this post was submitted on 11 Apr 2026
394 points (99.7% liked)

World News

55400 readers
2045 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] REDACTED@infosec.pub 21 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago) (7 children)

Random, but why is she called "socialist"? Is she going to ban capitalism (stock markets, public companies, private properties, bonds, etc.)? Or are we simply calling her socialist because she's closer to European capitalism (balanced, kept in check, regulated) rather than US capitalism?

[–] bufalo1973@piefed.social 6 points 51 minutes ago

Her party is democratic socialist, center left, not socialism, left.

[–] nlgranger@lemmy.world 3 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

I wish European capitalism was anywhere near what you seem to think. It's just less worse... for now.

[–] bufalo1973@piefed.social 1 points 48 minutes ago

Than the PPE and its ilk.

[–] DosDude@retrofed.com 57 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Socialist is not a bad word. Only in the US it's a bad word, because socialism means billionaires need to earn less, and the billionaires won't allow that.

[–] REDACTED@infosec.pub 9 points 4 hours ago (2 children)

I never said it's a bad word, but as someone from the east, socialist sounds a bit over-the-top for just healthcare, socialism (social policies) is part of any well balanced capitalism system for me.

[–] Tattorack@lemmy.world 13 points 4 hours ago

Here in Europe elements like healthcare still fall under socialism.

Im not sure how the Mexican government operates, but typically it's not all-or-nothing. Just because a socialist gets elected doesn't mean they suddenly have the power to completely overturn a country and kick capitalism out. Such changes would require overwhelming majorities.

However, socialists would strive to implement those elements of their idealogies they can.

[–] DosDude@retrofed.com 4 points 4 hours ago

Agreed. But the context of the area needs to be accounted for. Socialist ideas compared to the old status quo.

[–] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 15 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (1 children)

Being a socialist doesn't mean you have to ban capitalism the moment you get power. Or at all. There are many ways to be socialist and do socialist policy. The overarching ideology is the belief we can do better than capitalism by distributing the resources we create according to amount of work and need, instead of profit maximization. How and how quickly we achieve that differs between different kinds of socialists. Sometimes dramatically.

[–] Alcoholicorn@mander.xyz -4 points 4 hours ago (2 children)

Or at all

Socialism is defined by opposition to capitalism, if you don't support eventually moving beyond Capitalism, you're definitionally a liberal.

[–] Tattorack@lemmy.world 10 points 4 hours ago

A socialist does support moves beyond capitalism, but in a representative democracy they wouldn't have the power to do that outright. So it goes in small steps, starting with checks and regulations to prevent capitalism from going rampant (like it is in the US).

[–] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 2 points 4 hours ago

You're not wrong but some render their opposition to capitalism by reducing the scope of the capitalist system. Something liberals tend not to do. Are all reformists committed to bringing it down to zero? Maybe, maybe not. I probably wouldn't call a self-proclaimed socislist who spends their life reducing the capitalist part of their state a lib if they are okay with say 10% of the economy remaining capitalist.

[–] Ilixtze@lemmy.ml 6 points 4 hours ago

The morena Party she is from is could be defined as a "social democrat party" The state provides some social programs like healthcare, scholarships, help for single mothers, subsidized public transportation, and monetary help for the elderly.

I magine to people in highly capitalist countries these policies would be seen as socialism, but it feels more like a hybrid system. Most of the markets are capitalist with some light government regulation and some basic needs are socialized. I always find it weird how people draw these black and white distinctions today. I'd argue most governments of the world have hybrid systems in their economic management, even America with their welfare programs.

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 2 points 4 hours ago

I can't find anything about her calling herself a socialist, but she's definitely to the left of most European politicians. Of course she's working from a less development and more rightwing starting point so her policies seem like common sense to Europeans, but equating her with folks like the SPD based on that would be wrong. You don't really get this kind of anti-neoliberal, overt social democracy from mainstream European parties anymore.

[–] WanderingThoughts@europe.pub 1 points 4 hours ago

Those Europeans you speak of call themselves socialist too, but they still with the capitalistic system and control the redistribution mechanisms bolted on.