Why was the US happy to elect a literal communist for four

>>2796371
Democracy was pretty much at its low point in the 1930s. Just about everyone everywhere in the world was willing to roll the dice with an authoritarian ruler in the hopes of things being better.

>>2796371
>literal communist
No.
Roosevelt did more to suck away support for communism than anyone else in American history, thanks to capitalist concessions in the New Deal. It was either that or face massive labour unrest, especially in the South where the Communists were organising African-Americans.
The US Communist Party peaked in 1932 before FDR took office.

File: 1490578514274.gif (2MB, 320x200px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 320x200px

>>2796371

Honestly he was a state capitalist much like modern China. He used state spending to prop up private businesses.

>>2796417
Fair point.

>>2796420
>Roosevelt did more to suck away support for communism than anyone else in American history
Expand your point.

One of the last things the guy had a chance of doing before dying was trying to implement universal basic income, how does that not speak to his communist tendencies?

>>2796459
Because you present a too inelegant view of reality.
Communism and fascism both get support from the system collapsing in a systematic way. Using state economy to unfuck the economy, isn't very communistic. Its more of a extreme capitalistic move, to preserve capitalism, and to keep the economy afloat.

A core problem is that from a historical standpoint, Austrian Economics is viewed on a low level. So one corporation kicking the bucket is fine. But from a super national standpoint? The entire economy collapsing isn't fine in any way, shape or form: Simply because it means there can't be a economy for the losers to lose in.

>>2796459
UBI isn't communist. It can easily be seen as a capitalist measure, like all welfare, to give the workers something to lose and stop them revolting and toppling the system entirely.

>>2796535
Sure, sure, sure...

>>2796543
But come on... ?

UBI isn't communism? What planet have you been living on? Seriously, it is quite literally the idealistic view of communism only proposed under a different name

>>2796550
This explains why it isn't socialist well
https://therealmovement.wordpress.com/2016/08/23/the-socialist-argument-for-universal-basic-income/

File: 1491007571768.jpg (32KB, 450x410px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 450x410px

>>2796550

>If the government does anything
>That's communism

>healthcare
>communism

>roads
>communism

>money
>communism

>police
>communism

>stop signs
>communism

>>2796576
>the gubberment handing out the same income regardless of proffession
>that aint communism dude, lmao

???

>>2796579
>>the gubberment handing out the same income regardless of proffession
Thats not what UBI is though

>>2796535
This. Elites like to co-opt social movements and unrest to prevent a wider revolution where they lose everything.

Bismarck did it in the 19th century. The Social Democrats were growing, and to take away support for them, he implemented the world's first welfare state, giving them something to lose. And it 1914, it paid off. The SPD voted for war credits and put aside class struggle.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burgfriedenspolitik

>>2796371
Umm... I'm not aware that FDR wanted workers to own the means of production.

>>2796579
>means of production still in private hands

By definition, not communism.

Communism is not synonymous with "big government"

Squares and rectangles, nigga