Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: If not "socialism", what should we call "spending tax dollars on things that help everyone" [View all]fishwax
(29,346 posts)88. Here's how the Oxford Dictionaries define it
1A political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.
1.1 Policy or practice based on the political and economic theory of socialism.
1.2 (in Marxist theory) a transitional social state between the overthrow of capitalism and the realization of Communism.
The term socialism has been used to describe positions as far apart as anarchism, Soviet state Communism, and social democracy; however, it necessarily implies an opposition to the untrammelled workings of the economic market. The socialist parties that have arisen in most European countries from the late 19th century have generally tended towards social democracy
1.1 Policy or practice based on the political and economic theory of socialism.
1.2 (in Marxist theory) a transitional social state between the overthrow of capitalism and the realization of Communism.
The term socialism has been used to describe positions as far apart as anarchism, Soviet state Communism, and social democracy; however, it necessarily implies an opposition to the untrammelled workings of the economic market. The socialist parties that have arisen in most European countries from the late 19th century have generally tended towards social democracy
This dictionary definition, with the use of "or regulated" is pretty clearly in line with the usage in American political discourse going back well over a century. Every significant government regulation of industry, from the idea that coal mines shouldn't be able to purchase the labor of eight-year-olds in extremely dangerous conditions to the minimum wage to the requirement that employees provide access to health care has won the label, in the halls of congress and on the editorial pages of newspapers across the country.
The funny thing is that it has historically been conservatives who have used this term to attack policies that they don't like. And for decades, they have successfully fought against a wide variety of public interventions into the private operation of capital by simply referring to any such intervention as socialism. Now, though, the tactic has backfired and the tide is turning, because the rising generations, who don't have the psychological baggage of growing up during the Cold War, aren't as predisposed to see anything labeled socialism as problematic. So they hear conservatives use terms like socialism to refer to Universal Health Care and they think: I'm cool with that. And so you have millennials who are predisposed to like socialism, because (thanks mostly to conservative attacks) they associate it with things like the nordic model.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
94 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
If not "socialism", what should we call "spending tax dollars on things that help everyone" [View all]
ProfessorPlum
Aug 2018
OP
Public funding is not socialism. Seriously, that meme needs to stop. It's ignorant.
Garrett78
Aug 2018
#9
The sewer system isn't a "means of production" OR a method of "distribution of goods."
pnwmom
Aug 2018
#42
You still haven't provided a link. The problem is that the standard definition of the word
pnwmom
Aug 2018
#52
But services can be provided by any government -- that doesn't make it a socialist government
pnwmom
Aug 2018
#59
LOL, ignoring the standard, dictionary definition of a word is a GREAT branding strategy.
pnwmom
Aug 2018
#84
The problem with that definition is that almost ANY democracy, no matter how capitalistic,
pnwmom
Aug 2018
#89
The problem with that definition is that it is so all-encompassing that it is meaningless.
pnwmom
Aug 2018
#91
Since our government is owned by the citizens of the country, funded by the citizens
shraby
Aug 2018
#3
You really think "You don't know it... but YOU support socialism" is a winning argument with them?
FBaggins
Aug 2018
#40
Yes we do. But the word SOCIALISM is the last thing that would help us market the concepts.
pnwmom
Aug 2018
#44
I bought the social infrastructure spending is socialism argument for a while.
Blue_true
Aug 2018
#49
Do a little bit more studying social about social democrat v. democratic socialist dear friends.
tirebiter
Aug 2018
#63
That has all been fundamental to the Democratic Party since FDR if not longer
Stinky The Clown
Aug 2018
#65
Money is like manure, if you spread it around it makes things grow!
yortsed snacilbuper
Aug 2018
#73
I'm pretty sure the right wing will be calling compassion a form of socialism soon enough
ck4829
Aug 2018
#75
Calling that stuff socialism is like being an assisted euthanasia advocate but saying you
Lee-Lee
Aug 2018
#81