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
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Bernie Sanders
Related: About this forumBernie Sanders’s New Deal Socialism By Jedediah Purdy / The New Yorker magazine
http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/bernie-sanderss-new-deal-socialism?mbid=nl_151120_Daily&CNDID=26139401&spMailingID=8275985&spUserID=MzkxMjA1MjAwODQS1&spJobID=802002852&spReportId=ODAyMDAyODUyS0Now we finally know what Bernie Sanders means by democratic socialism. Speaking on his political philosophy at Georgetown yesterday, the Vermont senator and Democratic Presidential candidate opened with a long invocation of Franklin Roosevelt and the social protections that the New Deal created: minimum wages, retirement benefits, banking regulation, the forty-hour workweek. Roosevelts opponents attacked all these good things as socialism, Sanders reminded his listeners...Curiously, Sanders seemed to agree with them, taking his definition of socialism from its nineteen-thirties opponents, the people Roosevelt called economic royalists. Let me define for you, simply and straightforwardly, what democratic socialism means to me, Sanders said. It builds on what Franklin Delano Roosevelt said when he fought for guaranteed economic rights for all Americans.
This isnt the first time Sanders has defined his position from the right flank of history. Pressed in the most recent Democratic debate to say how high he would take the marginal income tax, Sanders answered that it would be less than the ninety (actually ninety-two) per-cent level under the Eisenhower Administration. He added, to cheers and laughter, Im not that much of a socialist compared to Eisenhower. But, of course, both Roosevelt and Eisenhower distinguished themselves vigorously from socialism, which they understood to be a revolutionary program of extreme equality, committed to centralized control of the economy, and a cats paw of Soviet power. Accusations of socialism trailed liberals for decades after Roosevelt parried his opponents, from Ronald Reagans attacks on Medicare to the Republicans refrain against Obamacare. Democrats, like Roosevelt, have furiously defended themselves against the charges. But now a candidate whose ideal American economy does in fact look a lot like Eisenhowersstrong unions, secure employment, affordable collegeis waving the red flag, and finding favor with large numbers of Democratic voters. The new eagerness to embrace the word reflects the climate that a Pew poll captured, in 2011, when more respondents between the ages of eighteen and twenty-nine reported a positive view of socialism (forty-nine per cent) than capitalism (forty-six per cent). (Gallup polls regularly find that a slim majority of Democrats express a positive view of socialism, but an overwhelming majority supports free enterprise, suggesting, charitably, some ideological flexibility.) Those under-thirty respondents are, of course, the first voters of the post-Soviet era, whose formative experiences are of a not very heroic unipolar world of American power and market-oriented ideas. The fall of the Berlin Wall and the collapse of the Soviet empire put the word socialism up for grabs again: it may have landed in the dustbin of history at first, but that left it free for scavenging and repurposing.
A decade before the Wall fell, the United States saw the quieter but also momentous collapse of the pro-government consensus that dominated the middle of the twentieth century. The Eisenhower paradoxthat he was a big-government, welfarist conservativeis no paradox at all: he led the center-right at a time when the center was deeply welfarist and big-government. American politics after the Second World War was founded on the core idea of the earlier Progressive movement, which both F.D.R. and his cousin Theodore championed: the old ideals of personal liberty, economic opportunity, and civic equality could not survive in a laissez-faire industrial economy. Values once associated with small government now needed big governmentthe regulatory stateto preserve them. So, in 1937, F.D.R. urged that government should solve for the individual the ever-rising problems of a complex civilization, and, in 1965, L.B.J. echoed him, warning that change and growth seem to tower beyond the control and even the judgment of men. Strong government was the answer: a counter-power to wealth and to economic crisis. Their world was also Dwight Eisenhowers.
Ronald Reagans declaration, in his 1981 inaugural address, that government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem announced a new era. Government did not in fact shrink, thanks largely to military spending and retirement benefits, but the willingness to say that it could provide what F.D.R. had called a permanently safe order of things, let alone F.D.R.s economic Second Bill of Rights, was almost forgotten. The market was the new all-purpose solution, even before the Soviet collapse and the subsequent elevation of disruption, innovation, and self-branding as the language of emancipation. So, between roughly 1979 and 1989, two figures went into the wilderness: the long-dominant American idea that strong government was necessary to humanize a market economy, and the word socialism as a name for a different kind of society. Exiled as opponents, they returned as friends. Bernie Sanderss socialism is Eisenhowers and F.D.R.s world if Reagan had never happened: economic security updated by the continuing revolutions in gender, cultural pluralism, and the struggle for racial justice. In a word, Denmark; but also America with a counterfactual history of the last forty years... Sanders isnt much of a socialist compared to F.D.R., either. At the heart of Roosevelts program was the National Labor Relations Act of 1935, which greatly strengthened the hand of unions, essential parts of every welfare-capitalist order in the twentieth century, from Scandinavia to Canada. Sanders, astonishingly, didnt once mention unions in his Georgetown speech. Roosevelt proposed a maximum income of twenty-five thousand dollars (the equivalent of about four hundred thousand dollars today), which we wont be hearing from Sanders. Sanderss socialism is a national living wage, free higher education, increased taxes on the wealthy, campaign-finance reform, and strong environmental and racial-justice policies.
This is not a program for a different kind of economy, based on coöperation and deepened democracy what socialism used to stand for, which powered it as both a threat and a hope. The heart of Sanderss program, like F.D.R.s, is economic security: like F.D.R., he argues that true freedom does not occur without it. In the same way, he sees a strong government as protecting individualism from an economy that bats people around like the gods in Greek dramas. Calling this once mainstream idea socialism is a way of saying how far it feels from where we find ourselves now, how radical a step it would be to get back to it.
MORE AT LINK, BUT I GOT THE GOOD STUFF.
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
1 replies, 620 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (15)
ReplyReply to this post
1 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Bernie Sanders’s New Deal Socialism By Jedediah Purdy / The New Yorker magazine (Original Post)
Demeter
Nov 2015
OP
99th_Monkey
(19,326 posts)1. Bernie invokes FDR, Ike, LBJ & MLK Jr. to remind Democrats who they are
or at least who they are supposed to be, and what being a "real Democrat" really
looks like; which bears absolutely NO resemblance to 3rd Way catering to the rich
and powerful.
I love you Bernie!!! We need YOU in the White House, not a faux-Democrat pretender.