Sunday, September 20, 2020

Democratic Socialism, Separating Myth From Reality

 

        The United States—like almost every other country with an advanced economy, such as the U.K., Germany, France, and Japan—is already a partially socialist country, with a mixed economy and many government programs that serve the public good. Note however that this is “socialism” with a small “s.”  Democratic socialism is far less about limiting opportunity than many think, and more about simply determining and establishing a reasonable and equitable  definition of what constitutes basic human needs.  By this definition, Social Security is a socialist program: it's a government-run pension system that cuts out private money managers. Medicare - a single-payer, government-run health insurance program for those over 65 - is too. Medicare-For-All would simply extend this to the rest of the population.

        The minimum wage, maximum hour, and child labor laws that go back over a century are likewise "socialist" programs, in that the government intervenes in the capitalist market to require employers to meet minimum standards that might not be met in a pure, unregulated “free” market.

        Agricultural and energy subsidies, both, oddly enough favorites of many Republicans, including members of both the House and the Senate who get farm subsidies, are also a form of socialist programs. Unlike Robin Hood, however these are a concentrated form of "take from everyone and give to the rich." Likewise, the government’s crop insurance program is more of the same. Direct farm aid has climbed each year of Trump’s presidency, from $11.5 billion in 2017 to more than $32 billion this year — an all-time high. The USDA is paying farmers roughly twice as much as the actual harm that they suffered from the Trump incited tariff/trade war. And the payments are based on production; the bigger the farm, the bigger the payments. Thousands of farmers got more than $100,000 each. According to an NPR analysis of USDA records of payments made through July 2019, 100,000 individuals collected just over 70% of the money. Thirty-three members of Congress and their immediate family members collected at least $15.3 million in farm subsidies over the past 10 years. On the other hand, only two, both Senators, are actually working farmers. The rest are essentially simply collecting a “return on investment.” The “shadiest” part? Although current year’s payouts ($32 billion, remember) exceeds the USDA budget by over $8 billion, Congress rarely even discusses the extra expenditure of public monies to a select few. Where’s the Republican outrage? Begin with the fact that this particular form of wealth redistribution tends to favor “red state” endeavors.

        Stripped of the Red-baiting and name-calling, the real debate isn’t between capitalism vs. socialism, but about the appropriate balance between the two.

        Conservatives want to reduce Social Security and Medicare benefits and reduce the numbers who qualify, while progressives want to increase and expand these programs.  Many progressives want to move towards a Medicare system covering all Americans, not just those over 65 (“Medicare for All”) while centrist Democrats want to protect the ACA which is a hybrid between private insurance and government insurance and regulation, and conservatives want to go back to the all-private system which pre-dated the ACA.

         It is worthy of note that the first US President to actively discuss and promote universal health care was Theodore Roosevelt! (A Republican, although except for shared white superiority views, Trump wouldn’t recognize that). Again, in the “what they don’t know” category, is the fact that historically, “for profit” heath care is a relatively new concept. For profit health insurance truly began during and after WWII, and was more formalized by the Health Maintenance Organization Act of 1973. Today's truly astronomical drug company profits are relatively recent, as well.

    Both are the results of successful Conservative attempts to enable the private generation of profit from the unfortunate medical circumstances of others, which shouldn’t be revenue sources, but basic rights of citizens. The vast bulk of civilized nations of the world recognize this as a basic fact.

        The government already supports higher education, grants, and scholarships to a fair extent, (that’s socialism) but progressives want to make a public college education free or debt-free.  Conservatives support government subsidies for agriculture and the oil energy (that’s also a form socialism) while many progressives believe, as do I, (discussed above) that this is “reverse welfare” for the rich.

        Under the headline, "Most Young Americans Prefer Socialism to Capitalism" CNBC reported on a Gallup poll this summer showing that millennials are more favorable to the socialist side than the capitalist side of the equation. with 51% having a positive view of socialism and only 47% having a positive view of capitalism.

Lost in the fog of partisan bickering are two basic truths:

·       The United States has, and has had, for over 100 years, social programs and ideas which are socialist in nature. Even such things as Fire departments, roads, snow clearing, levees on rivers, etc. are instances of public money spent to benefit all the population. The fact that private interests and capital continue to be the business models for most goods and services is why it’s properly called Democratic Socialism. It can be, and is being argued that such things as producing cars, farming and, in fact, the vast bulk of consumer goods which are purchased with discretionary spending should be privately financed and produced. No sane US politician has opined otherwise.

However, it can also be argued that such universally necessary modern necessities as Electrical Power should be produced by centrally owned and operated  entities without a profit motive. Actually,  many developed nations have nationally owned power prediction facilities, but others use privately owned systems. There is some form of government oversight or control in almost all, regardless of public or private status. In truth, in the US, Public Utilities Commissions who regulate and approve rates for these privately owned and operated utilities are a hybrid approach to this issue and have been in place, working as designed, for decades, as have most state insurance regulators.

 

·       The second and sad point is that the bulk of those who flock to the banner of “No Socialism” have essentially no awareness or understanding of the things discussed in the preceding paragraphs. They have been fed a diet of “Socialism is Communism” for about a hundred years.

     Trump’s false proclamation that America “will never be a socialist country” is simply an attempt to resurrect the post-war McCarthyite red-baiting of his childhood (Trump’s first personal “fixer” Roy Cohn, was also Joe McCarthy’s legal hit man) in order to put his thumb on the capitalist side of the scale favored by the oligarchs in the ongoing debate over how much socialism and America should have.

        Truth told, it is impossible to over-exaggerate the chaos and misery which would ensue if all the things which are produced, provided, or regulated in the public interest (you know, like socialism) were to evaporate, This is why it makes me cringe, to see a MAGA hat wearing, over 65, person, since the vast percentage of them happily cash Social Security checks every month and use some form of Medicare.   

        There are those who insist that this isn’t “true” socialism a la Marx and Engels. Of course, it isn’t and no one with a brain has suggested that it is, although several have been blamed for it. Marx and Engels theorized about State Socialism (Communism) in which the state owns or controls everything. On a sliding scale of political theory with Fascism far right end and Communism on the far left, Democratic Socialism is just a bit left of center. Unregulated Free Market Capitalism (essentially Oligarchy) of the sort John Stossel (and to a significant degree, Donald Trump) advocates is farther right of center than Democratic Socialism is to the left.

        Let’s look at definitions:

Fascism: far-right, authoritarian ultranationalism characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition and strong regimentation of society and of the economy which came to prominence in early 20th-century Europe.

Communism: A philosophical, social, political, economic ideology and movement whose ultimate goal is the establishment of a communist society, namely a socioeconomic order structured upon the ideas of common ownership of the means of production and the absence of social classes, money and the state.

        I would point out that, for the average citizen, if you go far enough Right, conditions will be just about the same as if you go far enough Left. The extremes of both deny personal freedoms, that’s why I generally represent the political spectrum as a circle, not as a line from left to right. In fact, wartime Italians under Mussolini were little better off than wartime Russians under Stalin. Both had dictatorial leaders and little freedom for citizens. Finally, consider how easily Vladimir Putin was able to move Russia from what is was to the Oligarchy it has become. When participative government falls victim to absolutist “lifetime leaders,” such as Kim, Putin or Saudi princes, all of whose power Trump admires, and has said so, bad things happen, and the people bear the brunt of it.   

No comments:

Post a Comment