I’m troubled by this talk of Socialism taking over the Democratic Party.
The Socialism they talk of (all the means of production owned and controlled by the state) is Socialism without a supporting democracy.
We live in a social democracy. A social democracy is where you collectively put in the pot (taxes) for the good of the commons (all).
Examples: Social Security, Medicare, police, firefighters, schools, roads, military, judges, etc.
I can’t afford to buy my own fire truck or hire police to patrol my property. If private industry were asked to build a road (without tax money), it would only be in their interest.
That still leaves plenty of the needs of society for private industry.
You wouldn’t want the government making your shoes or cars.
Communism is the model of socialism without democracy.
The Netherlands is a model of a social democracy.
(Strong social programs, good wages, high taxes, good schools, good medical coverage and a free enterprise, overall good living conditions)
If you took away the hot button social issues in the United States, you’d find that most people were center left on economic issues. The problem is our media and elected officials are center right (both parties) on these issues.
Therein lies the problem. Thomas Jefferson was an optimist. He thought that people could govern themselves, but there had to be a well-informed citizenry. Hamilton was not so optimistic. He thought that we need a strong father figure to guide us in the right direction.
This debate is still going on. Who wins most likely will be who controls the narrative.
Pat Rainsberger
Snohomish
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
