Item — HN Reader

If this is what Post imperial Russia looked like, sign me up comrade. We tried to hyper individualistic capitalism, and that failed unless your the very top of wealth pyramid. Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different outcome.

I’m supposed to be afraid of socialists but not authoritarian technofeudalism paperclip maximizers? If both scenarios are “you’ll own nothing an be happy,” I’ll take the system where someone actually tries to make their constituents happy.

You can’t scare people who realize we’re already at rock bottom. People who are delusional and think they are temporarily embarrassed millionaires and billionaires are always a lost cause, they are in a cult or belief system similar to a religion.

1 comments

Modern communists are such reactionaries that they can't even see the value in decimating the petite-bourgeoisie population. Sad.

I cannot speak to communists, I currently align with democratic socialists and max out campaign contributions to those candidates. Some capitalism, but not too much, and a firm floor under everyone. I am wealthy because I was lucky. Existence is non consensual, no one asked to be here. One should not suffer through their existence because they were unlucky.

> and max out campaign contributions to those candidates

But why bother? Those candidates will only be successful if they're lucky.

Because you can’t attempt to win if you don’t buy the lottery ticket. Just like a founder who spends years of their life grinding for a startup that will most likely fail, I’m just throwing some money into the ring to attempt to encourage a successful outcome. Success is never assured.

"A society grows great when old men plant trees whose shade they know they shall never sit in."

You may ask: "Why are these lottery tickets and wins important at this point on the timeline?" That is a very important question.

Democratic socialists top MAGA candidates among voters in CNBC’s All-America poll - https://www.cnbc.com/2026/07/17/democratic-socialists-top-ma... - July 17, 2026

> The results indicate that even with a number of self-described democratic socialists on the ballot, Democrats will have the upper hand heading into November’s midterm election, which is widely viewed as a referendum on Trump. It also suggests voters are warming to the idea of a more muscular federal government that provides additional services in exchange for higher taxes. The poll found that 32% of registered voters would be more likely to vote for a candidate if they describe themselves as a democratic socialist, while 50% would be less likely to vote for such a candidate. Twenty-nine percent of voters would be more likely to vote for a candidate with Trump’s endorsement, while 52% would be less likely. A candidate who describes themself as a supporter of the MAGA movement does even worse, with only 27% of voters saying that would make them more likely to vote for them and 57% saying it would make their vote less likely. Capitalism remains more popular than socialism in the U.S., the poll found, but has declined in public sentiment in recent years as socialism has gained. Twenty-eight percent of registered voters polled viewed socialism positively, a leap up from 18% in 2024. Fifty percent of registered voters viewed capitalism positively, little changed from 51% in 2024. Forty-eight percent of voters viewed socialism negatively, while 27% viewed capitalism negatively in the poll released Friday. Voters aged 18-34 preferred socialism by a margin of 18% points, while older age demographics preferred capitalism. That could reshape the electorate in the future. Or today’s younger voters could evolve their preferences as they age.

> “If these current attitudes were to persist over time, and the 18-49 year-olds of today were going to keep those types of attitudes, we’re going to have a seismic shift in terms of the national conversation and economic policy prescriptions that we see coming out of Congress and different places over time,” said Micah Roberts, a partner at Public Opinion Strategies, the Republican pollster for the survey. “The attitudes of 18-34 year-olds today are the reality of our country in 20 years.” [My note: Draw your attention here, it is the most important fact when thinking in the context of this system.]

> Voters polled did not believe some form of socialism would be a good idea for the country, but by an extremely narrow margin. Forty-four percent of voters polled said some form of socialism would be a bad thing, while 40% said it would be a good thing — winnowing the gap by half from the last time it was polled. In a 2019 Gallup poll, 43% of adults viewed socialism as a good thing and 51% viewed it as a bad thing. [My note: extremely narrow margins on ideas can potentially be changed rapidly with some effort]

TLDR We are at a political tipping point due to demographics in the electorate, and if Democratic Socialists win and show they can deliver (as Mamdani is doing in NYC), it will lock in a positive uptake trajectory for them for at least 1-2 decades ahead. ~2M voters 55+ age out every year, and they are the ones with strong positive beliefs about capitalism (because they were lucky and had a positive experience within the golden age of US economics that will never repeat). 70+ age cohort owns 1/3rd of wealth. Progress occurs one funeral at a time (Max Planck). Young people may not be wealthy, and will likely never be wealthy, but they all get their vote.

https://www.apolloacademy.com/31-percent-of-wealth-owned-by-...

Additional citation:

Older Democrats walloped by midterms anti-establishment revolt - https://www.axios.com/2026/08/13/democrats-old-age-larson-br... - August 13th, 2026

> It also suggests voters are warming to the idea of a more muscular federal government that provides additional services in exchange for higher taxes

Sadly it's not more muscular. It's probably just heavier.

> show they can deliver (as Mamdani is doing in NYC)

That's not delivering, that's spending. $70m to make 5 grocery stores is not "delivering" except in the most crazed of minds.

You’re entitled to your opinion, HN is a small slice of the electorate and arguably in no way representative.

noted, comrade. Don't worry, your wealth will serve the working class future very well.

I certainly hope so, it’s just a tool, and I can’t take it with me. Would you hoard a hammer or your toolbox? Or let anyone use it who needed it? Do the Amish hoard wealth?

Measure impact, outcomes, and improvements in quality of life. Numbers in a database or spreadsheet are none of those.

To die with zero and an overflowing funeral attendance is success (great book on this topic literally called “Die with Zero” by Bill Perkins, I highly recommend [ISBN13 9780358567097]). If you don’t want to be hated as a very wealthy person, super simple, give most of it away (efficiently!) and make lives better. Keep enough to be cozy (nice crib, don’t have to work, fancy trimmings), but not enough to be a villain.

We may see wealth and the purpose of life differently, and disagreement during discourse is expected, but these are my thoughts and my mental model from ~half a century of existence and lived experience.

> To die with zero and an overflowing funeral attendance is success.

great comment. However, you could say that about alot of horrible people as well!

I live in a place where alot of those that claim the title 'Democratic Socialist' seem more drawn to 20th-century style identity politics rather than a philosophy of 'the world is complex and we need ethical and competent people to use the power of government to solve problems that markets don't solve', which is a way I might encapsulate my views.

Accepting the premise of my framing, how do you square the two?

Great question.

If we presume that we will always exist in systems of people, and that there will always be potential bad actors seeking leverage and opportunity to grift through power, we need strong effort by the electorate to elect “good candidates” for lack of a better term. Sometimes we love the wrong people, sometimes we trust the wrong people. Our governance systems should be designed to accelerate good people, and impair bad people until they can be recalled or replaced through elections.

As always, think in systems. If our systems are suboptimal for the target outcome, we must decompose and understand the system, and improve the components that are leading to the suboptimal outcome. I would encourage you to run for office as well. The solution is straightforward: get good people who give a shit into positions of leverage and power, and get out of their way. "One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors." —- Plato