Pub. 16 2019 Issue 1

12 O V E R A C E N T U R Y : B U I L D I N G B E T T E R B A N K S - H E L P I N G N E W M E X I C O R E A L I Z E D R E A M S Social Democracy: What Does It Really Mean? W ith the Presiden- tial election rapidly approaching in 2020, a term that is be- ing thrown around endlessly in the media is “socialism”. The United States is obviously a capitalist country at its core, so the word “socialism” is often used as a pejorative, something meant to strike fear into the hearts of American voters. However, largely absent from the discussion is what socialism really entails. What is the difference between socialism and the social democ- racy? And what has occurred in recent American history to make a concept such as socialism, largely taboo for many years in mainstream discourse in the United States, seemingly more mainstream? Socialism, according to Merriam Webster, is defined as “any of various economic and political theories ad- vocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods.” Social democracy, which operates within the socialist movement but features key differences, is defined as a “a political, social and economic ideology that supports economic and social interventions to promote social justice within the framework of a liberal democratic policy and a capitalist econ- omy.” The fear-mongering around the term socialism largely involves attempt- ing to convince Americans that it will eliminate capitalism, creating a society that attempts to regulate equality of out- come, thus negating factors such as work ethic, creativity and intelligence that can emerge in a capitalist system. There is a clear attempt to equate socialismwith communism, which is defined as “a system in which goods are owned in common and are available to all as needed” and “a theory advocating elim- ination of private property.” Clearly, so- cialism and communism are not the same and, in turn, socialism and social democ- racy are not the same. The key point to be made regarding social democracy is that it operates within the framework of a capitalist system, but increases the social safety net, specifically with policy goals such as universally accessible child care, care for the elderly and healthcare. Social democracy does not involve any elimination of capitalism or opportunity to succeed to one’s maximum potential, but revolves around implementing certain policies meant to create less overwhelm- ing poverty and inequality. Inequality is an inevitable fact of life, but it does raise an important philosophi- cal question: When does inequality reach a point where specific policies must be implemented for the benefit of society as a whole? Depending on one’s personal philosophy, the answer can vary. Under a philosophy like anarcho-capitalism, which advocates the elimination of centralized state dictum in favor of self-ownership, private property and free markets, the an- swer would be that inequality is perfectly fine and that the free market takes care of everything. Under a philosophy such as social democracy, the answer would be that a certain amount of inequality is acceptable, but there must be something done before an oligarchy, meaning a small group of people having control of a coun- try, organization, or institution, emerges. For many years, terms such as “social- ism” and “social democracy” have been largely absent from mainstream political discourse in the United States. However, mainstream thought among Americans seems to be changing. There is more discontent and cynicism among voters regarding Congress than ever before. In 1988, Congressional approval was 42%. In 1998, it was also 42%. Since the Great Recession, Congressional approv- al ratings have hovered in the range of 10-20%. Currently, it sits around 15%. There is more dissatisfaction with the government than we’ve seen in decades and it’s been sustained for 10 plus years. So, as a result, voters are more open to ideas that were considered outside of the mainstream for many years. This brings about the concept of the Overton Window, which is defined as the range of ideas tolerated in public discourse. It’s been theorized that the degrees of accep- tance, in order of least acceptable to most acceptable, are unthinkable, radical, acceptable, sensible, popular and policy. For instance, marijuana legalization is now supported by nearly two-thirds of Americans, including a majority of Republicans and Democrats. In 2000, By Mark Anderson, NMBA Legal and Legislative Assistant