General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Bad news for those wanting revolution. [View all]PETRUS
(3,678 posts)The discussion preceding my entry was about "pure" socialism, which admits of degree and I was addressing that. My definition is a pretty functional way to describe the real world, which isn't "pure" anything. So I'm not sure what the fuss is about.
Anyway, I like your idea about using quantity/quality of protein if we're going to try to evaluate the status of a population. It seems sensible to examine health, education, all that. With respect to your idea about discretionary income, I'm hesitant about that because market values are strange, and higher consumption doesn't necessarily mean something good.
The near or middle term future of domestic politics isn't something I want to try to predict. Our problems are bigger than the United States anyway. Global warming/climate change and the world's weaponry are serious threats to the health and welfare of billions of people. Unless we get our act together, questions about how to govern ourselves might be asked in a very different context, if asked at all. Perhaps a bit more international solidarity (!) is called for.
Since you asked: Universal public pensions, education, and healthcare are nice expressions of solidarity at a national level. In more general terms, I suppose I see it as the recognition of shared interests and acting in a coordinated fashion to achieve common goals.