Feb 23, 2020 5 min read

The 2020 election promises to be a wild affair, with many Americans becoming more entrenched in their political bunkers than ever before. The one political ideology that will receive the most abuse is the much-maligned concept of democratic socialism. I will offer a brief defense.

For many Americans, it does not matter that the term “socialism” is preceded by the word “democratic.” The mention of socialism conjures up visions of communism, totalitarian leaders and the end of individual liberties. The words of British conservative writer Roger Scruton provide a summary of the prevailing view: “The future of mankind, for the socialist, is simple: pull down the existing order, and allow the future to emerge. But it will not emerge, as we know. These philosophies of the “new world” are lies and delusions, products of a sentimentality which has veiled the facts of human nature.”

What conservatives and even traditional Democrats fail to remember is that “pulling down the existing order and allowing the future to emerge” was exactly the answer for taming the abuses of the industrial revolution. Democratic socialism provided the roadmap for how a democratic society would respond to the abject poverty, overcrowding, and ill health in the expanding urban areas. It gave voice to a political culture that would make room for immigrants into the existing community. It expanded voting rights for Western Europe and America, without social unrest. In the 20th century communism and fascism succeeded only in those countries where democratic socialism, with its liberal reforms, was not permitted to flourish.

I would argue that the social challenges of the industrial revolution have returned under a different guise as we enter the information revolution. It is no longer an adequate response to only provide an economic floor for the unfortunate and disabled in society. The new challenge is to determine what role the nation must undertake in order for all its citizens to pursue healthy, full and decent lives. This is why progressives who favor democratic socialism are calling for universal health care, low-cost higher education, income leveling by taxing the wealthy and policies to face climate change head-on.

The greatest misconception concerning democratic socialism is its effects on the political life of democratic institutions. It is a myth, encouraged by conservative social media, and outright false propaganda that political elites and societies that have adopted democratic socialism seek to limit individual liberty or other democratic principles.

Opponents of democratic socialism point to Venezuela, Russia and China as examples of our fate if its policies are adopted in America. An examination of each case leads to a different conclusion. In truth, Venezuela’s democracy collapsed decades ago, not because of its reliance on democratic socialism but because of its slide into kleptocracy, where the country is governed by a loose confederation of criminal enterprises.

The Russian political elite has no affinity for democratic socialism and has taken control of all media to weaken public confidence in democratic elections and to increase support for its own brand of crony capitalism and authoritarianism. China’s brand of market capitalism has emboldened autocrats around the world to seek economic prosperity without opening the door to civil liberties or democratic political competition.

The best blueprint for democratic socialism lies in Scandinavia, where the Nordic model employed by Sweden, Denmark, Norway and Finland has resulted in increased economic productivity, high social equality, social trust in democratic institutions and over the moon levels of personal happiness.

Consider the decaying levels of social trust in America. In Scandinavia, as pointed out by David Brooks in a recent opinion article (New York Times, Feb. 13, “This Is How Scandinavia Got Great”) the Nordic model reinvents basic education to confront social integration at an early age. The goal is to “create in the mind of the student a sense of a wider circle of belonging – from family to town to nation – and an eagerness to assume shared responsibility for the whole.” This approach places all of society on the same side as contrasted with American tribalism and narrow silo thinking of “me” over “us”.

I am not suggesting that democratic socialism is the panacea for all of our social ills. Moreover, there are other well-constructed visions on the way forward for our complex democratic republic. But it is wrong to dismiss the principles of democratic socialism out of hand without considering its value in planning for our future.

Lastly, a word about where the real danger lies for liberal democracy. According to the National Endowment for Democracy, global democratization peaked in 2005. Since then many regimes have turned undemocratic. Liberal democracies have become illiberal. Many new democracies have declined into what political scientists call “competitive autocracies”. This trend has nothing to do with the principles of democratic socialism and everything to do with the election of populist political leaders who seek to divide voters and who encourage their followers to favor the individual in charge over democratic institutions.

Gary Stout is a Washington attorney.