I still think it’s bad branding. A Democratic Socialist is, semantically, a Socialist. It implies that the social safety nets and limits on capitalism are intended as a stepping stone to full socialism, which I think most Americans don’t want. If that isn’t the intention, all the more reason to use a different branding. “Social Democrat” would not have the same connotation. It seems like the label has been worn proudly, especially by Bernie Sanders, for so long that it’s been accepted as the right label, but IMO it was a regrettable choice which makes it unnecessarily hard for the left to gain mainstream support.
You’re talking as if the label has no real meaning and is just an accessory. Consider the possibility Zohran calls himself a Democratic Socialist because that’s what he actually believes in. It’s not just branding, it’s a statement of intent. His platform may just be social democratic, but his long term vision does seem to be full socialism.
I still think it’s bad branding. A Democratic Socialist is, semantically, a Socialist. It implies that the social safety nets and limits on capitalism are intended as a stepping stone to full socialism, which I think most Americans don’t want. If that isn’t the intention, all the more reason to use a different branding. “Social Democrat” would not have the same connotation. It seems like the label has been worn proudly, especially by Bernie Sanders, for so long that it’s been accepted as the right label, but IMO it was a regrettable choice which makes it unnecessarily hard for the left to gain mainstream support.
You’re talking as if the label has no real meaning and is just an accessory. Consider the possibility Zohran calls himself a Democratic Socialist because that’s what he actually believes in. It’s not just branding, it’s a statement of intent. His platform may just be social democratic, but his long term vision does seem to be full socialism.