Written by Rodger Malcolm Mitchell, www.nofica.com
Econintersect editor’s note: Misunderstandings of American biases and preferences has led both Republicans and Democrats to make defective decisions about which candidates may be most electable. We have seen such clearly evidenced by party leaders, but this extends to the rank and file. There are major differences between what party members think the public wants and what the public actually wants. For example, less than 60% of both Rs and Ds think the public would vote for Jewish president but more than 90% of the public says they would. Obviously either many Rs or Ds (probably both) say they would vote for a Jewish candidate while thinking others would not. The Economist found the greatest misuderstandings were among Democrats.
Please share this article – Go to very top of page, right hand side, for social media buttons.
Econintersect editor’s note (continued): And political candidates also make errors in not recognizing public biases, as Rodger Malcolm Mitchell details in the following.
The one picture that shows why Bernie Sanders is foolish to call himself a “socialist.”
Here, from The Economist, is the one picture that shows why Bernie Sanders is foolish to call himself a socialist:
Socialists are the least likely of the above groups to be political winners in America. (Well, at least they beat child molesters and telemarketers.)
The fact is that despite his strange claims, Bernie is not a socialist.
Merriam-Webster Definition of Socialism
1: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
2a: a system of society or group living in which there is no private property
b: a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
3: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done
Medicare-for-All, Sanders’s signature proposal, is not a socialist program.
1. It does not propose governmental ownership and administration of anything.
2. It does not propose the elimination of private property.
3. It does not propose that the means of production be owned and controlled by the state.
4. And it does not propose the unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done.
What it does propose is federal funding of programs vital to the health and welfare of the people. Mere funding is not socialism.
Contrast Medicare for All, which proposes paying the private sector (hospitals, doctors, nurses and other hospital employees, medical equipment manufacturers, pharmaceutical companies, etc.) with the socialist Veterans Administration, which owns its own hospitals and other medical facilities, and employs their personnel.
So why does Sanders continue to call himself a “democratic socialist”? Perhaps Bernie merely is stating the obvious. The entire government of the democratic United States is a combination of functions, having some socialist and some capitalist characteristics.
By not explaining to the voters what socialism really is, and also not explaining how Monetary Sovereignty could pay for his Medicare for All, Sanders has made serious mistakes, perhaps electorally fatal.
Even with Professor Stephanie Kelton advising him about Monetary Sovereignty, Sanders has exhibited a troubling stubbornness that may sink his candidacy.
It’s a shame.
.
