly I was down but I’m also down for this
I found this channel randomly, & I'm sooooo glad I did. APAB.
The amount of pain that your pronunciation of sock dems causes me makes me think you’re actually having a real villain arc-
Came to this video to unsubscribe because I didn’t want to be lectured only to let the video play a couple seconds and be like oh… OH. Shit. I’ve been thoroughly schooled, thank you. I do think people shift into this mode of believing in “reform” and that their preferred party will make everything better because the reality is extremely and horrifically bleak. Too much realism can damage the soul. But it’s definitely worth reminding and educating people about because boy is the world fucked.
Also gonna stay subscribed 😅
Nick not like socdem
capitalism with health care: when the bar is just that low
Hey Nick, may I ask since when does Sweden have a right-wing foreign policy?
They have been very open for anyone willing to apply for an asylum in Sweden. They never deport.
thank u for always putting my caveman thoughts into well articulated videos🙏🏻🙏🏻
Ive been waiting for you too post again so I can tell you, I've watched your communism video, and school system video a lot, I love them, but the important part is that I was in class last week (8th grade social studies) and my teacher said that the government is legally requireing them to tell us that communism is bad and doesn't work. I hate it here
Man i love your rants
I'm living for these videos
Hey 3ish other Canadians in the comments we have a federal election this month. Register to vote maybe. I know we kinda trashed on voting in this one but still exercise the power you do have.
Me slowly realizing I need to get armed and organized because I don’t see us fighting the effects of climate change so it’s only a matter of time before conflict
im so glad you brought up animal agriculture in this video, so many people ignore it :(
Hello Nicholas, thank you for the interesting video. I may have to watch it again and do further research on this though. I am probably too idealistic, but I would hope that a government/state would work towards taking care of and helping the people that make up its country. Living wages/UBI, affordable and quality housing, free/affordable childcare, less work hours so people can rest and be involved in their community, programs to ensure everyone has food. I guess what some would call a "Nanny State". I don't know, I try to take care of people I care about, so I would expect an ideal government to do the same. I don't know if that's considered Social Democracy or Democratic Socialist or anything (need more research). I do agree that both political parties are essentially the same, and neither really wants progressive changes like this. Maybe something like term limits, making the pay the same as the minimum wage of their state, banning lobbyist money, essentially making sure that the job has no perks so that only those who truly want to work for the people would be willing to take it. But I doubt people in power would opt to limit their power and benefits. So I dunno. It would just be nice if humans could work together so we could all have good lives and enjoy the time we have on this planet. I would like humanity to not cause it's own extinction.
I think the problem is that the way most states are organized today is around profit and not peoples needs- the state you describe would need to be self sustainable and not rely on exploiting their people (for eg labor), other countries and continents, animals, nature, etc. for resources and in the end profit like it happens with capitalism ever since but to change that we need to change the systems but this will probably not come peacefully or through reforming because those who hold the power (and exploit and profit the most) are not interested in changing their fortuned situation and therefor will not like to give that away. And ultimately a new form of government could be formed to give the power to the masses of working people (because no one would make money from other peoples labor because the goal isnt gaining money) and not through a few people so we could thrive for „power to the people“ and create a system where the majority has the power and not the minority and where the goal is not to create profit but to be able to care for everyone. then it would be equally valued if youd like to be a doctor or an artist because both benefits the humans and you wouldnt have to chose a career path regarding money/being able to feed yourself or whatever but rather regarding what you like to do and what youre good at because you are cared for no matter what
Edited for typos
Ah, the continuation of your villain arc.
Socdem bad video end
Sunny
agree
good
Agreed
So true
They’re not gonna like this one Nick 😂
May I ask what's the alternative to a state? I like the idea of abolishing systems of power but I don't know how this would work globally?
all of nick's longer videos have a moment of * most interesting/intriguing point (to me) * "but that's besides the point;"
Might I just say that the thumbnail is incredibly prophetic and it aged like fine wine.
As someone who lives in sweden, do not model your country after us, we suck too
Second this..! //also another person who lives in Sweden
*Ikea lying about their deforestation practices and their lawsuits because of their cheaply made garbage furniture has entered the chat*
You're extremely intelligent. I'd like to learn more from you
While I agree with a lot of the things being said in this video, I really don't understand where you got the impression that Sweden is an ethnostate? It's true that fascism and general anti-immigrant sentiment is on the rise here and that segregation, especially in the education system, is getting worse. But we're still a decently racially diverse country (by European standards anyway) with the native sami in the north and a sizeable Arabic and north African minority that came here largely during the refugee crises of the 80s and early 2010s. This idea that Sweden is a racially homogenous land of blue-eyed blondes has been outdated since the eighties. If you're going to state something so confidently, please be more careful with where you're getting your information.
Hello, I just found your Channel and while I don't agree with everything you say I really think you bring a good bit to the conversation, plus some of your skits are pretty funny!
I think being a socdem is a good stepping stone for becoming more left-leaning, and I think there are a lot of positions they have which are generally good for how things currently are like deprivitizing prisons, schools and medical insurence. I identified as one for the longest time, but I realized more can be done than what was given. However, I know the US still sees socdems as radicals, and there is a lot to go for. I don't mind voting in a socdem even if the payout is small in return as alternatives can be much worse.
I currently really don't hold a specific identification for my politics, but there still are a lot of values of socdems that I'd like to make at the very least the ground we start off at.
I’ve always pronounced it sock dems. I’ve been missing out all this time.
Sewshe Dems is an infinitely superior pronunciation.
SocDem
More like
MORE LIKE SUCKDEMS
are there any specific books or essays or other media that brought you to this viewpoint? i fear collapse and revolution, i don't understand anarchism or non-hierarchical ways of being (and the groups i've been a part of that have functioned this way have almost always been chaotic) -- but i want to learn
I really respect how thoughtful you are, especially for your age. I hope you’re involved with a socialist party, I think you would have a lot of great ideas in meetings.
Or communist, I use those words kind of interchangeably.
United forever in friendship and labour our mighty republics will never endure ! Long live our motherland ,built by the people's mighty hand!long live our people united and free!
I know we're doing this whole not giving up thing but we're fucking screwed. Let's be honest.
everyone loves a villain
Kinda correct, but you're an anarchist.
Also calling Sweden an ethnostate is hillarious, guess what, not every country developed like the settler colonialist USA ;P
So, how do we keep a new state from forming? If we’re anarchists, what stops some dickhead building a militia and forming a new dictatorship? If someone could point me to a video or article, itd be much appreciated. Im just not seeing how life on earth without militaries is possible (and Im not happy about that btw).
I don't mean any of this negatively, really I liked the video and am not trying to attack you or anything just to state some thoughts I had watching this video, which overall has a lot of good points imo.
While I do see how the ideal of SocDems / the democratic party are flawed, I don't agree with vilifying people who vote for it (that's at least the feeling I get from the video). I mean it's a sad truth that that's basically the only option anyone remotely on the left has at least for now. It's still the better thing to do compared to voting republican.
Regarding nordic countries, I think while it might be true that they are still dependent on the third world/ have some questionable foreign policies they are still rather forward-thinking on other fronts where other first world countries might still be struggling, like maternity leave, prison policy or equality
Lastly while I do appreciate criticism I don't think it's very helpful if no alternative is provided. You say democrats are bad, liberals are bad (I mean agreed) but then what is good? what should you vote for? And if Sweden shouldn't be the role model what other country should? Or if no country fits, how should they be changed exactly? It might be easy to just yell at everything you don't like but it won't help people change their minds just make them angry.
Shaun (the UA-camr, though the discussion took place primarily on Twitter) a while back was in mild controversy for basically suggesting people shouldn’t vote for the Labour Party since they’d shown they will actively fight against leftist policies and even sabotage their own party in favour of conservatives to avoid more leftist policy. So basically I think he was suggesting even if a third party is less likely to actually get enough power to do much, we should vote for those who actually represent our ideals best rather than continually voting for the lesser of two evils since we need to show we want to vote for leftist policies. Voting for the lesser of two evils just shows the lesser evil that they can continue getting more and more evil as the greater evil continues growing more and more evil and people will still vote for the lesser of the two evils. We should start sending the message that we won’t support the lesser evil, make it clear if they want our support then they need to move further left rather than continue drifting right.
This stance received backlash because many applied that reasoning to America, where many many more poor and disabled people would die if the greater evil won. They don’t always have the luxury of not voting for the lesser evil. In the UK the fear is often of losing rights that Americans already lack. They aren’t as desperate as Americans so they should arguably do what they can to send a message before they become too desperate to really have even that choice. It’s also different in America because the political system is completely different.
Your comment reminded me of that discussion. People are desperate and don’t have much choice. They shouldn’t be vilified for supporting those they have no choice but to support, but they should also recognise that this isn’t how things should be.
I learn so much from you
What are your proposed solutions to dealing with the problems you point out in the socdem ideology?
This is what happens to you when you get your education from Twitter. Be careful, kids.
im not gonna claim to know a metric ton about
politics, but i think the thing that everyone forgets is that people always have agendas, and no amount of reform is gonna change that. you cant put someone in power and expect them to be impartial.
Where’d you learn all of the politics from? I just started high school and I’m kind of trying to cram learn politics before I can vote.
I recommend watching Vaush if you want more leftist content. He does debates and has a degree in sociology. If you like video essays I recommend Contrapoints and PhilosophyTube. Especially Contrapoints video on voting.
I agree with you for the most part im just confused on your hatred of the state i may have missed it but what is your alternative
No state, I think. He defines himself as an anarcho-communist.
@@OrpheusWasAPoorBoy but how does it work I can’t fathom a system that works without a system of authority
@@Roaring20twentys they don't, there's a reason none exist.
@@bongosmcdongos4190 makes sense because there will always be someone with more power it just depends on what we put that to in current day that means wealthy but if we go back to primitive living it’s who has the most water and food
Literally as soon as this vid started I sneezed. I'm allergic to socdems lol
since i was little, it always blew my mind that the usa elects people either from far right or right. no middle. no left . wild
13:52 describes me pretty well actually
4:35 on the sign, i'd say it's mostly correct, but steps 3 and 4 are kinda off. step 3 would be "the powerful figureheads of the democratic party co-opt the loudest members of the Grassroots, Social reform movement." step 4 is "the demands and policies are altered, the once "radical" movement is defanged. energy is funneled back into the electoral system." step 5, 1, and 2 remain. somewhere in there we get publicity stunts as part of P.R campaigns, twitter threads, general mob pandering, etc (is any et left to cetera?)
today, i discovered i'm a SocDem.
not me getting an ad for the new matrix movie before this lmao
Lol i got an ad from the green-eco party to vote for them next week 👏✌️
B-but how Bernie Sanders bad if funny mittens?????
Ok I see your point but how is Sweden an ethnostate?
I’d like to see you do a sort of review/analysis on the BBC series Years and Years. I believe with your knowledge and political stance, you’d have a lot to say on the tiny details and larger arches of that show.
Great! So we're all in agreement, giving people fair wages and healthcare isnt "socialism", I fail to see the delima
Socdems to me give off the same vibe as Netflix's "The Politician"
So what are we going to do, take pitchforks to the whitehouse?
i'm gonna sound rly dumb rn but i need clarification on a couple things since i've been trying to research politics as of recent but everyone's different definitions for everything makes it impossible for me to understand what they're talking about. so here goes nothing
1. what the difference between liberal and leftist? i see the terms used interchangeably by everyone but leftists so i'm kinda lost
2. what's the difference between socialism and communism? (for same reason as above lol)
3. what are neoliberals?
and for questions about anarcho-communism that i was gonna put on your other video but i'll just put here instead
1. how would widespread infrastructure work under anarcho-communism, considering some things like roads and large buildings need a lot of construction workers? like how would that happen without a government and just a bunch of small communities?
2. how would an efficient system of higher education work under anarcho-communism?
3. how would it work with the sheer number of people on the planet?
4. how is anarcho-communism supposed to ever happen at the state the world is currently in? i'm tryna picture it but with how politics are currently running, especially in the US, i really can't visualize the steps it would take it achieve it without feeling overly idealistic
i think those are all my questions for now, sorry for sounding really ignorant but the internet is a hellhole for doing research. if anyone could answer that would be really cool :)
My ideology:
II. 1.: any work would be done to benefit everybody not for money so everybody work do what they could eg to built a road and you wouldnt necessarily have to be paid in money bc ppl would habe what they need (food, house, hobby, culture, healthcare, … provided by the „state“)
II. 2.: higher education could be pursued by anyone who would want to higher educate themselves and would be taught by ppl who are fitted and would like to teach- as above not for a paycheck by the end of the month but to benefit the humans
II. 3. thats a tricky one for me bc humans seem to work best in smaller groups (like cavemen were oragnized in larger familes) so i think as lifestyle would change (no luxury items for status eg) the planet could more easlily provide for a large number of ppl- ppl need to organize themselves in somewhat smaller communities. Heres a potential that those commuities will be at war with each other for religious or ideologist reasons bc humans are trash at least the way they were since we can keep track
II. 4.: spread the word
how is sweden an ethnostate…
So you don't believe in markets or private property?
socdem? i hardly know them!
The ending of the video is literally that thing that actual German radical leftists used to say: Wer hat uns verraten ? Die Sozialdemokraten Which is one of the few things I still know in German and mean Who has betrayed us ? The Social Democrats
"Because why not?"
Mood as fuck
can someone explain to me the difference between demsocs and socdems?
demsocs: basically socialists who believe in bringing socialism about by gradual reform via the democratic process
socdems: basically capitalists who believe in a strong welfare state etc
Socdems are fine with capitalism, demsocs are not.
I support capitalism with a wealth cap to prevent wealth hoarding, but I also don’t think even things like that will be achieved through our current politicians and political system. The idea that they’d willingly throw away capitalism altogether is silly imo. If you’re a socialist/communist then obviously no mainstream politician is actually on your side.
I’m Aussie and also find it odd when Americans think things like healthcare or other basic things are socialist/communist. We have some conservative politicians who’ll admit to not wanting to support healthcare but typically even our Conservative party knows it’d be like saying “hey, please don’t vote for us. We will actively try to take your lives if you do” if they publicly supported removing our healthcare to make it more like how things are in America. The idea that our conservatives are progressive is absurd though. The idea that they’re in any way socialist is just ridiculous. Americans just aren’t used to governments taking care of even the basic needs of the people I guess.
@@jlord9638 I want both. Capitalism can’t function as it’s supposedly meant to when there are billionaires hoarding wealth and even using the power that that gives them to influence global politics. There are people deliberately exploiting and manipulating people for profit when they don’t even need the extra money they gain from the exploitation. There are wealthy people deliberately destroying the environment for profit. If you remove the wealth hoarding as a motivator then you remove the main motivation for exploitation and many other destructive practices. The wealth cap can still be ridiculously high while discouraging endless wealth hoarding.
@@jlord9638 a lot of exploitation happens overseas. The power of billionaires does not begin and end in the country they are from. And while people here are generally pretty well off, many are very much not, especially in many rural communities that have been neglected. There are also differences in things like education that even at the state schools privilege the wealthy, not only because of the obvious reality wealthy people can hire extra help for students and buy the best resources, but also because some people deliberately buy expensive homes that surround the best schools so they’re guaranteed to fall in the catchment areas, and when those kids do better academically due to having better backgrounds the government rewards the school by providing them with more resources, which attracts more privileged students, etc. I know it’s been very common in Queensland for teachers to give EAL/D learners and disabled students suspensions during testing periods so those students don’t lead to the appearance of poor student academic performance and as a result less government funding. Schools with more EAL/D learners in Australia are often schools with high numbers of Indigenous Australian students too, and there’s a lot written about how the government and schools fail those students. A result is often a focus being put on the education of those who have the best resources at home and who will perform well academically, neglecting the education of others.
The idea that it’s bogan mentality preventing class improvement is so ignorant and classist it’s absurd.
There will always be poverty in a pure capitalist system because poverty leads to desperation and desperation leads to easier to exploit workers, and when the people in your own country aren’t desperate enough we can take advantage of the poverty elsewhere, which also isn’t good for our country because it means jobs are going elsewhere, which leads to increased risk of poverty over here moving forward. If people aren’t poor enough sometimes things are done that force people into poverty, so they’ll be more desperate. It’s not the lower classes who have the power to change these things but the very wealthy.
The idea that people are poor simply because they have a mentality that makes them poor is dumb btw.
Thank you for this video!! And yes, please don't idolise Swedish politics. We have a racist party (with connections to n*zism) in parliament. We have n*zis "demonstrating" in our streets, being protected by the police. It's really not ideal =-)
All politicians are bad?? What about nicki minaj?
My dumb little thinky brain confused Democrat with Republican, so I was v confused when u mentioned AOC 😭
Just like to point out that any socialist politician that engages in liberal democracy is technically a social democrat. That's where the state of affairs that is loosely defined as Social Democracy gets its name.
TLDR same words can mean different things not all Soc Dems are the same different things are different.
Hold up. SocDems revealed themselves to be eugenicists? That's a pretty massive thing to drop with no context or citation.
small (or not that small but you won’t get it any shorter, probably, this is over 150 years of history) history lesson (this is primarily about Germany because that’s where I‘m from and that’s the history i learned but i can imagine that this happened in various european countries as well, feel free to correct me if i’m wrong, this is purely from memory):
the social democratic party is the oldest party that is still in place in German governments today. but as with many parties, even just in the context of German parties, they have very much lost most, if not all of radical ideals they were founded on. they were founded in 1863, years before Germany would eventually become a whole country and years after a revolution that attempted to unite the small independent German states in a democratic state that failed because there was no consensus between revolutionary parties on whether they wanted a monarchy, a democratic republic or something in the middle, on top of a bunch of other reasons. (for context, Germany before the 1879‘s where a bunch of small states that happened to speak some sort German and had history as a bigger monarchy, it was loosely united as the Deutscher Bund. there were trade systems to avoid taxes and there was a northern alliance but everyone was kinda doing their own thing. the two biggest states were prussia and austria, austria later split and became its own country, prussias king later became emporer of germany) so anyway, in this mess of a bunch of countries that were getting rolled over by industrial progress they couldn’t keep up with at first a whole bunch of people thought ‚huh, socialism is kinda neat, did you read what this Karl Marx guy was saying‘ and founded a party, the social democratic party germany. they would become the party for the working class, after the country finally became one in the 1870’s, thar is responsible for things like health insurance. the party had some big successes and further radicalized and became more marxist.
after ww1 the emporer and monarchy was abolished and the Weimar Republic was founded which was so liberal that it would eventually abolish itself and result in ww2. the republic was off to a rough start. the republic was declared not once but twice, one time by socdem Scheidemann and a couple hours later on the same day by communist Liebknecht. the social democrats at the time were deeply in conflict and would soon split into the social democrats (spd) and the communist party (kpd). after an initial government run there were new elections in 1920 and the spd would lose a lot of votes to the kpd, a trend that would continue as the years of the republic went by and the politics became more radical and the spd less radical. in the beginning of the 30‘s the two leading parties were the kpd and the nsdap (the nazis, if you somehow missed that in your history class). the radicalisation can be explained by a look at the young republic which was a whole dumpster fire, going through not one but two major economic crisis and having to deal with the general aftermath of ww1. during the holocause being a socdem or anything that wasn’t a nazi could get you a one way ticket to a concentration camp. after the war it put some chancellors into office but mostly it just sat in the Bundestag, sometimes in a government with the conservative christian democratic union (cdu), sometimes leading the opposition against them. but in either position it was very disconnected from its origins in socialism and communism. in the current election they want to stop climate change and stop the pandemic, safe the economy, raise the minimum wage and give tablets to students - just like every other big party.
the spd survived both world wars and 3 different Germanies so far. at first it stuck to it’s radical origins, becoming more radical at one point but after ww1 and it split and the remaining spd became more conservative as the years went by. today they’re not unique in any way, they’re still the party of the working class but that role also applies to other parties who have different main personality traits.
this year is election year in Germany and if you happen to be a german adult, go and vote. you got the letter, don’t just throw it away.
i looked up the political compass for this election and it does make you think when the party that calls itself the left is closer to the center than the party that has origins in the center party.
i brushed over a very important stage in German history, split Germany. that is simply because i don’t know enough about that era to give anyone an overview.
As a socialist, we do not claim these people.
Hello Nick, I’m not sure if you will read this, but I wanted to say thank you for making these videos. I was greatly influenced by libright sources just a year ago and just like every country in the world, my country also only has right wing. You’ve educated me about politics more than anybody and I was able to get over so many prejudices and propagandas thanks to you. I’m extremely grateful and still working on myself. However I don’t want to just call it a day with the information you gather for us. I’m curious about your favorite writers, philosophers, scientists, articles, books and how you shaped your ideology in general. I want to learn more about politics and economics but I don’t know where should I start. Do you have any suggestions?
lol i was the 1.1k like, ik you don’t care but it was fun clicking and unclicking it (the ofc clicking it again)