Social Democracy: Why not?

[j654dgj7]

Dearest and most beautiful people that I know,

​

As long as I can remember, "socialist" has been a dirty word in the Anglican culture. I'm no socialist, but why is it that the entire group cannot have their say?

Most socialists that I know hate social democrats. Yet we have a strong presence in most European countries. We are the largest party in most of Northern European countries, and the second biggest in Germany.

Self-proclaimed social democrats count the likes of Nelson Mandela, Indira Ghandi, Rosa Luxemburg, Thorvald Stauning, Tony Blair and Poul Nyrup Rasmussen.

So what do we believe in, since we have left such a lasting legacy in Europe and the rest of the world?

It's pretty simple, really. Our slogan has always been "Liberty, Equality and Solidarity". We believe in a free market that serves the people, and grows wealth amongst every citizen of the country. Communists will have you believe that the free market destroys more than it creates, but we disagree. It has brought us more wealth than any other system in the history of mankind. Since we know that, we decided long ago that everyone should benefit from it, not just the one's on top. Here's a list of what Denmark has accomplished, while maintaining strong business cultures, world-class infrastructures and historically low corruption levels.

Welfare
​

We are stronger together. Poverty and despair is more expensive than spending money to ensure that everyone has access to the work-force, and financial security. Crime rates and disenfranchisement grows in unequal countries, whereas they fall when we help each other. That is why we advocate free hospital care and free psychiatric help for everyone. We also advocate free psychological help for people under the age of 25.

Retirement is a right. People that have spent 40-60 years working should be able to retire with dignity. That is why our government pays a worthy pension to those that are ready to retire. It is only fair that we pay back to those that have worked hard, and carried hard burdens.

Everyone should have access to the medication that they need. We subsidize medication fees progressively, so that the more you need, the cheaper it is. No one should be put in a position where they have to choose between being healthy and leaving their homes and families.

Education
​

Society has changed radically these last 20 years. The internet has made the world a smaller place, and production has moved to Asia. How do we approach that reality? We are optimists that believe that tomorrow will be better than today. That is why we welcome this development with open arms, even though it might be hard at first. That is why education in all forms are completely free of charge. All the way from Kindergarten to College/University. The world of tomorrow needs for us to be the best and most capable part of the world. The fact of the matter is that the less educated a nation is, the more fragile it is. We cannot drop entire generations on the floor, and not prepare everyone for a more specialized future. If we invest in the future, we will be more well-suited for the challenges that this new world has to offer.

Those that are of older generations should not be forgotten, either. That is why the government subsidizes work-place specialization for those that have worked for companies for a number of years. People that work in factories today must learn how to operate robots, and the new machines that are more effective than they are. Everyone benefits from a more specialized work-force, especially those that have little-to-no education.

Gender equality
​

Despite a number of improvements, gender inequality is still very present in society today. Men are paid more than women for doing the same job, and women are underrepresented in the work force. Equal pay benefits everyone, especially families.

LGBT rights are under attack, and the victims of hate crimes. We need to make it safe for everyone to feel at home in our societies. It is not okay to discriminate anyone because of gender or sexual preferences.

Prostitution and sexual slavery has to be stopped. Everyone deserves a dignified life, no matter where you come from.

Taxation
​

Those that earn the most should pay the most in taxes. The middle-class should not pay the bills of those that make millions. That is why we advocate low taxes for the working- and middle-class, with a progressive tax code for those that make more. It is not about envy, it is a matter of fairness. When that is said, no one should suffer crippling taxation levels. Those that contribute most should be able to reap the awards. However, we are in this together, and we have a stake in giving everyone meaningful employment with financial security. It is only fair.

Immigration
​

We welcome immigration and take the responsibility of helping refugees from all over the world. However, we cannot take in everyone. Legal immigration and following the laws of the country should always be the way to enter our society. We do not accept hardened criminals that spread fear and terror. That is why we need an efficient and well-equipped police-force and intelligence agency. No one should fear for terror, and we therefore need to aid more in the local areas of the troubled areas around the world.

Climate control and the environment
​

Global warming is threatening all of us, especially our children's futures. Instead of pretending that it does not exist, we must invest heavily in developing new technologies and sources for renewable energy. If we develop the best technologies, the world will want to buy it from us, and we will all benefit from it. Private companies should receive benefits for doing research on the subject.


How can we afford all of this? By everyone contributing. That means regulating the financial sector, and rewarding those that produce the most. Increasingly, companies request qualified work-forces, and if we can provide that, we can attract companies from all over the world. Taxation means little compared to productivity and a strong infrastructure. Low corruption rates make it easier to run businesses, as does happy and good workers.

Questions for you:
​

- What do you think of social democracy?
- What topic weighs the most for you?
- Do you agree with the policies that I just described?

 

[invisible]

Dear ezra, I am not very well read on political theory, at least not well enough to really discuss it, but I do have some of my own beliefs on these matters and I'm happy to share them since they seem relevant and may be of interest. I have always been a pretty materialistic person, and I do believe that people should be able to express themselves by accumulating some of the wealth that is generated by their labour, and directing it to purchase possessions or experiences. The idea of having no individual rights of ownership or determination over wealth that is generated in this way unsettles me, partly because it seems unfair to me, and partly because the cynical part of me believes that there will always be corrupt people who will take advantage of situations in which others have no personal rights. However, I also believe that a society that provides an environment in which wealth can be accumulated in this way, and expects its people to abide by the rules of this environment, has an obligation to help people to develop saleable labour, and to maintain people whose labour can have no market value at a fundamental level that would be acceptable to those whose labour does have market value. I think that these requirements of fundamental existence should include shelter, food, education, healthcare, and access to other public infrastructure such as transport and libraries. I think these are my.main beliefs about these matters. Regards, invisible.

 

[j654dgj7]

Dear ezra, I am not very well read on political theory, at least not well enough to really discuss it, but I do have some of my own beliefs on these matters and I'm happy to share them since they seem relevant and may be of interest. I have always been a pretty materialistic person, and I do believe that people should be able to express themselves by accumulating some of the wealth that is generated by their labour, and directing it to purchase possessions or experiences. The idea of having no individual rights of ownership or determination over wealth that is generated in this way unsettles me, partly because it seems unfair to me, and partly because the cynical part of me believes that there will always be corrupt people who will take advantage of situations in which others have no personal rights. However, I also believe that a society that provides an environment in which wealth can be accumulated in this way, and expects its people to abide by the rules of this environment, has an obligation to help people to develop saleable labour, and to maintain people whose labour can have no market value at a fundamental level that would be acceptable to those whose labour does have market value. I think that these requirements of fundamental existence should include shelter, food, education, healthcare, and access to other public infrastructure such as transport and libraries. I think these are my.main beliefs about these matters. Regards, invisible.

Dear invisible!

I agree completely. Materialism is not a bad thing in my opinion. Accumulating wealth in a fair manner, and priding yourself on your accomplishments, is a great goal and something to strive for.
Individual rights and the rights of ownership are essential to a healthy society. As is freedom of expression, religion, the right to assembly, etc. etc.

 

[brightmoon]

Depends on where the "Anglican" culture is.

Americans mostly think of the social democracy as a dirty word (Bernie Sanders' recent popularity not withstanding) in Canada and UK we think about politics differently. Social democrats are all over Canada, making up provincial governments and are currently the official opposition. The same can be said in UK. Their influence on the political system is profound in Canada and even our Conservatives (for the most part) pale by comparison to the ones they have down South. Lets hope Canada is returning to social democratic or at least Liberal fold soon.

 

[j654dgj7]

Depends on where the "Anglican" culture is.

Americans mostly think of the social democracy as a dirty word (Bernie Sanders' recent popularity not withstanding) in Canada and UK we think about politics differently. Social democrats are all over Canada, making up provincial governments and are currently the official opposition. The same can be said in UK. Their influence on the political system is profound in Canada and even our Conservatives (for the most part) pale by comparison to the ones they have down South. Lets hope Canada is returning to social democratic or at least Liberal fold soon.

You're right, I forgot Canada! Sorry about that. Your system is remarkably different to the other's. How do you like the Canadian Social Democrats?

I wonder if Bernie Sanders is a "real" social democrat, and if so, what he could change if he came to power ...

 

[brightmoon]

Hmm Well Canadian Social Democrats called the NDP aren't really my party of choice, I'm more of a Liberal party support which could be called "centre-left" and are in some ways more left than the NDP.

As for Bernie Sanders, even if he became President, there is likely little chance of him being able to implement even a small part of his agenda, due to the structure of the American system. Look at the struggles Obama has had implementing the most modest of reforms to American health care. Obama has been the most liberal President in last 30 years and his ability to make substantive change to the US system has been severely blunted by entrenched interests. The US is basically an oligarchy where those with money call the shots. I think many Americans are waking up to this reality, after so many years of neo-con rule (which started with Reagan) and this accounts for Bernie's popularity.

 

[Lerxst]

As a person who changed parties from the Green to the Democrats in order to vote for Sanders, I'm not that concerned with his ability to change things. The state he's a senator of has a large Conservative faction - the sane ones, the ones who realize LGBT issues don't really matter too much and that church is a place you go to on Sundays. Apparently they all love his up there.

I've been disappointed with Obama even though I didn't vote for him. He's just wasted so much time and so many opportunities. His Execute Orders (presidential decrees that don't require Congressional support) have all been weak half-measures. He's declared war, sent more troops overseas, supported oil drilling, cut funding where it's needed, allowed costs to soar sky-high, sheltered the billionaires, bailed out businesses... pretty much acted like a Conservative on most issues.

I can't wait for a Social Democrat to finally win the presidency in this country! The rest of the world has it and even our Democrats are Conservative by comparison.