Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

wnylib

(26,917 posts)
55. Most American voters don't have that background understanding
Fri Jul 3, 2026, 07:45 AM
Friday

of Europe, but they do know that health care is more available there for everyone than in the US. I read your post about the cost of your recent health crisis. In the US, many people would have gone bankrupt to get that care. Others would simply not have received it at all because of an inability to afford the initial visit to a doctor to be diagnosed. By law, ERs here have to treat people who arrive without health insurance, but in practice, those patients get poor attention and treatment because they can't afford the cost of health insurance or to pay out of pocket for diagnosis and treatment.

Of course not all European nations are the same and not all people within them are the same. But in general, there appears to be a better approach to some issues of quality of life than in the US. Here there is an attitude that my German-born great aunt used to refer to contemptuously as, "I've got mine and devil take the hindmost." She was my grandmother's sister and their family left Kaiser Bill's German Empire in 1890 when they were young children, long before modern social programs.

From what I sometimes read, the EU's regulations on things like social media and food production and processing are more mindful of people's protections than in the US where corporations under unregulated capitalism are kings that own Congress. Yet European nations also have quite successful capitalist businesses and corporations. I don't believe that they are faultless utopias, but they are more socially oriented in many ways that we are not.

I was born a few years after WWII ended, so I remember when the US still had corporate regulations from the FDR era on monopolies that prevented huge corporate conglomerates from ruling as if capitalism were a governing system instead of being a financial tool of society. That was before RW politicians chipped away at financial regulations in pursuit of raw, unregulated capitalism.

I am also old enough to remember who the European leaders were that you mentioned. Not that I knew a lot about them, but I did have a very general idea of where they stood politically. Even with a more conservative swing in Europe now, they are socially ahead of the US in many areas of quality of life.

I don't have an in-depth knowledge of German history, but have learned on my own more than we were taught in high school and college courses on European history. I wanted to understand the background of my mother's family. So I understand what you mean about the post war period adjustments from the Prussian authoritarian, bureaucratic way of life.

My mother's paternal side were from West Prussia, near what was then the southern border between Prussia and Poland. Her grandfather was a Uhlan general from an untitled junker family. In 1888 he supported the social and political reform plans of Kaiser Wilhelm II's parents, Kaiser Friedrich and Kaiserina Victoria (daughter of Queen Victoria) for a parliamentarian system like Britain's. But Friedrich only lived a few months as Kaiser and his son, Kaiser Wilhelm II, charged his father's reform supporters with treason, so my mother's grandparents fled with their children to the US.

The maternal side of my mother's family came from a little village called Dargun in what was then Mecklenburg-Schwerin, not very far from the Danish border. The village was founded by Danish monks (13th century, I think) who built their monastery on a mission to convert the Pagan Germans there. That side of the family left, like hundreds of other people from Mecklenburg, for better economic opportunities.

Bureaucratic sloganeers are, IMO, the downside of socialism and one reason why I couldn't support socialism as a political/economic system. But incorporating some social programs into a capitalist democracy as the FDR adminstrations did, is something that I think Americans are ready to do as a reaction against the present move toward a fascist oligarchy.



Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

He's right Fiendish Thingy Thursday #1
I have been saying this over and over for the 8 years (today is my 8 year anniversary) I have been on DU Celerity Thursday #16
Happy Anniversary SocialDemocrat61 Thursday #30
thanks so much Celerity Thursday #35
What's the difference? Farmer-Rick Thursday #17
It's more than semantics Fiendish Thingy Thursday #23
I agree AZProgressive Thursday #2
And, believe it or not, as president, Biden was the closest to a Keynesian since LBJ. Fiendish Thingy Thursday #24
Like when the Danish PM reminded someone that Denmark's a market economy, not socialist. betsuni Thursday #3
That reminds me of a quote from Tom Souzzi AZProgressive Thursday #7
These secret conspire & whine cocktail parties sound intriguing. betsuni Thursday #36
Oh, and same revolution person said attendees at such Democratic events are "older, whiter, and wealthier" betsuni Friday #43
Not only that DFW Friday #44
I forgot the canapes: "Some of the wealthiest members of the political establishment are hiding behind closed doors betsuni Friday #57
When I hear canapes, I always think caviar, which I hate DFW Friday #58
I love the Scandinavian smoked cod roe caviar that comes in tubes (any seafood-mayo or cheese in tubes). betsuni Friday #61
I used to get this a lot in France in the 1960s, from many 18 year old experts on the USA who had never been there DFW Friday #63
Norman Thomas, perennial socialist candidate, knew FDR was not a Socialist DBoon Friday #59
More of us every day. BlueTsunami2018 Thursday #4
Socialism represents public power. Of course Emile Thursday #5
Absolutely, and, I'm tired of the bad faith false choice. Oneironaut Thursday #6
But MAGA morons believe Fox, and Trump, and SInclaire radio, NewsMax etc. They're dumb and hateful people ChicagoTeamster Thursday #8
Great, just please stop using the term "socialist." Say "Democrat." Period. Auggie Thursday #9
Doesn't matter SurfLiberal Thursday #10
That word can rally their troops. Like your idea -- stay home. Auggie Thursday #25
Doesn't mean you have to call yourself one Boo1 Thursday #26
Sorta like the Nordic model Joinfortmill Thursday #11
social democracy is a foundation for our Nordic Model (I am in Sweden) Celerity Thursday #13
The elephant in the room that is not being addressed here.. ananda Thursday #12
This message was self-deleted by its author applegrove Thursday #14
It is called liberalism in Canada. applegrove Thursday #15
The Liberal Party of Canada is not a social democratic party, the New Democratic Party is the social democratic party. Celerity Thursday #27
They could have had Polliviere Callie1979 Friday #51
Economically, Carney is making multiple moves that are similar to what Poilievre would do, Celerity Friday #54
Small "L" liberalism Fiendish Thingy Thursday #29
Used to be called that in the US, too. wnylib Thursday #37
Then the neocons took away the word liberal by making it derogatory. applegrove Thursday #38
I refused to have it taken from me. There is nothing wrong wnylib Friday #41
Liberal and Socialist have been tainted by the Rs and their Big Media 31j20b3 Thursday #18
John Steinbeck quote anamnua Thursday #19
And that was many decades BEFORE Fox Noise. DFW Friday #53
As soon as the Govt starts bailing out failed "free market" Capitalism, any argument against Govt social programs ToxMarz Thursday #20
Right you are. Tax breaks for corporations is just a direct applegrove Thursday #22
That's a consequence of financial deregulations that wnylib Thursday #39
Regulated capitalism saw capitalism as an economic tool. Capitlists seek to unleash it as a form of governance. ToxMarz Friday #42
yup Skittles Friday #45
It doesn't matter Cirsium Thursday #21
Too many FASCISTS in the U.S! Remember in WWII, it was the fascists who REALLY hated the socialists. eom Exp Thursday #28
In The Third Reich, they merged DFW Friday #46
Absolutely. SamuelAdams Thursday #31
I have a confession to make SocialDemocrat61 Thursday #32
Same here. I have always said that I am a liberal Dem to the left of center, but wnylib Friday #40
It gets complicated when you say As In Europe. DFW Friday #47
Most American voters don't have that background understanding wnylib Friday #55
Pretty sad when affordable day care, affordable rent, and affordable transportation are called "socialism". Bluetus Thursday #33
Sad and disingenuous as well. DFW Friday #48
Krugman is tops BaronChocula Thursday #34
And the supposedly business-friendly Republicans cut Obama's business Stimulus package in half DFW Friday #49
Scumbags BaronChocula Friday #50
It is a mentality we will never understand, and they exploit that to the max DFW Friday #52
"but they are grateful for our reluctance to do so" BaronChocula Friday #60
I have run into Gingrich a few times, but never really talked to him. DFW Friday #65
He's very wrong TVguyCards Friday #56
I think most people voting for candidates to get universal applegrove Friday #62
I wouldn't be so sure TVguyCards Friday #64
"make the argument that workers should own the means of production" EX500rider Friday #66
Ahh I was expecting you to say that :) TVguyCards Friday #67
So the short answer is there have been no economically successful socialists countries? EX500rider Friday #68
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»There Are Very Few Social...»Reply #55