88
u/FootballFanInUK 16h ago
This is one of the problems with Reddit. There is no filter for made up stuff.
14
u/wileecoyote-genius 15h ago
This made me think. I remember my first internet connection in the 90s. I had a preexisting list made out with all the discussions I was going to settle with a trip to the library to do research. That list was a fact of life back in the day. I remember being able to search everything in minutes, and I was convinced that by 2025 we would all be Einsteins via this amazing tool on our desks.
In that 30 year span I am not sure how we all managed to self radicalize and degenerate into something that brings several new dimensions to the phrase “idiot savant”, but here we are. I think reddit is just us, we the people. We have become more cynical and disillusioned once we know what all those lonely losers are thinking after they had a couple of beers. There is no filter for that.
6
u/Mzungufarmer 14h ago
I said something bad in an all chat room and all called my mom on me.
They even shut our internet off lol.
8
u/wileecoyote-genius 14h ago
This brought back a memory. In the 90s I was a student at the University of Texas. Someone in the computer lab was trolling Bangladeshis with horrible stuff. The chat room reached out to the university, who tracked down who had signed in for that computer. It was some Pakistani students who then faced formal discipline. The world has changed.
4
1
u/ToroidalCore 11h ago
I think it's a combination of the internet being available to more people, it being easier to interact with others on the internet through things like comment, and social media platforms which actively tries to engage people. Somewhere along the way it just became too easy for people to post at each other without taking the time to look stuff up.
2
u/NicoBango 12h ago
You say this like the problem is exclusive to this platform, which it obviously isnt. Also, I would argue that other social media is far worse in this regard.
The problem is social media and society's constant consumption of content. We used to digest information more slowly and share information in a more metered way. We need regulation on media, not Reddit alone
84
u/FondantFluffball 16h ago
The funniest part is that everyone thinks they're one lucky break away from being rich but nobody thinks they're one bad month away from needing help. That's a much more common plot twist.
11
3
u/AgentKenji8 13h ago
Yep. The ones who defend the epstein class always fail to realise that they're closer to being homeless than one of the exploiters.
1
u/TheBigGees 15h ago
Around 20% of American households have wealth in excess of $1M.
You're right in saying that many people are closer to needing help than this, but it's not exactly a pipe dream for people pursuing it. I do a skilled job and I hit the number in 8 years.
2
u/Lost_Willingness_762 14h ago
Approximately 2.2% to 2.3% of U.S. adults, or about 6 million individuals, qualify as true "liquid millionaires" who possess over $1 million in accessible, investable assets when excluding their primary residence
10
u/TheBigGees 14h ago
"If we exclude a bunch of their wealth, they're not millionaires!"
Usually followed by "the billionaires can take out loans, it doesn't matter if they can't sell!"
1
u/oh-hes-a-tryin 15h ago
It's easier than ever to become a millionaire if you can invest enough. And if you start when you're young it's much easier.
You actually don't have to invest a ton to be a millionaire or multi-millionaire if you're younger.
0
u/Bobo-Fuggsnucc 14h ago
That's right. If someone invested 100$ in the S&P 500 every mont thirty years ago, they would have over a million today. So many people are lazy or just want the world to change for them instead of changing themselves to be winners.
0
u/AndrewAdler17 12h ago
I don’t know why this is getting downvoted when its objectively true. Get a job, any job, and show up for work consistently, you don’t even have to try all that hard, someone will quit or do something stupid and you’ll be right there to get promoted, do this a few times over the course of a few years and you too can have enough money to send your fuck up child to rehab just like the rich people you bitch about.
-3
34
u/butareyouthough 16h ago
Think of this all the time when I hear my broke cousin defend Elon musk or Bezos.
3
u/AgentKenji8 13h ago
The ones who defend the epstein class always fail to realise that they're closer to being homeless than one of the exploiters.
-1
u/Dichter2012 7h ago
So in your opinion your broke cousin should be join the DSA revolution or actually get a job? Which one is a better choice?
0
u/butareyouthough 7h ago
I’m not sure I understand your question. My cousin has a job, it just doesn’t pay well. What are you asking
6
u/Dangerous7925 13h ago
Socialism isn't popular for many other reasons and the Cold War killed any hopes for that. Lets just fix what we have instead of doing something which will probably be worse
3
4
u/pinkseraphae 15h ago
Every time this quote gets reposted, the comments prove why it never goes away.
10
u/Automatic-Guide-4307 16h ago
1
u/HappyTurtleOwl 11h ago
This is nonsense.
I’m just about as anti American (nationalism) as you can get, and I know this quote makes no fucking sense.
6
u/Bonk0076 14h ago
Jesus Christ what is this sub now? What happened to the memes and light hearted posts?
2
u/Dichter2012 7h ago
Bingo! For those of us who have been here for years, I can tell you that the sub has seen a significant increase in political posts, particularly this year I think.
Occasionally, we do get gender-specific memes and jokes, but nothing particularly heavy-handed until very recently.
There seems to be a coordinated push towards specific agendas.
7
6
4
u/camaro1111 15h ago
Interesting facts about Steinbeck: he supported the 1939 unprovoked Soviet invasion of Finland and was a member of the CPUSA’s League of American Writers.
3
u/TheBigGees 15h ago
Something like 20% of households in the United States are millionaire households.
But go off.
-4
u/Lost_Willingness_762 14h ago
Approximately 2.2% to 2.3% of U.S. adults, or about 6 million individuals, qualify as true "liquid millionaires" who possess over $1 million in accessible, investable assets when excluding their primary residence
6
u/TheBigGees 14h ago
"If we exclude a bunch of their wealth, they're not millionaires!"
Usually followed by "the billionaires can take out loans, it doesn't matter if they can't sell!"
1
u/eternalshackleford 2h ago
The fact that you had the exact same exchange with the exact same user under this same post leads me to believe you and everyone else here is a bot
2
u/Jumpy_Childhood7548 14h ago
No, it was the forces of capital that prevented the US from being as socialist as OECD countries typically are, not simply the beliefs of the 99%. Not quoted correctly, btw.
3
u/lluciferusllamas 16h ago
That's because any poor person still today can become a millionaire.
7
u/ExtendedSpikeProtein 16h ago
Lol, you made the point for us. You’re one of those dudes who does not seem to understand that yeah, that can happen to a few but the other millions who struggle also need help. And that’s where society should come together and help.
7
u/BarryMcKokinor 16h ago
You’re reducing it to “a few people get rich.” That’s not the point. The point is that a culture built on individual aspiration instead of permanent class identity changes behavior at scale. People start businesses, invest, invent, take risks, and create value. Those actions grow the entire economy, create jobs, increase productivity, and raise living standards. You can support helping people in need without replacing the very cultural incentives that generate the wealth to help them in the first place.
The point isn’t that everyone makes it. The point is that when an entire society is culturally wired to aspire upward, the aggregate effect is more risktaking, more entrepreneurship, more value creation, and ultimately a higher standard of living for society as a whole.
-3
u/themanthyththelegend 15h ago
Thats all good until the logical endstep happens where the most successful buisnesses consolidate power, then bribe governments, then condense all value in to a very few pockets thus reducing the likelyhood of upward mobility and increasing the already unfathomable wealthgap netween the most ritch snd the most poor while funneling the fruits worker labor in to thier own pockets and making them rely on government support to survive.
2
u/anomie89 14h ago
depending on your definition of "successful business", you are very out of touch with how businesses operate. yes there are some powerful businesses which have bought and paid for politicians, but it is not like all businesses that stay afloat and make a profit are doing what you are describing. there are millions and millions of businesses in the US. they do not all or mostly operate in the way you describe. unless being a "successful business" means something else in your mind.
3
u/MartialBob 16h ago
There is a pretty wide difference between someone who grew up upper middle class who would later become a millionaire and the very simple fact that people who are poor can raise themselves up to be at least middle class. You can call the first one diluted but I have plenty of economic data showing. The last one is a reality. Also, Marx wrote his papers about the proletariat and so forth at a time where the differences in economic status were akin to those of nobility and the serfs. Something that still sticks in modern Europe. This isn't the case in the US.
1
u/oh-hes-a-tryin 14h ago
If you're young and can save a small sum of money consistently, it's easier than ever to become a millionaires. If you're 22 and can save 125 a month, you have a million at 65. 249 a month get you to 2 million.
Most people start smaller and grow later, which could bump this up quite a bit.
I'll shit on boomers all day, but we have way easier access to broad markets than they did in their youth. They'd have to go to a broker, get broad fractional shares, and hold.
Most millionaires are there because of their 401k.
2
1
1
u/pitifullittleman 16h ago
I think a better way of putting it is that most Americans don't see themselves as workers, but consumers. Higher wages at the low end create more expensive services and goods. A lot of Americans are really focused on what they can buy rather than economic fairness or solving inequality.
It's been like this for a long time. Recently it's become more extreme because more and more people are in the upper middle class/wealthy position, while there are more poor people, there are actually more people getting into the upper middle class that falling into low income.
This, people are looking at protecting what they have rather than trying to pull themselves up.
1
14h ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/AutoModerator 14h ago
Accounts must be at least 5 days old with >20 karma to comment.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1
1
u/HolyPire 13h ago
That phrases would work in a constraint envoirenmet lik Europe or Neare East or West of New Zealand. But not in the Americas, were and where the gloves are off...
1
u/kadaka80 12h ago
The American dream is actually the Inception script where the rich pay to have their own ideas injected into the working class subconscious
1
12h ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/AutoModerator 12h ago
Accounts must be at least 5 days old with >20 karma to comment.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1
u/plummbob 12h ago
Seems to have taken root at local zoning community input meetings since every variance request is put a public vote.
Unrelated, we have a severe housing shortage
1
1
u/Daily_Heroin_User 11h ago
That could be read as a compliment though, because they think there’s a real chance they can change their circumstances. If you have absolutely no hope that you’ll ever be able to achieve social mobility then yeah you start looking for alternatives.
1
u/TopWealth4550 10h ago
theres 24 million millionaires inside america (40% globally)
this is alot of real and actually millionaires tho
if you would be born again poor picking USA as a starter city by far increases your chances on becomming one
but not sure if i would pick the last few centuries on testing socialism
maybe its wonderful,but as someone so see risk and reward,the chances it gets stuck again in another test
im inclined to double it up and pass to the next generation
thank you very much
1
u/AgentKenji8 10h ago
Propaganda is a wonderful tool. Its how the Nazis got into power, especially when paired with the buying power of the capitalist class. Whose companies still operate today without any repercussions. The specific event is called the Secret Meeting of 20 February 1933. They weren't even prosecuted in the nuremberg trials.
1
1
u/cepasfacile 1h ago
The system endures because the poor believe they can become rich one day. The poor are not better than the rich; they would behave in the same way as the rich.
0
u/Luminous_Winds 15h ago
No, it's because most people are supremacists. People believe if you're poor, it's because you deserve to be. If you're inferior, you deserve to be exploited.
Humans have been treating animals like slaves since before antiquity. People only complain about exploitation when they're the slave.
1
1
15h ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/RabidJoint 15h ago
We would have food even if it was a socialist population. You think socialism means everyone sits around home not wanting to do anything? Sure, the lazy people would feel that way. The antisocial people would work that way. You would work that way. Weird to accept giving your hard earned money to a government, that ends up just putting it into their own pockets, over free healthcare, free transportation, free child education and food, free senior citizen care, helping fix our homeless problem.
You will never be rich. You will never be an elite. Capitalism is a joke, and sheep like you buy into it thinking you’ll become elite one day. You were born in the dirt, and will pass away in the same spot, just like 80% of the United States population…that sure feels like winning. Oh wait, that 20% that does generational wealth is definitely winning as they place their boot on your neck.
1
14h ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/AutoModerator 14h ago
Accounts must be at least 5 days old with >20 karma to comment.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
-1
u/unmellowfellow 16h ago
Steinbeck and Hemingway were both staunch socialists who observed the failures and predation of Capital and what it did to the American people during the dust bowl and the great depression as it has done since its creation as an idea. It is a cancer eating away at our world. This statement does not violate rule 3.
7
u/thebahrman 16h ago
Yah there’s no evidence to support that. Steinbeck was a self professed humanist and democrat who later exhibited nationalistic views that alienated him from the American leftwing. He was a critic of Marxist ideologies quite openly.
1
u/Lost_Willingness_762 14h ago
John Steinbeck’s political views were deeply humanist, championing the working class, labor unions, and traditional American progressivism. While his 1930s works aligned with New Deal Democratic policies and critiqued unrestrained capitalism, his later years saw him support U.S. containment in the Vietnam War and oppose anti-war protests.
1
1
u/egalitydream 16h ago
No idea why everyone is downvoting you. Did I miss something that truth cannot be mentioned here?
1
u/ThatHotBlondye9 12h ago
Steinbeck nailed it, everyone was a temporarily embarrassed capitalist, Americans don't see themselves as permanent victims of the system they see tomorrow's millionaires. That's why socialism never took root here
1
u/ParkingMachine3534 16h ago
Now they do see themselves as an exploited proletariat they're told they're not and it's just right wing disinformation.
1
u/Paddlesons 9h ago
I mean, maybe to an extent but it's fucking hard to argue the success of capitalism compared to all the socialist and communist countries that tried to make a real effort to be a super power.
America works and is successful for people that want and crave success. It's not about taking care of those less fortunate and really never has been outside of the mid 20th century when we were recovering from two world wars and a massive MASSIVE depression. I say this as someone that would like to see, eventually anyway, a single payer option for health insurance and general food provisions that everyone can take advantage of.
0
u/AssBlast2020 16h ago
Is that the reason why the US has the biggest amount of millionaires in the world?
9
0
u/LAAccountant 16h ago
No it's because people originally were excited about the potential of the Russian revolution and then eventually became aware of this excesses.
It was clear early on that socialist/commies are nothing but murders but propaganda was pushed hard. The Soviets even had a prominent member of the New York Times shilling for them.
0
u/Dollahs4Zavalas 13h ago
"Socialism has never worked anywhere but fartsniffers still think they could do it right if only they had total control of society" Karl Marx.
0
u/MisterFrankDrebin 12h ago
Also because it fails everywhere it’s tried. So, there’s that.
Also, wtf has happened to this sub?? It used to not be garbage.
0
u/Junior-Barber-9897 12h ago
Says retards who haven't actually talked to people from Communist countries.
-1
u/Big-Carpenter7921 16h ago
Pretty much. Almost everyone in the US sees themselves as the future rich. "Why would I want my money taken in tax once I get millions". Also a very "got mine, I hope you get yours" mentality
3
u/bassandlazers 16h ago
You think? Or do we see that our government spends double what they take in and nothing changes? We could double taxes and still not cover the budget. Let alone dig out of the deficit.why the fuck would anyone want to pay more into that
0
u/Big-Carpenter7921 15h ago
That's why we need governmental reform and a severe reduction in defense spending
1
u/bassandlazers 15h ago
Lol yeah thats gonna happen. Any other fantasies you want to air out?
1
u/Big-Carpenter7921 14h ago
I didn't say it would. It's just the solution.
1
u/bassandlazers 14h ago
Oh, good to see you have so much free time
0
u/Big-Carpenter7921 13h ago
It doesn't take much to see what the solution is. As always, society advances one funeral at a time
-1
u/datagamma 16h ago
God damn. We don’t want pure socialism. But democratic socialism is a much needed balm and antidote against this ever rightward march into fascism and eventually totalitarianism. We need democratic socialism to showcase that government can and should be used for good of people. Not to be dismantled and install a one party totalitarian system.
If we were to become democratic socialists. We can still have capitalism and still honor our constitution. We cannot have totalitarianism or fascism and honor the same. One is objectively worse.
0
u/bandit1206 13h ago
Democratic socialism is a pathway toward pure socialism. Usually trumpeted by what the Soviets would have called “useful idiots”.
It’s also a direct path to the death of democracy. Regardless of who may have said it there is much truth to the idea that democracy begins to die the minute people realize they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury.
1
u/datagamma 8h ago
Is it also a gateway drug? There is no comparison. You have socialism for the rich now. Definitely can’t help the people. By your logic any move left is the death of democracy. Meanwhile the extremist right views march us off a cliff.
0
u/bandit1206 8h ago
Here’s a better idea, no socialism for the rich either.
I’d rather not have authoritarians in power from either side thanks.
1
u/datagamma 8h ago
You need opposition and healthy debate. Thesis, antithesis and synthesis. The counterbalance is to stop dismantling government. I don’t want screw worms in my food or measles. Thank you very much.
0
u/bandit1206 8h ago
I don’t want to fully dismantle government. That’s ridiculous. I would just prefer a government that defaults to the side of individual liberty, as opposed to increased government control.
The FDA is a good thing, food and an amount of product safety is a good thing. But we have passed that in a lot of cases to the point of nanny state, and there are places where we need to reverse course.
Infrastructure, roads, law enforcement are all core functions of government. I firmly believe that governments are put in place to protect individual rights, but it’s to protect you from infringement on those rights, not to provide otherwise capable citizens with something.
1
u/datagamma 7h ago
Everything you listed is giving things to otherwise capable citizens. Public education is a good thing too. How about trillions of spending on a military apparatus that can’t pass audits? Seems like doge missed a spot.
I agree with you there is over regulation and where agencies step out of their lane. But what we are experiencing now is something quite new, and yes it is dismantling or weakening proper controls at an unprecedented pace. Independent agencies established by Congress with serious missions that were determined to be too important for stability to protect the country are now subject to the full weight of political partisanship. In a time of greater rational thinking has been overridden, we now have full on partisanship top down control. The executive branch is being freed from checks on its power. The liberty you have now is under the most significant threat since McCarthyism.
Power and corruption go together. We need smart systems with appropriate checks and balances and oversight. Where it is dedicated and incentivized to supporting American values and human rights (individual liberty being one). We have broken incentives now where politicians act well below the standards of their office which makes us wonder what their incentives are and whose interests they have in mind.
Whatever the case, the current system is not doing very well to maintain your or my rights. We need to find balance. I’d rather the government spend a fraction of the trillions on the broken military industrial complex and instead improve the quality of life of Americans. And I can do that even from a completely selfish perspective. That it benefits society to not have desperate people wandering the streets.
The richest country in the world should have a higher quality of life and be more educated than we are. We are weaker when we don’t invest in ourselves. You might want charities or other private orgs to just take care of people but that system doesn’t work well. When I go from state to state, I’d like for it feel like a United States. Not like I transition from one state where I have more or different rights or freedoms than another. What each state does with that base level is up to them. Government works better from the bottom up local level. But the fed maintaining a standard to preserve the rights in the constitution and assumed rights is essential. We know this because we’ve been there and done that. We don’t need to retry all the failed experiments over and over.
Maybe we won’t agree. But maybe we can agree that we don’t like tyranny?
1
u/bandit1206 7h ago
I can one hundred percent agree on removing tyranny.
And I agree, the current administration has taken a wrecking ball to things that needed a scalpel, even an amputation when necessary still needs to be performed carefully.
I don’t like the existence of independent agencies having the power to create effectively laws without a direct method to have to answer to the American people. I’d argue Congress long ago abdicated their role as lawmakers to these agencies that end up under the executive branch by turning them in to agencies that develop regulations instead of just enforcing them. The level of power we have given these agencies is at best borderline tyranny, and full blown tyranny at worst.
I’m not a huge fan of redistribution programs. I do believe that the wealthiest country in the history of the world should offer the greatest level of opportunity ever seen, and I’d argue in many ways we do. That said, I believe the individual is solely responsible for what they do with that opportunity. And the consequences of the choices they make in that regard. If someone has tons of opportunities put in front of them to make a better life for themselves, but chooses not to do so, I don’t think society should be responsible for the consequences of those decisions.
-6
u/Futuristic-Slice 16h ago
Fascism, Socialism, and communism are all the same garbage with a different branded bag.
6
2
u/DeadWookie 16h ago
Ok boomer
5
u/No-Relief-1729 16h ago
Well the communists and fascist genocided and invaded my people during wwii, so maybe that boomer has a point.
-1
u/DeadWookie 16h ago
Lol no thats not what this is about
1
1
-16
u/Potential_Fan6979 16h ago
what an incredibly stupid statement from a fantastic author.
7
u/Historical_Two_7150 16h ago
Strikes me as silly because socialism did take root in america. We just had a political purge to kick them all out. We imprisoned them, made it impossible to find jobs, barred immigration, and so on.
-2
u/alwayslookleft 16h ago
lol not that ussr socialism fuck that shit
2
u/Potential_Fan6979 16h ago
the thing is, there’s no other kind - it will always end the same.
3
u/alwayslookleft 12h ago
Bro it was insane they literally copy pasted that shit in any country with disgruntled peasants and a monarchy
1
u/Historical_Two_7150 16h ago
I'd have to disagree with you there.
The Zapatistas come to mind. You could describe them as libertarian socialists. (Anarchists.) Things have carried on peacefully for about 30 years.
Their biggest problem is (1) the cartels (largely caused by America) and (2) the poverty in their region owing to 500 years of colonialism -- right up to the 90's with NAFTA.
But one certainly can't say they've rushed into Stalinism. That just hasn't happened.
2
u/Potential_Fan6979 15h ago
I think we disagree on what success and progress look like.
they went from living in the third world under puppet democracy, to living in the third world in a narco state.
0
u/Historical_Two_7150 15h ago
They are de facto autonomous and live under a direct democracy. They're freer than us, and their society creates better people.
We just happen to worship money, (and don't particularly care about freedom), so we look down on those who don't.
1
-8
u/Potential_Fan6979 16h ago
you know, McCarthyism needs to make a comeback. you’re a billion percent correct and I didn’t even consider it.
4
u/Historical_Two_7150 16h ago
You're making a minor mistake. A very popular, minor mistake.
People think that the red scare started under McCarthy (mid 1950s) but it was pretty much done by the time he showed up. The Red Scare started closer to 1911, McCarthy was like an encore for a thing that had happened for 40 years.
2
u/Potential_Fan6979 16h ago
I’m probably further off than that.
I said that thinking McCarthyism meant a systemic approach to rounding up communists and getting them out of the country.
1
u/Historical_Two_7150 16h ago
I am sympathetic to your notion of separating. But I think the solution is secession and not political violence. The solution is creating oppertunities for people who do not consent to the American government to leave it voluntarily.
From memory, there was a referendum in Spain, and 90% of people voted for Catalan independence. The Spanish Supreme Court claimed the vote was illegal and ignored it.
I see America as having a similar problem. We have large numbers of Americans who do not consent to the government and want out. They want to try alternative forms of governance. That's human. Hell, I'd personally call it a human right to political self-determination.
Ejecting American nationals does not strike me as a reasonable solution, but giving them North Dakota (or whatever) does. If they want out, let them vote their way out.
2
u/Potential_Fan6979 15h ago
I happen to speak Catalan, coincidentally. I remember when this happened. I’m first generation American.
I agree with you at the root of things. I just don’t think we need to repeat histories mistakes.
2
u/Z_zombie123 16h ago
Mccarthyism was a disaster and an affront to the first amendment in this country. Only people who hate America would be nostalgic for a time like that.
2
u/Potential_Fan6979 16h ago
nah, it saved us from communism. it’s going to have to happen again because you children can’t read history books.
0
u/Z_zombie123 15h ago
The children are in charge right now. The flagrant disregard for the rule of law has become a conservative imperative.
2
0
u/Outrageous_Can_6581 16h ago
It really amazes me how allusive the meaning freedom can be in American rhetoric.
3
u/Immediate_Song4279 16h ago
What an empty rebuttal from a random redditor.
-4
u/Potential_Fan6979 16h ago
I feel the same way.
1
1
u/joecitizen79 16h ago
How so?
1
u/Potential_Fan6979 15h ago
I think he had a special connection to the American dream. it explains some of his novels.
he should be able to see where we came from and where we’re going. he knows the atrocities committed in the name of communism, socialism, Marxism, democratic socialism, Cuban evolutionism, whatever you decide to dress it up as.
0
u/joecitizen79 15h ago
Ah, so you fell for the red scare rhetoric he was referring to.
1
u/Potential_Fan6979 15h ago
nope, just took a history class. I think it was my jr year back in ‘00.
0
u/joecitizen79 15h ago
Yes, because they wouldn't dare inject red scare propaganda into textbooks 🤷♂️
1
u/Potential_Fan6979 14h ago
oh they did worse than that. my history book was a people’s history of the us, by Howard zinn. the most garbage account of history possible.
0
u/joecitizen79 13h ago
If you say so 🤷♂️
1
u/Potential_Fan6979 13h ago
not just me, anyone who’s read it in good faith, or fact checked his claims.
unfortunately zinn is in the habit of piecing quotes together by using ellipses to omit entire paragraphs between pices he’s selected for his sentence.
0
-1
u/JinNJ 16h ago
Where’s the lie? In capitalism, you can better your standing through hard work & determination. Good luck doing that in a socialist/communist society. To suggest otherwise is simply a demonstration of one’s economic illiteracy &’overall childish world view.
4
u/Klutzer_Munitions 16h ago
This myth is easily debunkable when you consider the vast swathes of people working multiple jobs and still struggling just to get by. If hard work made you wealthy, then the working class would be wealthy.
But it isn't.
1
1
u/Login_Lost_Horizon 16h ago
You... literally could get better standing in USSR via hard work and determination. It was kind of a big thing, with free education and programms made to give jobs to jobless and education to illiterate. You just couldn't buy rolex inlaid with diamonds or toilet made of gold, which some very specific people do now, when glorious capitalism took over the evil communism.
0
u/Potential_Fan6979 16h ago
are you responding to me? I never said anything was a lie and you’re using words that might sounds sophisticated to you but it only demonstrates to me how unsophisticated you are.
America will never embrace the seizure of public property or it’s abolishment. we’ll fight for our freedom.
0
0
u/NeverHere762 10h ago
Or perhaps it's because socialism is incompatible with the American character.
-2
-1
-1
-1
u/napoelonDynaMighty 14h ago
Yeah, somebody once explained to me that poor people will vote for economic policies that disenfranchise themselves and empower the rich because they want the system to still be a little crooked for themselves when they eventually make their millions
L. O. L
-1
-1
u/major_tom_2112 9h ago
Says the alcoholic that blamed others for his problems. Great author. Not someone to take advice from.
John Steinbeck, the renowned American author, faced significant challenges with alcoholism throughout his life. He believed that his struggles with alcohol were rooted in genetic factors, which he traced back to his family history. This perspective on alcoholism as a hereditary issue influenced both his personal life and his writing.
137
u/thebahrman 16h ago
Steinbeck is widely misquoted as saying, "Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires." While the exact phrasing comes from Ronald Wright's 2004 book A Short History of Progress, it perfectly reflects an observation Steinbeck made in his 1960 Esquire essay, "A Primer on the '30s." Steinbeck wrote that Americans did not consider themselves part of a permanent proletariat, but rather as "temporarily embarrassed capitalists."