When the socialist left allies itself with the Circle D Corporation for political relevance, because their owners allow them only two choices in their selectoral system, propping up the party that pretends to give them a seat at the adult table becomes job one.

The Circle D Corporation is savvy enough at marketing their brand to know that having a "socialist/progressive" wing, no matter how non-existent it is in swaying the direction of it's owners party, will still attract the partisan fools it needs to keep Democrats Inc. as the only viable choice said fools have in their owners two choice selectoral system.

Whether one is a Democratic Socialist, or a Progressive Democrat,(oxymoron) voting for the blue wing of our owners government only counts you as a Democratic party supporter. You legitimize their existence as a firewall between the people and the government our owners bought to protect themselves with.

INB4 partisan apologists start making excuses for their team, and blaming the other guys for the odious complicity they engage in at the expense of the "good faith" their voters elected them with.

Some things about M4A and everything else our owners government isn't allowed to provide for it's citizens, from an interview with Michael Hudson:

Grumbine: Wow. Biden’s First State of the Union address, I was appalled to hear him already calling out China. His first intent was to demonize China, and you focus in on why? All I could see was, the United States government had allowed itself to be hollowed out, it allowed all its infrastructure to fall apart, it allowed its entire industrial base to collapse, and the pandemic showed the frailty of supply chains.

They go after Russia, they go after China, and they create enemies to buy time, to try to reinvent what the US is, to allow it to survive without its hegemony. What are your thoughts on why China and Russia became the targets?

** Hudson:** It’s not what you say, it’s not that America ‘allowed’ other countries to go ahead, that was the deliberate policy, from Clinton on. They wanted to get rid of manufacturing labor here, in order to create what Marx called, a reserve army of the unemployed. They wanted to create unemployment here, by hiring foreign labor instead of American labor, and in the process, to make huge profits for companies, multinational firms, that produced abroad, with lower priced labor, from the United States.

So, it’s not that they allowed China to do something to pull ahead, America pushed these other countries to develop. That was part of the American’s anti-labor policy. And if you don’t realize that the aim is to cut living standards and reduce wages, except to the extent that wages can be spent on interest, to the financial sector, insurance, to the health providing sector, and housing sector, and rents for the real estate sector.

If they can’t provide this, the function of labor is not to produce commodities, as occurs under industrial capitalism. It’s not to be employed by manufacturers, to use equipment, to produce goods or services, it’s to serve as a market for the fire sector. That really is the guiding line, and it was the guiding line in Rome, which is why Rome fell apart.

It’s been the reason why countries, who let an oligarchy develop, end up pushing their own economies into obsolescence, and a kind of dark age. It’s policy, and most of all, it’s the policy of the Democratic Party’s administration here. Yeah. So look at what the laws do, and how the Supreme Court is there to prevent any kind of re-industrialization in the United States.

You cannot re-industrialize in a way that the original slaveholding authors of the Constitution would have approved of, if they were there today. They would be like the billionaires of Microsoft, and Facebook, and the others. That would be their philosophy.

Full Interview can be found here.