BERNIE SAUNDERS IS A SOCIAL DEMOCRAT

The political rhetoric surround presidential candidate Bernie Saunders is causing some confusion because of the definition of two terms. Some commentators maliciously refer to Bernie Saunders’ approach to government as ‘democratic socialism’, which is disparaging. Others use that label out of ignorance. Everything he says and does suggest he believes in democratic socialism. Social democracy is not the same thing as ‘democratic socialism’. The names are nearly identical, but a world of difference exists between what they believe. Social democrats believe in maintaining capitalism while Democratic Socialists do not believe in maintaining a capitalistic system, which is a big difference. Democratic socialists believe in social ownership of the means of production, which is communism. In stark contrast, social democrats social democrats believe in maintaining capitalism. I strongly identify with social democracy but know, as does everyone else, Communism is a failed system and want nothing to do with it. As a social democrat, I believe the state needs to provide security in a manner decided by the majority of the people, which ranges from the neighborhood watch, through police, on to the army and navy. Social Democrats regard government intervention in constraining markets and the redistribution of wealth by salaries and taxes as good things. Moves, such as progressive tax systems, fair wages, and limiting market control, benefit lower classes. The overall objective is to establish a more equitable society while recognizing human nature will not allow that there ever will be a perfectly equitable society. Critics decry such objectives as putting us on the road to communism and belittling success. Human nature is the basis for such criticisms. For example, individualism, greed, social hierarchy are innate. However, altruism is also innate. Humankind could not survive without greed nor could we survive as a society without altruism. As is the case with establishing an equitable society, society has come to terms with a balance between greed and altruism. Our elected government a practical form of democracy; representatives of the people who represent us; however, the people are still sovereign. Of course, the danger in all of this is “tyranny of the majority”, which is a dog-chasing-its-tail argument, which is the situation where a majority places its interest above those of the individual that in turn, is the basic objective of democracy. The government becomes tyrannical when it practices oppression comparable to that of a tyrants and despots. We understand society will never be completely equitable or free of greedy members, nor will society be totally nurturing (altruistic), but most of all we have to know government will never be perfect just as we know that 7-billion people cannot live on this earth as individuals. URL: firetreepub.blogspot.com Comments Invited and not moderated