A recent poll of self-identified Republicans showed a large majority—63 percent—believe that President Obama is a “socialist.” I always cringe when I hear people throw around the “s” word since it seems to be used more as an insult than as an intentionally descriptive label (although when I hear the words “General Motors” I realize they have a point.)
An even more recent poll by Gallup, however, shows that many Democrats may not consider the term to be derogatory:
Socialism had the lowest percentage positive rating and the highest negative rating of any term tested. Still, more than a third of Americans say they have a positive image of socialism.
Exactly how Americans define “socialism” or what exactly they think of when they hear the word is not known. The research simply measures Americans’ reactions when a survey interviewer reads the word to them — an exercise that helps shed light on connotations associated with this frequently used term.
There are significant differences in reactions to “socialism” across ideological and partisan groups:
- A majority of 53% of Democrats have a positive image of socialism, compared to 17% of Republicans.
- Sixty-one percent of liberals say their image of socialism is positive, compared to 39% of moderates and 20% of conservatives.
I suspect that many democrats are unclear on what they mean by socialism. Most are probably associating the term with New Deal/Great Society-style welfare statism. A few, however, may actually be social democrats while a smaller minority are full-fledged democratic socialists.
How would you define socialism? Do you have, or know people that have, a positive impression of the term?
February 5th, 2010 | 5:20 pm
Noting the fundamental uselessness of these kinds of forced classifications (there’s lots of shades of Republicans and Democrats along way more that one axis) two things seem pretty clear in this muddled picture:
- Democrats and Republicans aren’t thinking of the same thing when they say ‘socialism’;
- adding up the numbers, it seems a lot of democrats think both entrepreneurs, small business, free enterprise AND socialism are great stuff, making one suspect they are not overburdened by the requirements of logical coherency.
My most rabidly partisan democrat friend goes bonkers when I suggest that the democratic party is essentially socialist – but, what other conclusion can an outside observer make, when the Democrats have never, in all my years, met a proposal to centralize power that they didn’t like?
Republicans have their own problems, and my general attitude is ‘a pox on both houses’ but at least let’s be clear on what the parties are about, as much as possible.
February 5th, 2010 | 5:21 pm
Traditionally I’ve interpreted socialism to mean ‘state ownership of the means of production’, or even ‘state ownership of all property’, both of which, as a practical matter, can be viewed as one end of a quantitative continuum, with a kind of anarchy or a completely private economy the other end. Once you view it quantitatively of course the binary distinction ‘capitalism’/'socialism’ assumes less significance. From that standpoint, some degree of socialism (i.e., state monopoly on military power, state provision of fire department, education, sanitation services, etc.) is accepted by most Americans (except extreme libertarian anarchists) as a good or at least a necessary evil, I should think. Certainly that’s how I view it. Another aspect which is far more interesting, I think, and rarely discussed, is the notion of worker and/or consumer ownership or control over the means of production, which of course needn’t imply state ownership, nor indeed a monopolistic system. Many American corporations and co-ops exemplify this principle to various degrees, combining it with market competition and private (non-state) ownership, and I wish religious conservatives would give it more of a hearing as a kind of ‘third way’ between state-socialism and purely profit-driven private corporate capitalism.
February 6th, 2010 | 7:17 pm
Socialism in its best form is intended to help that segment of society that either have fallen on hard times or are unable to help themselves. The problem is when the benefits of socialism are so attractive that they diminish ambition, innovation and hard work. Whereas necessity is the mother of invention, comfort is the father of indolence.
February 6th, 2010 | 11:38 pm
[...] Thoughts: Democrats are Fond of Socialism (No Really, The Are) by Joe [...]
February 7th, 2010 | 3:03 pm
“Do you have, or know people that have, a positive impression of the term?”
Yes, Europe.
February 7th, 2010 | 7:00 pm
Of my friends, many of the Democrats would like to strike a balance between capitalism (as they understand it) and socialism (as they understand it). Capitalism tends to be associated with the free market but interpreted according to some Marxist or quasi-Marxist lens. The market then functions in a certain way, which, if let to run rampant, will lead to big corporations exercising undue control over various areas of life — monopolies and such.
It’s the standard history of the New Deal, and it is buttressed by the background picture that on the far Right lies Nazism, whilst on the far Left lies Stalinism.
That would explain how capitalism and socialism received similar marks in the poll.
The contrary view, though, is that in socialism, the state most definitely does not check the power of big business but favors certain big businesses against others, and most big businesses against the small. People who hold this view are almost always Conservatives or Libertarians. And under this view, balance is not an issue, because every policy seeking support from socialism is of necessity self-undermining (eg, the minimum wage increasing the number of people receiving no wage, etc). This would explain the large gap between the marks received by socialism and capitalism.
February 8th, 2010 | 12:18 am
I know one person who has a positive association with the term, at least, if you qualify it a little bit, and that is Pope Benedict XVI. In his book ‘Without Roots’, Benedict writes that: “In many respects, democratic socialism was and is close to Catholic social doctrine, and has in any case made a remarkable contribution to the formation of a social consciousness.”
Granted, we must inquire into exactly what the Holy Father means when he uses the term democratic socialism (e.g. he contrasts it with totalitarian socialism); but nevertheless, it is a surprising statement from the man who is the head of the Church that once stated that “No one can be a good Catholic and a true Socialist” (Pius XI).
The only way to resolve this dichotomy, is to realize that socialism is a term with many nuances, and it is categorically important that one define exactly what they mean when using it in serious political discourse, and not simply as a aspersion to cast upon one’s enemies.
February 8th, 2010 | 1:15 pm
The first communists were the early Christians. But that’s communists with a small c…it was all purely voluntary. Communism with a large C is totalitarianism, with the individual having no say in the matter.
So I can understand how the pope could say that democratic socialism is catholic in it’s nature, and then say that a “true Catholic” could not believe in true socialism. It’s the theory that is ideal – the reality isn’t attainable without force, which isn’t acceptable. Those Christians who desire it are chasing a will o’ the wisp. If we were all saints, life would be perfect. If we were all saints…
February 9th, 2010 | 5:05 am
[...] HT: Joe Carter [...]
February 11th, 2010 | 9:38 am
[...] disturbing Gallop Poll showing that 53% of democrat leaning voters think positively about “socialism.” This is insanity. People need to read history. Also included in the poll were voters [...]
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact