“Champagne socialist” is a political epithet used to describe individuals who publicly espouse socialist or egalitarian ideals while simultaneously enjoying a wealthy, luxurious lifestyle. It suggests a level of hypocrisy, implying that their commitment to socialist principles is superficial and not reflected in their personal choices.
Ward 2 Council Member Robin Wonsley earns a six figure income, with a gold plated benefits package, and graduated from Carleton College, the most expensive college in Minnesota at $65,043 per year in tuition according to the 2023/2024 U.S. Department of Education National Center for Education Statistics survey.
And she likes her $8 seltzer.
I’ve been to Arbeiter a few times, it’s even had a few prize winners. It does have that DSA vibe, being two doors down from the burned out hulk of the 3rd Precinct. Maybe Fair State could brew a “Moderate” West Coast IPA.
I would like to recommend that David Tinjum go outside and do something fun around other people at some point. Seems like you must be pretty sheltered to be freaking out about an $8 drink.
Freaking out? Please read again: “Ward 2 Council Member Robin Wonsley earns a six figure income, with a gold plated benefits package, and graduated from Carleton College, the most expensive college in Minnesota at $65,043 per year in tuition according to the 2023/2024 U.S. Department of Education National Center for Education Statistics survey.
And she likes her $8 seltzer.”
No need to get all emotional about it.
It undoubtedly easier to just ignore this trivial personal attack, but David Tinjum (as usual) blatantly distorts the goals and values of socialism. Socialism does not stand for the proposition that no should have nice things. It stands for the proposition that EVERYONE should have nice things. I doubt any socialist would begrudge anyone from spending a little extra on a drink. A glass of champagne would also be fine. The low six figure salary that a city council member earns is probably a realistic goal for everyone under socialism. And probably every socialist supports the availability of a good college education for everyone. It is preferable to have free higher education offered by public institutions but given the system we have, it is doubtful that any socialist would blame someone for getting the best education opportunity they can find. The problem for socialists is excess wealth and luxury. Examples of excess would be mansions (or multiple mansions), yachts, cars that cost more than houses, owning many other people’s houses, or having more assets than anyone would need in a lifetime. The cutoff point would be not be easy to define but clearly Robin Wonsley’s selzer drink, city council salary, and college education is nowhere near it.
She actually identifies as a Marxist https://youtu.be/flp_JLUe5bg?si=2BXPCM0d6ewZ5eA0
same thing for these purposes. Socialism incorporates the basic tenets of Marxism including that economic and political relations in capitalist society are drive by class struggle and that the goal of socialism is for the wealth of society controlled and shared by the whole of society.
Serious question Jordan. Is there a socialist/communist nation that has delivered on economic equity for the masses?
Don’t say Norway and Sweden, been there. High taxes and great safety net, but also booming capitalist industry. Don’t say Cuba, been there. Wonderful wonderful people, most people just above or below the poverty line. The US embargo hasn’t kept the rest of the world from trading with Cuba. It has been a huge tourist destination for Canadians, Germans, Brits et al for decades. It just doesn’t seem to be working.
I am unaware of any successful socialist/communist country. If you know of one, I’d take a look at how they did it. They also seem to be quite susceptible to totalitarian take over as we seem to be now.
same thing for these purposes. Socialism incorporates the basic tenets of Marxism including that economic and political relations in capitalist society are driven by class struggle and that the goal of socialism is for the wealth of society controlled and shared by the whole of society.
Using the term Champaign socialist gives off massive [redacted for incivility] energy.
Yeah we have to operate within the confines of the massive grift that is the American economy, which aside from a few years in the 1930s has been an elaborately designed system to strip away as much as possible from workers to enrich those at the top.
I don’t understand why DFLers would even bring up this point. Just go be [redacted for incivility] if you want to [redacted for incivility] status quo talking points.