I am tired of hearing simplistic comparisions used to label politicans. In particular I'm tiring of the old conservative refrain "[Insert Democratic offical] is a socialist." But, what does that mean? Webster defines Socalist as: "one who advocates or practices socialism2 capitalized : a member of a party or political group advocating socialism." So what is socialism? Lets go back to Webster:
1 : any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods 2 a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state 3 : a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done.
The Webster defination reveals that socialism is a broad term and not a narrow meaning. However, when it is used by political pundits it is meant to conjure up imagines of state controlled markets, authoritarism, forced equalitarianism, and the brutality of Stalin Russia. This is a false equation. The policies of which he is advocating are not elminating merticracy, capitalism, private property or competitiveness.
The same people who scream "Socialist!" Who are aghast at how "freedom is being removed," are the same people who defended Bush's illegal wiretapping, justified the Patriot Act, Guatanamo Bay, and other excessive during the War on Terrorism. It makes little rational sense. Its acceptable to invade privacy, deny basic human rights, and violate parts of the Constitution in one setting, but then claim that the government expanding healthcare coverage to poor citizens is stripping away rights. The logic is hard to grasp.
I'm not attempting to make an argument for Universal Health Care, but I am attempting to critique the tactics used to argue against it. There are reasons to be concerned. Is the coverage expansive enough, can we afford, will it affect the quality of care we receive, and so forth. Those are good questions and a healthy debate should arise to consider those concerns. However to site "Death Panal", euthanasia for elderly, covering abortions, and being the the step to a communist state is absurd and intellectually dishonest. These tactics are used to garner opposition.
Most people lack the time and interest to preform an indepth analysis of Healthcare reform and therefore relay up media. Unfortunetly pundits are used dirty, dishonest tactics to undermine it. They do so by providing a ready made template to understand the issue. Universal health care is socialism. Socialism is communism. Communism failed. Communism is evil. When Americans think of socialism it is associated with Communism as it existed in the USSR, China, Vietnam, Cuba, and so forth. However socialism is a far broader term then that. Marx himself even referrred to the period between capitalism and communism as being socialism. The theorist of Communism differianted socialism from his theoritical form of government. Socialism can refer to any system which seeks to compensate for the inequalities created by capitalism. It can be as simple as government safety nets establish to minimaze the effects of poverty and it go the extreme of forced equality. But when it is used it is the extreme of forced equality that is implied.
By doing so the pundits harm the debate. The debate is not about the merits of the proprosal, but about knee jerk reactions based on low information. This tactic is cheap and dirty and has no place in democratic society. The most most offended by the tactic are socialist themselves. Billy Wharton, a member of the socialist party strongly renounces the claim. Obama needs to nationalize the banks, finacial system, insurance, and pull all troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan before he is anywhere near being a socialist.
Pundits need to stop harming the political debate and cease using code words to conjure up negative images that prevent indepth analysis of the policy being proposed. If Universal Health is bad stop with the dishonest tactics and begin an open debate.
