Steven LaChance Blog

You know I believe in research. You know I believe in not jumping to conclusions. And you know I believe that in order to understand our country, we need to educate ourselves about it.

Right now, America is having an argument about socialism when much of what we’re actually arguing about is social democracy.

And there is a difference between the two.

Social democracy does not seek to eliminate capitalism. It seeks to regulate capitalism and make sure that a prosperous economy also provides a decent standard of living for the people who make that prosperity possible.

That is why you hear so much discussion about how we reached a point where CEOs at some of America’s largest corporations can make roughly 280 times what the typical worker makes, while questions about wages, taxation, and economic inequality continue to grow.

An easy way to understand it is to think about things we already know: Social Security. Medicare. Strong labor protections. Progressive taxation. Public education. Infrastructure. Affordable healthcare. A strong safety net for people when they get sick, lose a job, grow old, or fall on difficult times.

Franklin D. Roosevelt was not a democratic socialist. He was a Democrat who believed capitalism needed significant reform. The New Deal strengthened regulation, expanded protections for workers, created Social Security, and dramatically increased the government’s responsibility for the economic security of ordinary Americans.

In modern terms, much of what FDR did moved America in a social-democratic direction, even though he did not describe himself as a social democrat.

Democratic socialism, on the other hand, traditionally goes further.

It argues that democracy shouldn’t stop at the ballot box. Workers and communities should also have substantially greater ownership and control over the economic institutions that affect their lives. That can include worker-owned businesses, cooperatives, and public ownership of certain industries.

Here’s where American politics gets confusing.

Many politicians Americans call “socialists,” and many policies attacked as “socialism,” are actually much closer to social democracy.

Bernie Sanders calls himself a democratic socialist, but many of the policies most closely associated with him, such as universal healthcare, stronger unions, progressive taxation, expanded Social Security, and affordable higher education, fit comfortably within the tradition of social democracy. At the same time, he has advocated ideas involving greater worker ownership and economic democracy that move closer to traditional democratic socialism.

What we are seeing emerge in the United States is something that doesn’t always fit perfectly into either traditional definition. What Americans call democratic socialism today often blends elements of both social democracy and democratic socialism. You might think of it as an American version of democratic socialism, shaped by our own political history and economic system.

Universal healthcare does not require abolishing capitalism.

Strong unions do not require abolishing capitalism.

Progressive taxation does not require abolishing capitalism.

Social Security certainly didn’t abolish capitalism.

You can oppose any of those policies. That’s democracy.

But calling every government program you dislike “socialism” doesn’t help us have a serious conversation about what these political philosophies actually mean.

America has been mixing capitalism with social programs and government regulation for generations.

The real debate isn’t capitalism versus communism.

It’s how much responsibility a wealthy democratic society should have for the well-being of the people who live in it.

And that brings us to the part we need to confront.

If you believe Social Security should be protected, Medicare and Medicaid should exist, workers deserve protections, corporations and the wealthy should pay their fair share, public education should be funded, and government has a responsibility to provide a basic safety net for its citizens, then you already believe in some of the fundamental principles of social democracy.

You may not use that label. You may have even been taught to fear it. But your beliefs do not change simply because someone attached a word to them.

And that brings us to the current Republican Party.

If you support these programs and principles while voting for Republican politicians who are working to cut Medicaid, weaken labor protections, reduce taxes on corporations and the wealthiest Americans, or weaken the social safety net, then there is a contradiction between what you say you believe and what you are voting for.

That isn’t name-calling. It is a question every voter should be willing to ask: Does my vote actually reflect what I believe?

I know what I believe, and I understand why I vote the way I do.

My goal isn’t to tell you what you should believe. My goal is to encourage you to understand what you believe, learn what the people you vote for actually intend to do, and then make sure the two match.

Because democracy works best when we vote based on what we understand, not what we have been taught to fear.