Any alternative the Left (as opposed to "democrats") is immediately dismissed as similar to socialism. If it involves state control, it's communism. If it's a

Any alternative the Left (as opposed to "democrats") is immediately dismissed as similar to socialism. If it involves state control, it's communism. If it's a planned economy, it's communism. If it puts restrictions on the market economy, it's socialism. If it suggests increasing taxes, it's socialism. If it aims to shape market behavior, it's socialism. If it comes from someone who has previously suggested one of these previous ideas, it's socialism. The luddite argument is that we should stop progress because it is too drastic a change. (most of) the Left is not advocating that. However, there is a strong argument to say what got us here is causing more problems than solutions, and the same solutions dismissed earlier are now within range of implementation. I'm not suggesting whole hog Cockshott's "Toward a new Socialism" -- most people here could tear it apart justifiably. One interesting idea is that the government charges full externality and market costs for the resources it controls, rather than the cost to maintain those resources, and distributes the excess as social credit. (Basic income suggests that one can live on it - social credit is the distribution of social wealth, but is not necessarily livable to start.) But again, that has government involvement implications, so it must be socialism.