> Americans tend to reject it entirely out of hand as it smells like vile socialism to them.
This is a bit too reductionist. I'd wager that most Americans agree that these are worthwhile goals, but many are skeptical that empowering the government is the best way to achieve these ends.
On concrete policies along these lines many poll in the majority. They don’t get implemented not because the American people are against them (they’re often for them) but because powerful interests are against them. (Corporations and some portion of the very wealthy.)
Just as a recent example of the influence of money here, there was a vote to reduce defense budget (which is at record highs) by 10% and reallocate that money. It was voted down. But those that voted against the reduction got 3.4x as much money from the defense industry as those that voted for the cut.
The same dynamic plays out on issues like single payer health care, with those against it getting major contributions from health insurance lobbyists who want to defend the status quo even while the policy has a large majority approval across both democrats and republicans (and a whopping 88% approval among Democrats).
Not really. There's a lot of debate on the role of government within socialist circles themselves, and there are many socialists that are skeptical of the idea that you can implement socialism top-down, without it becoming either totalitarian, or a form of collectivist capitalism where the ruling elites collectively own the means of production and collect economic rents from the rest.
