[The American Lion]

Young People More Likely To Favor Socialism Than Capitalism: Pew

Young people -- the collegiate and post-college crowd, who have served as the most visible face of the Occupy Wall Street movement -- might be getting more comfortable with socialism. That's the surprising result from a Pew Research Center poll that aims to measure American sentiments toward different political labels.

The poll, published Wednesday, found that while Americans overall tend to oppose socialism by a strong margin -- 60 percent say they have a negative view of it, versus just 31 percent who say they have a positive view -- socialism has more fans than opponents among the 18-29 crowd. Forty-nine percent of people in that age bracket say they have a positive view of socialism; only 43 percent say they have a negative view.

And while those numbers aren't very far apart, it's noteworthy that they were reversed just 20 months ago, when Pew conducted a similar poll. In that survey, published May 2010, 43 percent of people age 18-29 said they had a positive view of socialism, and 49 percent said their opinion was negative.

It's not clear why young people have evidently begun to change their thinking on socialism. In the past several years, the poor economy has had any number of effects on young adults -- keeping them at home with their parents, making it difficult for them to get jobs, and likely depressing their earning potential for years to come -- that might have dampened enthusiasm for the free market among this crowd.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/2 ... 75218.html

Looks like our image is improving.

[Godstud]

Most young people don't have the misconception Socialism=Communism. it also doesn't hurt that many of the programs that would help people, are socialist ones.

[Daktoria]

Most young people come from dysfunctional family units where the duty of care owed to them regarding social values was not fulfilled. In turn, they became convinced that public education loaded with professional bureaucratic administrators was the proper path to maturity instead...

...hence, socialism.

This really isn't surprising. You can actually compare it to 1968. The '50s were loaded with consumerism and unquestioned traditional conservatism, both of which lead to social alienation with parents simply bombarding their children with toys and dogma.

In turn, children grew up both spoiled AND confused, and any individual child who aimed to make sense of things ended up cast out for being uncool. That dialectic implies a radical revision where nobody supports actually fixing the system, but rather reforming the system to accommodate everyone. If you want, you can think of it as a sort of moral tragedy of the commons. Nobody's going to teach their children manners because they at least either don't care or want their children to be socially competitive, so schools are expected to teach manners instead.

This can be applied to both the Bohemian Bourgeois and working class. The Bohemian Bourgeois wants to sustain social hierarchy by preserving the popularity contest, and the working class wants respect for struggling in its primitive ways. Neither the popularity contest nor primitive struggle entail cultivating towards an objective quantifiable way of distributing goods and services as in free markets where a price is a price is a price is a price.

In turn, it really wouldn't be surprising to see anti-rationalism continue to pick up steam. When people don't want to think for themselves because they're more concerned with preserving social status, what can you do?

[Cartertonian]

Granted, it's a very sweeping generalisation, but I take the view that left-ideologies largely relate to how their supporters would like the world to be (aspirational), and right-ideologies relate to how their supporters perceive the world to actually be (pragmatic).

It's unsurprising, therefore, that the young lean toward aspirational, future-focused ideas, whereas older people tend to want to improve their lot in the here-and-now.

Winston Churchill said:

If you're not a liberal at twenty you have no heart, if you're not a conservative at forty you have no brain.

Sadly for me, I appear to have no brain...

[Social_Critic]

I used to be a libertarian right winger when I was young, but I was living in Cuba under communism, so of course I developed a phobia towards anything that came close to socialism or communism. Today I'm a bit more relaxed and I also realize all systems are grey, have their pluses and minuses.

In general, socialism as practiced in many European countries is fine but it lacks the dynamism needed to grow the economy and pay for the welfare state. Socialism as practiced in Cuba is an abomination. It's not communism, it's senseless, leads to poverty and serfdom. And when it fails at is has done, it evolves into a really nasty form of fascism, which is what we see emerging in Cuba today. Socialism as practiced in say North Korea is just a form of medieval slavery and serfdom with an hereditary monarchy, but I suspect the real power is in a shogunate within the military apparatus.

Given the current unemployment levels, high levels of sovereign debt (which in the US was incurred mostly by right wing governments led by Reagan and Bush), it's understandable that socialism may be a bit more popular amongst the young in the US - after all they have been screwed by the older generations. What they don't get is that the solution is to tax and cut benefits for the older generation, to make them pay for what they did. Being older, I am willing to face this punishment, although I've spent most of my life bitching and complaining about government debt and the military adventurism which characterizes US foreign policy.

[Soulflytribe]

It would be funny to see the US adopting a similar tax system, bureaucracy and labor regulation to what we have here in the socialist third world. I would definitely feel some sort of schadenfreude. Just go ahead socialist youth!

[Social_Critic]

It won't get that far, I think. The US economy should rebound (this is a delicate matter but I think Europe will pull out of the mess and China ought to avoid an economic crash if they can cut back on the emerging price bubble).

As the US economy recovers, it'll probably be more of the same. I vote Democrat, but it's mostly because the Republicans have become such a neo-nazi bunch, and their candidates, except for Romney and Ron Paul, are truly pathetic.

[CounterChaos]

Socialism as practiced in Cuba is an abomination. It's not communism, it's senseless, leads to poverty and serfdom.

Vigorous opposition, manipulation and propaganda is what creates failures. To think for a moment that the policies of the United States toward Cuba have no responsibility for these failures - is not thinking in the grey. Do you abandon a system because the outside opposition is powerful? Do you abandon a system because the outside opposition works endlessly to turn one against the other in your home? Do you abandon a system in favor of an outside system that you can see is flawed? There is no truth and no honor in that. Truth is important to some people SC - truth-seekers don't fall for a bag full of oligarchic lies.

Yes, Cuba has problems. You can thank the US for that.............

[Paradigm]

Obviously not everyone knows what socialism means(even within this thread), but I think the main takeaway from this is that young people see that capitalism isn't working for them. I doubt a lot of them have a clear idea as to what socialism is, but they probably make the association that socialism equals "not capitalism," and that's why they support it. So the real story here, I think, is not the support for socialism, but the opposition to capitalism.

[Lightman]

Most of these people probably think socialism means higher taxes on the wealthy and more social services.

[The American Lion]

Actually, at some Occupy Movements. Democratic Socialists and other small Socialist organizations offer free classes on Socialism.

Seattle International Socialist Organization has been it as well.

Yes, some of may not know the Marxist interptiation of Socialism, but it is a start.

[Fraqtive42]

Actually, at some Occupy Movements. Democratic Socialists and other small Socialist organizations offer free classes on Socialism.

Seattle International Socialist Organization has been it as well.

Yes, some of may not know the Marxist interptiation of Socialism, but it is a start.

Interesting. However, the orthodox Marxist interpretation of socialism would not approve of helping the poor via legislatory means because it would prolong the proletariat revolution. The Marxism that Bernstein, Lenin, and others broke away from was quite passive at the time. Since then, Democratic Socialists and Social Democrats have been the driving contemporary force of socialism if I am not mistaken.

[Paradigm]

It seems to me that there's been a resurgence of libertarian socialism (anarchism) since the Occupy movement began. In part, this might be explained by the fact that the Occupy movement itself operates on anarchist principles, such as horizontalism and consensus decision-making. I would also credit David Graeber as a major influence on the spread of anarchism. I'm a part of the Radical Caucus in my local Occupy movement, and anarchists make up the biggest faction within that group.

[Lightman]

Paradigm, are your people still meeting?

[Paradigm]

Paradigm, are your people still meeting?

By "my people" do you mean the caucus or the Occupy? In either case, the answer is yes. We don't have a park to Occupy, but they still do general assemblies, and the caucus meets fairly regularly(though often at times which clash with my work schedule).

[Stormsmith]

the real story here, I think, is not the support for socialism, but the opposition to capitalism.

Most of these people probably think socialism means higher taxes on the wealthy and more social services.

If I was an 18 year old wanting to attend university, and seeing the stonkingly massive amount of debt I would incur as compared to Canada, Finland etc, I would re-think my view on socialism. The fact is, America is crying out for well educated people. The jobs pay twice as much as those given to high school grads and the unemployment level is v. low.

If I was a 25 year old thinking of starting a family, I'd take an interest. kids talk.

America had her knickers in such a huge knot during the fifties that somehow, the notion of communism became one with socialism, overlooking the fact that most of America is at some point or another the beneficiaries of social safety nets.

Given the current unemployment levels, high levels of sovereign debt (which in the US was incurred mostly by right wing governments led by Reagan and Bush), it's understandable that socialism may be a bit more popular amongst the young in the US - after all they have been screwed by the older generations. What they don't get is that the solution is to tax and cut benefits for the older generation, to make them pay for what they did.

I think given the debt, and considering who was responsible for it, they must feel capitalism isn't all it's been cracked up to be. I would however point out that the seniors are the ones who have fought the wars, paved the highways, developed the Internet, built the schools, airports, etc. Younger people haven't begun to pay into America, but they've withdrawn plenty from vaccines to education to the transport systems that fetched them their cd players ad nauseum. The solution is not to cheat older Americans, its to balance the load fairly.

Add for good measure: the social programmes most helpful to older Americans are the trust funds: Medicaid et al and social securitiy.

The right wing babbles on about how the funds are vertually bankrupt. The reality is, all presidents have dipped into those funds and invested them in America. This saved the taxpayer from having to go cap-in-hand to Europe or China, looking for a loan with interest. Those trustfunds are well in the black. Its just that the moneiy is on an interest free loan to America.

[Cartertonian]

America had her knickers in such a huge knot during the fifties that somehow, the notion of communism became one with socialism

Ahhh...McCarthhy's leagacy in a sentance.

[Stormsmith]

^ "Students achieving oneness may advance to twoness" W Allen

[Lightman]

America had her knickers in such a huge knot during the fifties that somehow, the notion of communism became one with socialism, overlooking the fact that most of America is at some point or another the beneficiaries of social safety nets.

No; rather the concept of social democracy became one with revolutionary socialism.

[CounterChaos]

Interesting. However, the orthodox Marxist interpretation of socialism would not approve of helping the poor via legislatory means because it would prolong the proletariat revolution. The Marxism that Bernstein, Lenin, and others broke away from was quite passive at the time. Since then, Democratic Socialists and Social Democrats have been the driving contemporary force of socialism if I am not mistaken.

Yep, they are called revisionists now.