A little background for those who will read my blog. I live in Canada, I have lived here almost 5 years now, however, I am American. I love Canada and am falling back in love with the United States. Most of my political commentary is about American polotics.
This post was fueled by a Facebook friends comment about not being happy with the new president and the fact/assumption that he is leading the United States towards a Socialist society. (That was an elequent paraphrase of the comment he posted.)
Disclaimer: I am not accusing anyone of anything or implying anyone is anything based on the commentary in the following paragraphs - these are my views and feelings.
I shall start with these quotes.
“Socialism refers to any one of various economic theories of […] organization advocating state or cooperative ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods, and a society characterized by equal opportunities/means for all individuals with a more egalitarian method of compensation [a belief in human equality, especially with respect to social, political, and economic rights and privileges] based on the full product of the labourer [in which each worker is rewarded in accordance with the amount of labour that he contributes to society]. “Socialists mainly share the belief that capitalism unfairly concentrates power and wealth among a small segment of society that controls capital”
“In political theory, Democracy describes a small number of related forms of government and also a political philosophy. Even though there is no universally accepted definition of 'democracy', there are two principles that any definition of democracy includes. The first […] is that all members of the society have equal access to power and the second that all members enjoy universally recognized freedoms and liberties. There are several varieties of democracy, some of which provide better representation and more freedoms for their citizens than others.However, if any democracy is not carefully legislated to avoid an uneven distribution of political power with balances, such as the separation of powers, then a branch of the system of rule could accumulate power and become harmful to the democracy itself.”
Democratic: 4 : favouring social equality : not snobbish (Merriam Webster Dictionary)
The United States government funds libraries, healthcare and childcare for the poor, education, etc, etc. The only thing that differs who we already were, from the socialism people claim we are headed towards, is that our government does not pay 100% for ALL of these services (certainly some) but strives to create equal opportunity by providing basic healthcare, education, and services. However, we still have a VERY unequal society in which many feel they don’t have equality, we have a larger number of people living in poverty, 37.3 million people in poverty in 20071 , and among industrialized countries contain the highest poverty rate.2 This reflects a high degree of inequality.
The cornerstone elements of democracy include basic human rights, freedom of opinion, separation of powers, religious freedom and liberty, and good governance, defined as the “focus on public interest and absence of corruption”, a government that does not manipulate people to achieve personal goals based on personal interests.
When there is an administration that does not allow a freedom of opinion, where individuals were labelled anti-patriotic and put on a watch list for saying anything negative about an administration, where individuals are suspect because of their religious views, were individuals feel powerless to a government who favours personal interests and big business, individuals are having their basic right impeded on. Ask these people if they feel they were having their basic political rights stripped from them and you will be met with a resounding “yes”. Not a very democratic environment. We already have a government that is a juxtaposition of socialism and democracy, they have intertwining philosophies. I think the mistake people make is that they view non-democratic societies as those that have no say in their government and who think they have no say in things that go on. Step back from your political affiliations and LOOK – really LOOK at who has and has had the power, it is already a division of power based on many factors that are largely out of the control of the common man.
On a personal note, I don’t remember learning about socialism in school so my only research has been that of an adult. As an adult, I can look at it with eyes of a person that is not being told how something was/is by one school and one teacher who chooses the text we read (The Language Police: How Pressure Groups Restrict what Students Learn By Diane Ravitch and that’s just the tip of the iceberg on that – don’t get me started).
I am not advocating a pure socialist society (such as Sweden) but as a society that already has socialist aspects one should step back and be thankful. Be thankful we have a government that is developed, that provides for those lower and lower-middle class peoples who can not afford basic rights that are modern human rights [not to mention NECESSETIES}, that provides some basic equal opportunities, like educations and libraries. It is what separates us from a few of the countries we scarcely understand and whome we fight wars with. It is what makes us the country we are, the country that in the past, and now in the future, people strive to be a part of. It is what makes us America.
So, when the government makes changes to some of our basic policies we must believe that they are doing it for the better of the country and to trust them with our country and our well being is as democratic and as patriotic as one can be.
I welcome all comments especially from those who can provide a valid rebuttal to this, but please have some information to back it up – nothing is worse that someone with empty comments.
1US Census Bearau and News http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/releases/archives/income_wealth/012528.html
2Bradley, D., Huber, E., Moller, S., Nielson, F. & Stephens, J. D. (2003). Determinants of relative poverty in advanced capitalist democracies. American Sociological Review, 68(3), 22-51.
Common arguments forwarded by supporters of universal health care systems include [3]: * Health care is a basic human right or entitlement. * Ensuring the health of all citizens benefits a nation economically. * About 59% of the U.S. health care system is already publicly financed with federal and state taxes, property taxes, and tax subsidies - a universal health care system would merely replace private/employer spending with taxes. Total spending would go down for individuals and employers. * A single payer system could save $286 billion a year in overhead and paperwork. Administrative costs in the U.S. health care system are substantially higher than those in other countries and than in the public sector in the US: one estimate put the total administrative costs at 24 percent of U.S. health care spending. * Several studies have shown a majority of taxpayers and citizens across the political divide would prefer a universal health care system over the current U.S. system. * Universal health care would provide for uninsured adults who may forgo treatment needed for chronic health conditions. * Wastefulness and inefficiency in the delivery of health care would be reduced. * America spends a far higher percentage of GDP on health care than any other country but has worse ratings on such criteria as quality of care, efficiency of care, access to care, safe care, equity, and wait times, according to the Commonwealth Fund. * A universal system would align incentives for investment in long term health-care productivity, preventive care, and better management of chronic conditions. * Universal health care could act as a subsidy to business, at no cost thereto. (Indeed, the Big Three of U.S. car manufacturers cite health-care provision as a reason for their ongoing financial travails. The cost of health insurance to U.S. car manufacturers adds between USD 900 and USD 1,400 to each car made in the U.S.A.) * A 2008 opinion poll of 2,000 US doctors found support for a universal health care plan at 59%-32%, which is up from the 49%-40% opinion of physicians in 2002. These numbers include 83% of psychiatrists, 69% of emergency medicine specialists, 65% of paediatricians, 64% of internists, 60% of family physicians and 55% of general surgeons. The reasons given are an inability of doctors to decide patient care and patients who are unable to afford care. * According to an estimate by Dr. Marcia Angell roughly 50% of health care dollars are spent on health care, the rest go to various middlepersons and intermediaries. A streamlined, non-profit, universal system would increase the efficiency with which money is spent on health care. * In countries in Western Europe with public universal health care, private health care is also available, and one may choose to use it if desired. Most of the advantages of private health care continue to be present, see also two-tier health care. * Universal health care and public doctors would protect the right to privacy between insurance companies and patients. * Public health care system can be used as independent third party in disputes between employer and employee. * Conservatives can favour universal health care, because in countries with universal health care, the government spends less tax money per person on health care than the U.S. For example, in France, the government spends $569 less per person on health care than in the United States. This would allow the U.S. to adopt universal health care, while simultaneously cutting government spending and cutting taxes.