DEMOCRATIC SOCIALISM, OH MY!!!
Well, well, well. Zohran Mamdani was elected Mayor of NYC.
I have heard for 9 months from the Republican faithful about Mr. Trump: “He was elected by the voters; give him a chance; let’s see what he does.”
Mr. Trump won the Presidency with less than 50% of the popular vote. Mr. Mamdani won the Mayoralty with more than 50% of the popular vote. So, my fellow Republicans, let’s give him a chance.
Mr. Trump would like to label him a COMMUNIST!! And Mr. Trump has coined the fabulous political phrase, “Its Common Sense or Communism”. On November 5 Mr. Trump said, “Just look at the result of yesterday’s election in New York, where (the Democrats) installed a communist as the mayor to the largest city in the nation.”
Perhaps Mr. Trump does not understand the difference between Democratic Socialism and Communism.
Note here: (I am not endorsing Democratic Socialism, I am just describing what it is and how it compares to Communism. In my opinion this is an important thing to understand when debating where people who identify as Democratic Socialists like Senator Sanders and Mayor Mamdani stand and how they should be classified.)
Communism vs Democratic Socialism
Whereas Communism seeks to replace capitalism with a state-controlled economic system through violent overthrow of existing governments, Democratic Socialism attempts to humanize capitalism by reducing inequality through peaceful, democratic means.
In a Democratic Socialist economy, the government ensures social and economic well-being through programs like universal healthcare, free college tuition, and worker’s rights. The goal is to have the economy meet basic human needs rather than pure private profit. This results in a strong social safety net, high taxes on the wealthy and policies designed to protect discrimination based on racial, gender, or religious inequality.
Whereas Democratic Socialism prioritizes liberal democratic processes, individual liberties, free speech and multi-party elections, Communism results in a single-party state with central control and restricted individual freedoms.
Communism abolishes private property; Democratic Socialism includes individual ownership of property with only key industries becoming state-owned (no Democratic Socialist want the central government to own and operate your local coffee shop, gym, bodega, law office, or nail salon).
Communism centralizes and controls all means of production; Democratic Socialism is a mixed economy with a strong welfare state, social safety nets, but with some public ownership of key industries.
I want to be clear here. There is a difference between Democratic Socialism and Social Democracies. Both have identical short-term goals, but Democratic Socialists have a long-term goal of peacefully converting a capitalist system into a socialist system through democratic means. Both philosophies have evolved over time to represent more participatory democracies.
There are many countries in the world that have Social Democratic political systems.
Sweden, Denmark, Finland and Norway combine a capitalist, market-driven economy with extensive social welfare programs funded through taxes.
Germany has a mixed economy with Social Democrats playing a key role in government.
France, Spain, and Portugal all have strong Socialist parties which play significant roles in their governments.
India has deep Democratic Socialism roots embedded in their democracy.
Can you compare American Democracy with Democratic Socialism?
There is an internal tension in the US between financial Capitalism and Democracy. I have written about this in the past, but to sum up, American Democracy is based on one man, one vote. It does not matter (today) if you are male or female, young or old, a landowner or not, educated or not, rich or poor, pay high taxes or no taxes, serve in a government job or are self-employed; each person gets one and only one vote. But in a capitalist institution like a company or corporation, only those with financial interests vote, and their votes are proportional to their share of that financial interest.
China has an economy that has grown faster than the US over the past 50 years and now stands second only to the US in economic size. Economists call their economy a form of state-sponsored capitalism – YES Capitalism. The difference between the two economies is that in the US, companies are driven by the financial investments made by private parties, while in China the economy is driven by directed investment by the centralized state. Both models have clearly built strong economies; the values of those societies can be debated at a future time; today we are discussing the basic structure of economies.
Within the precepts of Democratic Socialism, the perception of unrestrained capitalism and its potential to skew the economy towards those who control the financial power to fuel economic growth, leads to the examination of models and methods to restrain those forces and protect the workers who have limited power. And the fact that in a Democracy, those with little financial power outnumber those with significant financial power, provides the pathway for constraining Financial Capitalism.
Historically, these constraints are instituted following times in which power wielded by the wealthy elite becomes overconcentrated in a small percentage of the overall population, or results in investment bubbles that collapse. Hence things like the Securities Exchange Act, Glass-Steagall, Trustbusters, the FDIC, The Federal Reserve, Sarbanes-Oxley, Dodd-Frank, the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act (TARP), the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, etc. are created and empowered.
Now, you may choose to embrace Democratic Socialism or reject it. Most likely you fall in the middle, endorsing some of the goals of Democratic Socialism, but discarding others.
At least in my opinion evolution of political positions should be celebrated, not condemned, and widening your sociopolitical constructs should be an ambition, not an impediment.
So, how does Democratic Socialism compare to Financial Capitalism in today’s world?
One measure of one system opposed to another is the “Happiness Index”. The one created by Gallup is a compilation of ratings including Life Evaluation, Inequality, Social Support, GDP per Capita, Healthy Life Expectancy, Freedom, Generosity, Perception of Corruption, Positive Emotions, Negative Emotions, Charitable Contributions, and Volunteerism.
Based on these measurements, the happiest countries in the world are Finland, Denmark, Iceland, Sweden, the Netherlands, Costa Rica, and Norway. Five of those seven have Democratic Socialist economies.
The US? It comes in 24th.
Here is a comparison of Norway to the US.
One interesting comparison of how Social Democracies compare to the American version of Capitalist Democracy is to look at the economies of Norway and the US. Please do not attack me for this comparison. I am not advocating for one over the other, but I am observing that blind flag waving and claims that USA, USA, USA mean that everything is always best in America are far too simplistic.
The average American pays about 37% of their income in Federal, State and local taxes.
In Norway there are two taxes, one on General income and one on personal income.
The General income tax rate is a flat rate of 22%. This includes income from employment, business and capital. This tax includes the national, county, and municipal taxes.
The Personal Income Tax is paid by bracket. This tax comprises income mainly from employment, including benefits in kind and pensions, as well as income from self-proprietorship and certain partnerships.
For incomes between $21,000 and $30,000 the rate is 1.7%
For incomes between $30,000 and $68,000 the rate is 4.0%
For incomes between $68,000 and $92,000 the rate is 13.7%
For incomes between $92,000 and $138,000 the rate is 16.7%
For incomes greater than $138,000 the rate is 17.7%
The net result is that Norwegians pay an average of just over 38% in taxes.
There are also consumption taxes in both countries. In the US those taxes are sales taxes and tariffs. In Norway there is a VAT ranging from 0% to 25% based on specific categories of goods and services.
Here is a comparison of the economies in Norway and the US:
Average Tax rate:
Norway: 38% US: 37%
Poverty rate:
Norway: 10% US: 29%
Life Expectancy:
Norway: 81.7 years US: 79.6 years
Infant Mortality (per 1,000 births):
Norway: 2 US: 5.7
Murder Rate (per 100,000):
Norway: 0.51 US: 4.74
Incarcerations (per 100,000):
Norway: 74 US: 860
GDP (per person):
Norway: $75,000 US: $59,500
Unions (% protected by Union membership):
Norway: 70% US: 11.3%
Happiness Value Rank (by country):
Norway: 7 US: 24
Free Universal Healthcare:
Norway: Yes US: No
Free Higher Education:
Norway: Yes US: No
Home Ownership:
Norway 83% US: 63%
Minimum Wage (level guaranteed to reach):
Norway: Living Wage US: Poverty Wage
Guaranteed paid vacation per year:
Norway: 8 weeks US: None
Paid Parental Leave:
Norway: 35 weeks US: None
My conclusion is that there is much good to be said for Democratic Socialism, particularly if it is constrained within the bounds of Social Democracy. The cost to the government may be higher than the costs within the US, but the benefits are significant.
Mr. Mamdani acknowledges that he endorses the precepts of Democratic Socialism, but he will be constrained by the NY municipal government, the State of NY, and Federal legislation. His aspiration for a stronger safety net, and for services that ease the life of those making poverty incomes seems, to me, to be laudable. Norway has shown that it is possible to provide these things to the general population without bankrupting the nation or preventing economic growth (averaging just under 3% over the past 5 years).
He is not a Communist.
We may have emotional reactions to Mr. Mamdani that result in fears about how he will govern in NYC. Those fears have been amplified by politicians and talking heads. The wild-haired Brooklyn Jew from Vermont may be a more palatable version of Democratic Socialism, but objectively there is significant appeal in this philosophy. Evolving political philosophies need to incorporate ideas that are valued regardless of the labels associated with them. This is the core of the American Experiment.