Talk:American Left

Why is there no mention of Mother Jones?

it seems like a gross oversight to not be mentioning Mother Jones, one of the most influential leftists in US history. 2600:8803:4013:1900:47EC:A319:5E48:2C49 (talk) 12:11, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

Just LOL

the American Left...

" Liberals and progressives believe that equality can be accommodated into existing capitalist structures, but they differ in their criticism of capitalism and on the extent of reform and the welfare state. Anarchists, communists, and socialists with international imperatives are also present within this macro-movement."

Hmmmmm ~2026-31153-18 (talk) 00:56, 26 May 2026 (UTC)

I'm not sure I understand your specific criticism of this section. It's a bit awkwardly worded, but it is sourced appropriately. Ithinkiplaygames (talk) 00:59, 26 May 2026 (UTC)

Lmao even ~2026-39331-69 (talk) 15:41, 11 July 2026 (UTC)

Splitting

Thinking we should split a good chunk of this article into another called Democratic socialism and social democracy in the United States.” This would be especially good for many of the sections following “Political currents.” Thoughts? Aunger67 (talk) 22:32, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

The is an article Socialism in the United States. TFD (talk) 03:49, 5 July 2026 (UTC)

That article is on nearly all ideological sects of socialism and is itself overly broad. I think both this article and the one you mentioned should be split into my proposed article on democratic socialism and social democracy. Aunger67 (talk) 15:38, 6 July 2026 (UTC)

As I wrote this comment, I found myself going back and forth between supporting and opposing, before finally deciding to support your proposal.

First I'll just list some overlapping articles, including the one mentioned by TFD:

• Social democracy#In the United States
• Democratic socialism#Democratic socialism and social democracy
• Democratic Socialists of America
• Socialism in the United States
• American left

I also looked at Template:Democratic Socialism US. The template says it links to "Democratic socialism & social democracy in the United States", but when I click the link, it takes me to the American left article.

My recommendation is the following:

• Support the creation of Democratic socialism and social democracy in the United States
• Use this page, and the related pages listed, as starting points to fill the page with relevant content
• Ensure the page sufficiently explores the differences between Democratic socialism, social democrats, and their relationships with socialism and capitalism (e.g. are social democrats actually socialists?)
• Excerpt the new page in this page, in Social democracy#In the United States, and in Democratic socialism#Democratic socialism and social democracy, replacing their content with the lede of the new Democratic socialism and social democracy in the United States page
• Go to Template:Democratic Socialism US and replace its primary link with a link to your new Democratic socialism and social democracy in the United States page
• Integrate the article into the broader ecosystem with bidirectional links

But of course these are all just suggestions. If you need any talk page feedback at any point, feel free to ping me and I'll drop by. Alexandraaaacs1989 (talk) 16:15, 6 July 2026 (UTC)

Notifying related pages of this discussion. Alexandraaaacs1989 (talk) 16:19, 6 July 2026 (UTC)

I think this is a really solid plan! Aunger67 (talk) 18:39, 6 July 2026 (UTC)

What is the definition of Democratic socialism and social democracy in the United States and how does it differ from Socialism in the United States? Maybe the solution is to narrow the scope of Socialism in the United States and have Democratic socialism and social democracy in the United States redirect to it.

Democratic Socialists of America btw is about a specific organization, which is currently in the news. TFD (talk) 14:35, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

Dem soc and soc dem are narrower than the broader socialism label, which includes anarchists and some Marxists under its umbrella. DSA is definitely pertinent to the new article scope which is why I mentioned it. Dem soc and soc dem are different but related ideologies so they wouldn't have one singular definition. Alexandraaaacs1989 (talk) 15:07, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

Anarchists are not socialists. Democratic socialism and social democracy include Revisionism (Marxism). However, following the creation of Communist parties, communism is considered distinct from socialism. TFD (talk) 01:54, 9 July 2026 (UTC)

Wrong. Anarchists (going by the original definition) ultimately have the same goal as "Marxists": a classless, stateless, moneyless world; the "anarchists" who claim to not be socialists substitute "public" government domination for "private" corporate domination. But even if we include them under the label of "anarchist", it simply changes to "most anarchists... have the same goal as 'Marxists'".

Communism and socialism are not distinct either; again, these are either synonyms (original definition) or two distinct steps (according to Lenin) in the same process. The term "communism" that is used is mistakenly conflated with "Marxism-Leninism" despite this meaning being very historically specific (having to do with the collapse of the 2nd International). Most socialists/communists refer to themselves using both terms interchangeably, and the distinction created by Lenin is mostly meaningless in a post-USSR world. Your statement is based upon a lack of socialist theory. ~2026-38939-57 (talk) 21:45, 9 July 2026 (UTC)

As I pointed out above, since the creation of Communist parties, communism is considered distinct from socialism. They are considered distinct topics, even if communism is a division of socialism.

Similarly, anarchism separated from the rest of the Left at the time of the First International and is considered a distinct topic.

There is a similar issue with Liberalism in the United States Both major parties in the U.S. (if can avoid talking about Trump} are liberal, but the right-wing is ahistorically called conservative. So today they are two separate topics. TFD (talk) 00:16, 10 July 2026 (UTC)

Oppose Democratic socialism and social democracy are very different things. Conflating these two together will create a Frankenstein page without focus. I would instead support a Democratic socialism in the United States page and a Social democracy in the United States page. BootsED (talk) 12:43, 14 July 2026 (UTC)

Support. @BootsED There is a distinction, but not enough to warrant 2 separate articles in my opinion.

These ideologies are deeply intertwined. As Bhaskar Sunkara has said: “We [democratic socialists] want a world beyond capitalism. But in the short term, while we’re within a capitalist economy, of course, we need firms that are profitable—that are providing employment, that are providing taxation. So, I think to govern in the short-term, as social democrats: we need proftiable firms. But in the long term, I don’t hide my desire that the economy should be socialized.”

The difference is really that pure social democrats want to stop at the robust Welfare state within a capitalist economy. Democratc socialists still believe in social democracy, but further stipulate that the economy should progress further. The ideologies clearly are deeply connected in the available literature, and I think the article could talk about both the deep connection and the nuance of distinction quite easily.Aunger67 (talk) Aunger67 (talk) 23:33, 16 July 2026 (UTC)

So yes, in America social democrats call themselves democratic socialists. So should the page simply be called "Democratic socialism in the United States" which would note that unlike socialism, it is actually social democratic? Or should the page be called "Social democracy in the United States" that would note social democrats call themselves democratic socialists?

This is an important distinction, because socialists oppose capitalism, while social democrats do not. Merging them together as this proposal does would be inaccurate, because their core ideology is completely different. I think we should note, this is not the page for the Democratic Socialists of America, which most news reports seem to be referencing when discussing "democratic socialism". This should be a larger, 100-foot view of the ideology from the 19th century to today, and not a regurgitation of the DSA page. BootsED (talk) 02:52, 17 July 2026 (UTC)

+1 - lots of attention should be attributed to the distinction between democratic socialism and social democrats and what the terms mean in the US today vs going back to the 19th century. Alexandraaaacs1989 (talk) 04:41, 17 July 2026 (UTC)

Again, I am of the position that we can just have one article entitled "Democratic socialism and social democracy in the United States." The bulk of the article would focus on democratic socialism, since that has a lot of history here, and then part of the article could focus on social democracy. I think the distinction can still be made apparent within the article. I don't believe there is enough content to make an entire article on social democracy in the U.S. alone, which is why I think the article should discuss both. Aunger67 (talk) 16:58, 17 July 2026 (UTC)

In general, oppose. There is already this article, along with the Socialism in the United States and History of left-wing politics in the United States articles, and I think that is more than enough. In my opinion, the focus should be on improving the existing articles rather than creating new ones or splitting this article. ~2026-40112-88 (talk) 04:04, 18 July 2026 (UTC)

Oppose – Per BootsED's argument. CalebHerrington (talk) 01:00, 22 July 2026 (UTC)