"Well, I’m a socialist, but not a socialist socialist. I believe in socialism, but also a heavily regulated, Nordic-style capitalism, which is actually more socialist than capitalist, except for the parts that aren't. So I call myself a Democratic Socialist. Now, technically, 'Democratic' is modifying 'Socialist' here, which makes me a type of socialist, not a type of Democrat, so my branding is already working against my electoral viability in a swing district. I realize using 'Democratic' as an adjective makes it sound like I'm prioritizing the socialism part (which I am, theoretically) but pragmatically, I’m a Democrat who just wants the government to own the means of data production. Not all production, obviously. Just the servers. But don't worry, I’m absolutely not a communist... unless we are talking about municipal broadband, health insurance, and AI data centers, which we should definitely nationalize tomorrow. But like, in a totally market-friendly, decentralized way that requires a 45-minute PowerPoint presentation to explain to a moderate voter at a supermarket."
...followed by...
"I don't want to overthrow the system; I just want to nationalize the tech sector, decommodify housing, and restructure the global economy. But in a gentle, non-threatening, suburb-approved way. See? It makes total sense if you just take the time to read this 80-page manifesto I brought with me."
... and finally...
"So... in conclusion... I'm not a communist, I’m just a guy who thinks Karl Marx had some solid points about cloud storage. Why is everyone walking away? I haven't even explained our stance on worker-owned bakeries yet!"
And, as our "explainer" finds out... he's changed NOBODY'S mind but strengthened the hostility toward our party with all the confusing explaining going on.
= new reply since forum marked as read