https://www.democracynow.org/2020/7/15/amna_akbar_on_canceling_rent_defunding?autostart=true This is extremist stuff and I do not advocate it. Instead I think the agenda to implement pure Socialism would lead to a slave state, such as we saw in the Soviet Union. We saw that fail. Why try it again?
Well there out there destroying their own country's history. Why would they even know any other country's history?
A couple of terms that are thrown around by those seeking change are “democracy” and “socialism” and then there’s the Bernie Sander’s “Democratic Socialist”. If the left wants democracy, then the majority always rules and for those who demand socialism, the leadership party decides who gets what and when. For those who want the combination...how is that even possible? It’s a given that we, as a Constitutional Republic, have adopted some agendas like social security and medicare / medicaid which are socialistic in nature but the whole of the government isn’t based on socialism. A slave state [is imminent], as @Dwight Ward wrote, in a total socialist society whereas in a democracy, no matter how beneficial a program or agenda might be, if the majority doesn’t want it then it is what it is which again, creates another kind of slave state. History has provided us with all the proofs we need to properly come to good conclusions but since those who are vying to make changes have not read through history then we are indeed doomed to repeat the mistakes of others. Maybe a walk through Webster’s Dictionary might help but perhaps that too is too heavy of a read to make any difference in the minds of those who have some sort of disdain toward the gathering of real knowledge.
I read the interview. Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't see where she (Akbar) is giving enough specifics to cause anyone to be alarmed. It seems to be more of a philosophical argument. She says we need to focus on the big picture, and notes what she sees as the connectedness of several problems we are facing now. Her original op-ed piece was in the NY Times and you need a subscription, but this is a copy (don't know how long it will stay up) https://outline.com/CaxTzb "Leftist movements today see our crises as intersectional. Police violence, global warming and unaffordable housing are not disconnected, discrete problems; instead, they emerge from colonialism and capitalism." The COVID-19 epidemic has made it more clear than ever that those without property (renters) are more vulnerable. Specifically she talks about rent relief, or thousands will soon become homeless. That those with property are more protected by the police than those without. There needs to be a safety net. "We need space to exist, to sleep, to eat, to take care of one another. But we live in a society where you need to pay for space to live. The private property regime then creates a direct contradiction with meeting people’s needs. Meanwhile a large part of police involves protecting those who own property. "
I thought that some might not see her as advocating pure socialism. I, too, think we should try to halt global warming. She does say much else that is true, .for instance that one of main functions of the police is to protect those with property. How could it be otherwise, though? People without property try to get it from those who have it, illegally. If property were more evenly distributed the police might be more protective of the mass of people rather than just the few. I advocate limits to private wealth and limits to corporate size and wealth. It's not exactly money that corrupts., It's having so much you can use it to buy power. I would still wish to preserve.the concept of 'property'. There's a world of difference between that and pure socialism. The private property regime then creates a direct contradiction with meeting people’s needs In this, Akbar seems to advocate the abolition of property itself. Do you think I'm misinterpreting her? It depends on her exact meaning for 'private property regime'. and perhaps she doesn't mean what I think she means.
One more thought about pure socialism vs. capitalism with some socialist elements: I'm much in favor or trying to make the world fairer. I think, though, that aiming for perfect fairness for everyone all the time is impossible and the attempt has been a disaster in the past and would be a disaster in the future.