Is the World Moving Toward Socialism and Away From Capitalism

[rgray222]

The evidence is beginning to accumulate that the world is experiencing a resurgence of socialist ideas, particularly among the younger demographic, people aged 18-45 years old. Depending on which poll you are reading Socialism gets favorable rating 49% NYT, 53% Cato Institute and 58% from the Sienna Poll. In the United States and Europe, figures like Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez have brought democratic socialist policies into the mainstream. By the end of 2025, there were 250 Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) members holding elected public office across 40 states. This shift does not necessarily indicate a global transition to state socialism or the collapse of capitalism; it does signal that change is arriving.

I find that when you press people about their support for socialism, you get something very different. They describe a capitalist framework with a very wide safety net. They do not describe the abolition of private property or the loss of market systems.

Figuring out exactly what people want will help shape our economic futures. Is Socialism in our future?

[SilentFeathers]

Posted by rgray222 (here)
The evidence is beginning to accumulate that the world is experiencing a resurgence of socialist ideas, particularly among the younger demographic, people aged 18-45 years old. Depending on which poll you are reading Socialism gets favorable rating 49% NYT, 53% Cato Institute and 58% from the Sienna Poll. In the United States and Europe, figures like Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez have brought democratic socialist policies into the mainstream. By the end of 2025, there were 250 Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) members holding elected public office across 40 states. This shift does not necessarily indicate a global transition to state socialism or the collapse of capitalism; it does signal that change is arriving.

I find that when you press people about their support for socialism, you get something very different. They describe a capitalist framework with a very wide safety net. They do not describe the abolition of private property or the loss of market systems.

Figuring out exactly what people want will help shape our economic futures. Is Socialism in our future?

Ignorance and lack of logic, reason, and common sense is a destructive and deadly mental disorder, history has proven this time and time again.

[sdv]

Posted by rgray222 (here)
The evidence is beginning to accumulate that the world is experiencing a resurgence of socialist ideas, particularly among the younger demographic, people aged 18-45 years old. Depending on which poll you are reading Socialism gets favorable rating 49% NYT, 53% Cato Institute and 58% from the Sienna Poll. In the United States and Europe, figures like Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez have brought democratic socialist policies into the mainstream. By the end of 2025, there were 250 Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) members holding elected public office across 40 states. This shift does not necessarily indicate a global transition to state socialism or the collapse of capitalism; it does signal that change is arriving.

I find that when you press people about their support for socialism, you get something very different. They describe a capitalist framework with a very wide safety net. They do not describe the abolition of private property or the loss of market systems.

Figuring out exactly what people want will help shape our economic futures. Is Socialism in our future?

If you look at the success stories of China and Scandinavian countries, a mixed system works in eradicating absolute poverty and ensuring a better standard of living for all.

We should perhaps get away from the attachment of naming and rather focus on what we want to achieve in terms of basic standard of living? Each country creates its own system to suit its particular needs. China calls their system socialism with Chinese characteristics (but led by a political party/movement calling itself communism, so that may still be the ultimate goal, which actually can be seen as a noble vision if you can overcome the knee-jerk Western reaction to that word). Unfortunately, in countries like the US (and perhaps even my own), the rent-seeking wealthy class and self-enriching political class are in control. IMO the impetus to change comes from pain ... those in control will tinker to appease the exploited masses, trying to keep the rent-seeking apparatus intact, and make it appear like positive change. The alternative is perhaps revolution, which can be very destructive initially. China itself went through revolution that caused an immense amount of death and suffering, and it took a long time you get the revolution on a steady track to achieve the upliftment of all its people, as was the intention of the original revolution.

[Bill Ryan]

Do also see these relevant threads:

• The Capitalism Problem
• How Capitalism will Destroy the World

(My $0.02 worth: 'Socialism' may not be the polar opposite of 'Capitalism'. There may well be other systems that can work much more equitably than the current 'western' model, which entirely rewards greed, corruption, exploitation, endless growth which is impossible to sustain, and environmental destruction.)

[Ernie Nemeth]

Capitalism is anachronistic to this game of "Three Card Monte" that our current fiat system resembles.

Add to that the new class of business, the multinational corporation, considered by the courts as 'Uber" human with rights accorded as such, who have no affiliation for any country over another, despite what they may claim.

In such a clime it is no wonder people want a socialist style regime.

Socialism requires acquiescence of the individual to the will of the majority based on ever-changing principles, and overrides individual freedom. Socialism does not recognize fundamental rights except as defined by/for the purposes of the current paradigm. In socialist regimes rights are replaced by privileges - that can be taken away at the whim and whimsy of the state.

Once socialism creeps into a state the outcome is inevitably more socialist control. Socialist control comes in the form of regulation and license, thereby eliminating or severely curtailing innovation and enterprise. The tent of socialism is large, but it relies on standardization and identification. Privacy is the enemy of socialism, and it is the prime target. Once privacy concerns are integrated free speech can be curtailed and an official narrative can be established, taught, enforced, and normalized. (We are here)

Then a true communist regime can begin.
Socialism leads to Communism.

So, is the world moving toward communism and away from capitalism? No. It's moving away from capitalism (free enterprise) toward cronyism and monopoly where we will all be equally powerless and poor.

[Bill Ryan]

This is my neighbor farmer's house. It has no windows, and living there is a single mother with 6 teenage/young adult children:



I've never been in the house, but my friend Gilberto has. He said it was perfectly organized, immaculately clean and tidy. And they're all the nicest people.

They live quite okay. They own cows and goats, which they graze on our fields, and they whole family is 100% healthy and in good shape. The kids learned to do farm work as young as aged 6, milking the cows and goats, and as they grew older learned to mend the fences, carry the milk churns to the road for pickup by the milk company (they're heavy!!), and so on.

They don't have a vehicle, of course, but don't need one as the bus fares are super-cheap here ($1 for 20 miles). They wash their clothes in the river, and have a very tiny fridge, an old desktop kind of thing, but it still works.

Here's my point.

There's NO WAY this beautiful, healthy family could get rich — or even have enough $$ or assets as anyone at all reading this right now.

They can't gamble on the stock market, start an expanding business, employ other people, or save for their retirement.

The entire world is unfair. Beautiful, kind people are poor. Greedy sociopaths get mega-rich and gain power.

This is what 'capitalism' leads to. It supports and encourages this inequality.

It all has to come down.

If socialism is the answer, bring it on — for all these hundreds of millions of people who live just like this.

And my neighbors are lucky. In South Africa and parts of India, we see this:



And here's the irony. That's an Alamy licensable photo. So to use it for a professional ('capitalist'!) purpose, Alamy charges a fee — which ranges between $20 and $365 or more.

F*ck them. Do the people living in those tin shacks get a cent? Of course not.

[sdv]

I will emphasise again that fear of and demonization of any 'ism' system is a distraction. Socialism is bad because ..., so let's keep capitalism, which is obviously turned toxic and cannot be reformed. Communism, of course, is the ultimate danger so let's take away people's freedoms and double down on all that is bad about capitalism and democracy in the US.

The truth is North Korea is probably the only pure socialist country, which may have reached the stage of being called communist (which does allow for a 'dear leader', strangely enough).

If you reject socialism because it has inherent dangers, then you must reject capitalism. All systems have strengths and weakness, and all are vulnerable to being corrupted by the worst in human nature. A relatively good and benign leader can be followed by a maniac, with the same system.

What about socialism is beneficial for a population?

Workers own the means of production, not oligarchs. Westerners will think purely in terms of profit, and who gets the biggest slice of the pie, and who deserves the biggest slice of the pie, and recite the propaganda to justify that belief. How about thinking in terms of workers knowing what safety measures are needed on the factory floor, how machinery must be maintained, what quality standards are needed, what working conditions and benefits they need for a good quality of life ...? You see, ownership is not just about money. If workers at a factory do not pay attention to quality standards, what happens? The factory ceases to exist. Oligarchs get protected from consequences for the people they harm and the mistakes they make. That is a tradition that should not be inherited from capitalism.

But, countries that incorporate a huge dose of socialism values in their governance do make sure that education, health, housing are available to all and not denied to people who cannot afford to pay. In some countries, since health is seen as a human right, although privately owned medical facilities and manufacturers exist, they many not make a profit beyond operating profit and they are carefully monitored. That is all surely good?

You don't have to be a socialist to accept some basic socialist values, and in places like the US, people are being conned to reject reform and change that would make the country a much better place because the ultra wealthy class are greedy, and the political class is easily bought. Are people free to murder each other in the US? Then why is allowing people the freedom to exploit and cause suffering others for self-enrichment accepted?

None of the isms are bad. None of them work or do not work.They are all vulnerable to human stupidity, greed and violence, and to ending up with a crazy leader who enables great suffering up be inflicted on the world. With the Nazis it happened quickly. With the Israelis it has happened over decades. With the US it has been more than a century because it has been extremely successful in its propaganda and convincing the world that it was good for nuclear bombs to be dropped on two cities, for countries to be invaded and destroyed, for the entire world to support voracious materialism and consumerism in America, etc.

But let us not be reactionary and put our faith in a theoretical political and economic system. Rather be open to considering all ideas and using what your country needs for all of the population to have a decent standard of living without having you exploit or harm in any way those beyond your borders (or even at home). China and Scandinavian countries, for example, have done very well in lifting and maintaining the standard of living for everyone in their country by incorporating some basic socialist ideas and accepting them as fundamental human rights. Might it not be a good idea to stop saying that capitalism is good and socialism is bad, or, worse, capitalism is kinda bad but socialism is all bad so we must preserve capitalism as protection against socialism?

Is it bad for a family to own a small business and be able to support the family (capitalism)? Workers for that business are not exploited if the state ensures that everyone has a house, health provision, education, even if they cannot pay for it (socialism)? (Equal standards, not a small hovel for the worker and a mansion for the owner.) And everyone can afford reliable and convenient transport, abundant healthy food ...? A family-owned business is capitalism, but all the rest is socialism.

My prediction is that the world is ripe for a revolution, and that revolution will replace Western democracy and capitalism. Those countries who refuse to adapt will be isolated (like North Korea was), but will not be able to continue to exploit and bully others, so it will not be the same. Trump, like many American presidents before him, thinks he can bully and threaten and bomb the world into submission, but he can't. Will Western democracy and capitalism be replaced by socialism and communism and dictators and monarchies? I think the people who will thrive in the new world will embrace their own form of socialism, not repeat the evils of democracy and capitalism, and be watchful about corruption in the socialism they embrace. That is the optimistic view!

[rgray222]

The world is undeniably in a state of change. The younger generation is driving that change. They see that governments around the world have allowed currencies to devalue, debt to skyrocket, inflation to destroy the chances of home ownership and at the same time wages that are not increasing at a pace to keep up with the rising cost of living.

They have been through a pandemic, supply chain disruptions, and immigration and migration problems on a global basis. It is impossible not to see the erosion in trust of major institutions and a lack of trust in overall governance. Governments have promised to fix poverty, education, healthcare, wage gaps and nothing changes. The spread of fake news, misinformation and propaganda is rampant.

They have been watching an endless parade of wars and conflicts in the Middle East. They are witnessing the largest and deadliest war in Europe since WWII. Nuclear proliferation appears ready to explode.

They look around and see billionaires being minted all over the globe, and the world's first trillionaire has finally taken a seat at the table. To this younger generation, income inequality is so real they can see it, feel it, and taste it. To this generation, capitalism means unabated materialism and consumerism.

This change that is just beginning to creep over the horizon is unlikely to manifest itself through socialism, Marxism, communism, or even capitalism. Instead, foundational shifts are being gradually established, brick by brick, towards an entirely new system.

The promises associated with this change will be incredibly appealing. Who could resist the idea of universal healthcare, free education, accessible daycare, generous vacations, good disability policies, and comprehensive retirement plans? Nuclear arsenals will be dismantled, and war and conflict will end. Billionaires and the wage gap will begin to disappear. We will be talking about equity, shared responsibility and global unity.

People are beginning to demand change, the social democratic are just the tip of the iceberg. Most people are eager for change, but they have not yet fully defined what that change should look like. If the world moves away from capitalism without having a clear idea where it is headed, global government with its attractive promises will be standing by to fill the void.

[JackMcThorn]

Where are the new ideas? [Speaking of a younger generation who wants change?] Why do we gravitate between the systems of the old guard? It's crazy. Where is the original thinking? This rise of socialism in america is sort of bizarre. It will attract negative attention of the government.

And frankly, I'm part at fault because I haven't thought of a new idea. [Solutions generally accepted if a complaint is lodged is typically how that works.]

Change; however, is constant. Until it is not. But the recycling is getting boring.

[The KMan]

I think there might be a third way of looking at this beyond capitalism versus socialism. Perhaps the real question is what type of capitalism do we want going forward.

Markets create wealth, innovation and opportunity, but society must ensure that the gains and risks are broadly shared. The question is whether rewards still reflect genuine value creation, or whether the system increasingly rewards those closest to capital, financial engineering and shareholder interests. When executive salaries and bonus structures become disconnected from performance and accountability, trust in the whole system starts to break down.

This short clip on Boeing captures it well. Executives were rewarded handsomely over the same period that the engineering culture and accountability were allowed to erode:
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/kpRjE3W6nHo

Nobody is saying successful people should not be rewarded. And as others here have pointed out, the Nordic countries show there is another path. Denmark, Sweden, Norway and Finland are not socialist economies. They are capitalist economies with stronger social foundations, where markets create wealth but society ensures people have access to healthcare, education, security and opportunity.

I will admit I am a big admirer of the Nordic model. What I find compelling is that these countries consistently rank near the top for both business competitiveness and quality of life. It suggests the tradeoff we keep debating may be a false one. You do not have to choose between a dynamic economy and a decent society. They have shown you can build both.

So maybe the future is not about replacing capitalism with socialism. Maybe it is about repairing a version of capitalism that has allowed the gap between wage earners and asset owners to grow too wide. Because if the system cannot address that imbalance, people will not just start looking for alternatives. They will accept whichever alternative arrives first with the most attractive promises, whether or not it can deliver them.