2 ms·

How does the saying go? >Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat, but as temporarily embarrassed m

by pixl97 9mo ago

How does the saying go? >Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat, but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.

hunterpayne 9mo ago
Offtopic but, the funny part about that statement is that the only place the socialist ever got the poor's support was in China during its civil war and then only because Mao was directly giving (bribing) them with land in exchange for their support. Everywhere else the main population of socialists were government bureaucrats. Ironically, all authoritarian ideologies (fascism too) happen this way, with low level government officials being the most zealous and the core supporters. The whole "revolution of the people" narrative is just propaganda, like your quote.
ThrowawayR2 9mo ago
"America Added 1000 Millionaires A Day In 2025, 40% Of World’s Millionaires Now In U.S." from https://www.forbes.com/sites/dougmelville/2026/01/05/america-added-1000-millionaires-a-day-in-2025-40-of-worlds-millionaires-now-in-us/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/dougmelville/2026/01/05/america... "Altogether, according to an estimate by UBS Wealth Management, the United States is home to ~22m millionaire households — roughly one of every six households." from https://thehustle.co/originals/the-insane-growth-of-americas-millionaire-class https://thehustle.co/originals/the-insane-growth-of-americas... Looks like the Americans have the right idea and Steinbeck ultimately didn't.
- pixl97 9mo ago
  I mean technically I'm a millionaire because I own a house. This said the scale from the time the quote was written till now would mean I need like 20 million +
  - ThrowawayR2 9mo ago
    I feel fairly confident in asserting without bothering to check that there are proportionally more $20-millionaires in the United States than there were in Steinbeck's time as well so Steinbeck is still on the wrong side of history. While capitalism certainly needs to be regulated to curb its worst excesses, far more than it is now, it's abundantly clear that it has outperformed the alternatives.

by pixl97 9mo ago

How does the saying go? >Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat, but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.

hunterpayne 9mo ago

Offtopic but, the funny part about that statement is that the only place the socialist ever got the poor's support was in China during its civil war and then only because Mao was directly giving (bribing) them with land in exchange for their support. Everywhere else the main population of socialists were government bureaucrats. Ironically, all authoritarian ideologies (fascism too) happen this way, with low level government officials being the most zealous and the core supporters. The whole "revolution of the people" narrative is just propaganda, like your quote.

ThrowawayR2 9mo ago

"America Added 1000 Millionaires A Day In 2025, 40% Of World’s Millionaires Now In U.S." from https://www.forbes.com/sites/dougmelville/2026/01/05/america-added-1000-millionaires-a-day-in-2025-40-of-worlds-millionaires-now-in-us/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/dougmelville/2026/01/05/america... "Altogether, according to an estimate by UBS Wealth Management, the United States is home to ~22m millionaire households — roughly one of every six households." from https://thehustle.co/originals/the-insane-growth-of-americas-millionaire-class https://thehustle.co/originals/the-insane-growth-of-americas... Looks like the Americans have the right idea and Steinbeck ultimately didn't.

pixl97 9mo ago
I mean technically I'm a millionaire because I own a house. This said the scale from the time the quote was written till now would mean I need like 20 million +
- ThrowawayR2 9mo ago
  I feel fairly confident in asserting without bothering to check that there are proportionally more $20-millionaires in the United States than there were in Steinbeck's time as well so Steinbeck is still on the wrong side of history. While capitalism certainly needs to be regulated to curb its worst excesses, far more than it is now, it's abundantly clear that it has outperformed the alternatives.