He didn't term himself a socialist. The policies he's recommending are largely socialist. In other words, inherently centralizing.
He's also pushing hard on the climate change agenda, which I can empathize with to some degree, but always with skepticism because it's the primary socialist talking point at the moment.
These terms are fluid in a way, but they do matter.
Agreed, it's been a while but I do recall him advocating for some centralizing practices that I thought was giving participatory democracy a bad look, much to push back on.
Appreciated reminder, going a little further down the least traveled path to no return. You may enjoy.
Should we explore the similarities between our prison, work force, and educational systems more extensively, as a form of centralized socialism?
-
"War Without Terms: GeorgeJackson, Black Power and the American Radical Prison Rights Movement, 1941–1971" https://youtu.be/ynIFHoV6l6s 
I find myself pushing back on all the intellectuals, their terms and ism's, for not defining themselves as decentralized, opposed to more of the same centralized bullshit.
Yeah there's a ton of noise to sift through. It's almost infinite, but I'm working on a book right now.
The baseline is aimed at avoiding any form of 'should' or 'ought'. Rather to encourage voluntary agreements and a web of trust to exclude those who break agreements or impose on others.
Maybe you take the angle that trust is virtually obsolete in the age of trust-less smart contracting, and "voluntary" a given?
