Is this Socialism?

With all of the bailouts and public infusions of cash into the private sector, the word “socialism” has been tossed around throughout the media. This is quite an interesting turn of events. Free market ideologues, including the point figures on the bailout, are now asking government to fund the buying of private debt, and infusing cash into private banks. These ideologues have been fueled by economic theory that has been labeled “scientific” and “value-free.” They were supporting their arguments by saying that the free market capitalist system is the “end of history,” implying that the system works harmoniously with the laws of nature and there was no other system that could supersede, what Adam Smith called, “obvious and natural system of liberty.” Now they are making an about face. So much so that Dana Perino the White House spokesperson stated that Bush was going against his “instinct” in order to deal with the financial meltdown. They are overtly looking to government to resolve another crisis of capitalism.

But is this socialism? Hardly. Maybe some would cynically call it financial socialism or socialism for the wealthy, but socialism cannot be simply characterized as the government infusion of cash into markets. Government in the United States has been propping up capitalism and capitalists for years. Whether through public spending programs on infrastructure, military spending, or tax laws, the idea that the free market has been unfettered is quite ridiculous. Forget about “the invisible hand” guiding rational decisions in the marketplace, there has been a visible arm that has been keeping capitalism from drowning for many, many decades. This "bailout" stuff is just more obvious.

These recent policy decisions to bailout Wall Street have been called socialism, but socialism involves a lot more than simply government involvement in propping up the economy. In fact, labeling the recent actions as “socialist” only furthers the misconceptions about what socialism means and, in many ways, further alienates people from moving to change a clearly broken system. This is policy dictated by Wall Street bankers and conservative economists in order to maintain the status-quo. This is not about change at all. Furthermore, this is not a democratic process in any way. Contrary to popular conceptions, socialism can and should be democratic, emerging from ordinary peoples needs and directed by grass roots activity. This current policy does not resemble this in any way. Sure Congress voted on it, but by now it should be clear who the represent.

I don’t know what a new and better system will look like, but certainly keeping the foxes guarding the hen house cannot resolve this and move us into a better social situation. We need to begin to actively change this abominable system in a democratic way. Socialism may be one direction for us to consider; basing a system on people’s needs and ecological principles rather than simply the need to expand of profits. Certainly what we have right now does not work, and it is quite impossible to argue the contrary considering the current crisis. Maybe this will begin to break down the misconceptions about capitalism, and hopefully this will open our eyes to the possibilities of a truly new way to think about society: politically, economically, and culturally.