The government effectively owns General Motors and controls Chrysler, and the president is deciding what kind of cars they can make. Uncle Sam owns majority stakes in American International Group, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and controls large chunks of the banking industry. Also, President Obama wants government to take over the business of student loans. And he’s pushing for nationalized health care. Meanwhile, his Environmental Protection Agency has ruled that it reserves the right to regulate any economic activity that has a “carbon footprint.” Just last week, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said climate change requires that “every aspect of our lives must be subjected to an inventory.” Rep. Barney Frank, chair of the Financial Services Committee, has his eye on regulating executive pay. . . .
And yet, for conservatives to suggest in any way, shape or form that there’s something “socialistic” about any of this is the cause of knee-slapping hilarity for liberal pundits and bloggers everywhere. . . .
The whole spectacle was just too funny for liberal observers. Robert Schlesinger, U.S. News & World Report’s opinion editor, was a typical giggler. He chortled, “What’s really both funny and scary about all of this is how seriously the fringe-nuts in the GOP take it.”
Putting aside the funny and scary notion that it’s “funny and scary” for political professionals to take weighty political issues seriously, there are some fundamental problems with all of this disdain. For starters, why do liberals routinely suggest, even hope, that Obama and the Democrats are leading us into an age of socialism, or social democracy or democratic socialism? (One source of confusion is that these terms are routinely used interchangeably.)
For instance, in (another) fawning interview with President Obama, Newsweek editor Jon Meacham mocks Obama’s critics for considering Obama to be a “crypto-socialist.” This, of course, would be the same Jon Meacham who last February co-authored a cover story with Newsweek’s editor at large (and grandson of the six-time presidential candidate for the American Socialist Party) Evan Thomas titled — wait for it — “We Are All Socialists Now,” in which they argued that the growth of government was making us like a “European,” i.e. socialist, country.
Washington Post columnists Jim Hoagland (a centrist), E.J. Dionne (a liberal) and Harold Meyerson (very, very liberal) have all suggested that Obama intentionally or otherwise is putting us on the path to “social democracy.” Left-wing blogger and Democratic activist Matthew Yglesias last fall hoped that the financial crisis offered a “real opportunity” for “massive socialism.” Polling done by Rasmussen — and touted by Meyerson — shows that while Republicans favor “capitalism” over “socialism” by 11 to 1, Democrats favor capitalism by a mere 39% to 30%. So, again: Is it really crazy to think that there is a constituency for some flavor of socialism in the Democratic Party?
I realize there is a continuum from (1) laissez faire free market capitalism [not socialism] (2) free market governed by law and some regulations [not socialism] (3) government control of the economy [socialistic] (4) government having the right to nationalize private companies [socialist] (5) government having the right to nationalize private companies without compensating the original owners [socialist] (6) government owning the means of production [socialist] (7) government owning all private property [communism]
It seems to me that we are presently at #4, veering at #5, since investors in GM and Chrysler were stiffed, forced to receive only pennies on the dollar and the government in effect seizing their assets without their say. I realize that the current government share in the economy is relatively small, though slated to become much, much more once the health care industry is taken over. But the philosophy remains, and that’s what I’m interested in right now. I’m curious if you Democratic readers are OK with this. What number would you find acceptable? Would you agree with the much-touted European-style social democracy?
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In