Cygnus X-1 said:For me, an european, being socialdemocratic is just quite natural. It is NOT communism, i.e. the centralization of all the processes in the hands of the govern, which in turn would result, sooner or later, in a dictatorial regime because of the accumulation of money and, consequently, of power. Burocracy also becomes a way to put privileged people to key places, preventing the exercise of justice and destroying progress and changes.
It is NOT neoliberism, i.e. the system that de-regulate everything believed unnecessary at such a point that the vast majority of money goes in the hands of very few, rich people and creates devastating social differences. People that do not have means are condemned to not study as they should deserve, to not have a complete sanitar couverture, to not exploit their potential regardless of thier capacities and eventually, to not live worthily. Competition reaches a point in which in order to get a decent work, non-ethik attitudes are necessary, in which nobody can possibly care about other anymore, in which everyone is against everyone, in which the life of people are reduced to a mere battle and to overworking, while who has metarial richness reaches an untouchable state, poisoning even the justice.
Socialdemocracy is, ideoligically, the de-centralization of the money and the re-distribution of it in the most equal way, thus preventing accumulation of power, corruption and unequalities. A system, in which everyone start with the basics necessary to have a dignified life, i.e. low taxes for studying, large subsidies for families, high taxes for rich people and almost no taxes for poor people, with a exponential curve based on the taxable income. The state control essential processes that are not meant to make profits, but are meant to serve people, like trains, energy, water, post, sanity services and so on, but NOT what is meant to make profits, like banks. It is a controlled capitalistic system, with clear, severe rules for everyone who operate on the market. Against wars and promoting the peace, with the convinctions that within the human race no subraces exist. Ethnik groups exist that are fully equivalent, i.e. every human life is sacred and one person hs no more value then any other person in the entire world.
This is a very short, personal and uncomplete description. But it gives an idea. My question is the following: why isn't in the US a relevant socialdemocratic ideology? Are you people generally SO against to all of that I cited above? If yes, why?
Social democracy as an idea, seems to me to be a completely made up term by Euro-philes and leftists who feel North America is too 'free market' to distinguish between the Canada/US and the model' European economies, who by the way, are solely reliant of a large and export rich market (The United States) for their trade surplus
There's nothing inherently lacking in the way economists describe western democracies, that is, all are essentially or were essentially welfare states with some choosing one extreme (more welfare and more state) and others choosing the other extreme (less welfare and less state). Obviously, the surging conservatism of the last 30 years has shifted the pendulum to less welfare, but it is still within the same paradigm of government collection of income taxes (which were supposed to be temporary to pay for war) to fund social programs.