Democrats keep shooting themselves in the foot on “socialism”
For many decades in American history, “socialism” has been an expletive that the political right has used with varying degrees of success to attack the left. And for all of those decades, the left has never come close to figuring out how to effectively respond — or, really, how to respond at all.
Enter John Hickenlooper, the remarkably bland, uninspiring former Democratic governor of Colorado who has decided to run for president, because why the hell not? Pretty much everyone else in his party is doing it.
(Did you know that Hickenlooper cofounded a brewery in Denver before his political career? I visited it when I was out there a couple years ago. He really needs to return to the craft beer profession — desperately.)
I have no idea what his platform is, and I really don’t care, because guess what? He will never be president of the United States. He is, however, an excellent case study on his party’s utter ineptitude at dealing with this vintage yet perennial issue.
“Democrats,” Hickenlooper declared in this POLITICO article, “must say loudly and clearly that we are not socialists. If we do not, we will end up helping to reelect the worst president in this country’s history.”
There are, of course, so many things wrong with his assessment, but the first thing should also be the most obvious: He’s legitimizing a charge that doesn’t deserve legitimacy of any kind. Period.
Let me explain this as simply as I can: If, as an adult, someone walks up to you repeatedly and calls you a “buttface” over and over again, how do you respond? Do you forcefully and earnestly deny the charge each time and try to convince them with reasoned points why their accusation isn’t true? Or do you recognize that their behavior is infantile, that their mindless, meaningless name-calling doesn’t merit a response in kind, and that you should instead focus your time on things that actually matter?
There are so many things wrong with Hickenlooper’s assessment, but the first thing should also be the most obvious: He’s legitimizing a charge that doesn’t deserve legitimacy of any kind. Period.
I hope you chose the latter. If not, go back to your grade school playground.
That’s essentially what this is. There can be no effective rejoinder to the “socialism” charge, because it’s not supposed to be thought-provoking, substantive, or dialogue-generating in any way. Quite the opposite, in fact.
When Republicans call Democrats “socialists,” what exactly do they mean?
I’m not quite sure. Your guess is as good as mine. You could ask five different people, and they’d probably give you five different answers.
My hunch is that this is precisely the point: The “socialism” charge isn’t even supposed to mean anything in particular so much as it is meant to be a sort of political slur or invective — a word that instantly evokes visceral revulsion, disdain, or offense, regardless of its actual definition. As such, it’s designed to stifle critical thought, to reinforce primitive tribal mentality, and to make people recoil at the very sound of it, because that’s what they’ve been socialized to do across generations. (See what I did there?)
If Democrats choose to respond to the “socialism” label by crying out “no, we’re not!!!,” then they’ve already lost, because by responding to the charge directly at all, they’re implicitly agreeing that Republicans have a valid point when they level it in the first place. (They do not at all.)
Here are a few ways Democrats should respond instead whenever someone calls them “socialists”:
- Calmly remind voters that Republicans have tried for years to repeal the health insurance coverage and/or protections for hundreds of millions of Americans in order to further cut taxes for billionaires and corporations. They’ve also stood in zealous lockstep against any efforts, however modest, to further expand coverage to the millions who still need it.
- Remind them that Republicans have kept the minimum wage at a poverty level for decades, and remind them that Republicans are the reason the United States is one of only about three or four countries in the entire world that offers no guaranteed paid family leave. (Because pro-life?)
- Bring to mind the fact that Republicans continue to block even the most basic and nearly universally backed gun control measures as citizens continue to suffer from violence and death at the hands of firearms, because Republicans care more about the profits of gun manufacturers than they do human lives.
- Gently point out that the Republican-controlled Senate has blocked any action on a variety of bills that Americans overwhelmingly support, such as net neutrality, LGBTQ protections, a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants, and (perhaps most pressing in light of recent headlines) election security.
- Remind them that Democrats would take action on all of the above, if only voters would stop voting for Republicans.
Indeed, Democrats could respond with any one (or all) of the facts named above, among many, many others, over and over again. If they did that, I’m pretty sure that the “socialism” label wouldn’t last too much longer.
Why? Because it will have lost its desired effect, which is distraction. Republicans are terrified of actually talking about the issues — an understandable fear given the points I enumerated above. So instead they resort to simplistic, sophomoric, intellectually vapid name-calling.
Thanks to similarly vapid characters like John Hickenlooper, their strategy, ancient and tired though it may be, is still at least modestly effective even in the year 2019.
Republicans are terrified of actually talking about the issues — an understandable fear given the points I enumerated above. So instead they resort to simplistic, sophomoric, intellectually vapid name-calling.
Pete Buttigieg, my preferred candidate for the 2020 Democratic nomination, often admonishes his fellow Democrats that “if we’re playing Donald Trump’s game, we’re losing.” He’s absolutely right, but his wise words are applicable to a context much broader than just Trump.
If Democrats want any hope of emerging victorious next year, they must place a laser focus on the issues. (I will repeat this many times between now and November 2020, so just be prepared.) For reasons I just articulated, they will be baited over and over again with vicious name-calling, many crude tweets, and ad hominem attacks that are utterly divorced from what everyday voters actually care about.
They can either be like Hickenlooper and foolishly legitimize this vitriol, thus wrongly keeping it in the spotlight, or they can immediately turn the conversation back to where it belongs: on the issues that matter not just to voting Americans today, but to the very future of our faltering nation. When it comes to those issues, to be sure, it will always be Republicans who are on the defensive, not Democrats. And Democrats must keep them there.
Like I said, John Hickenlooper will never be president. His fellow Democrats just need to decide whether they want to lose with him. I hope not.
