Recently, Der Spiegel, one of the world's most-read magazines, bore on its cover the message "The Red Light of Morning: How Left are We Headed?" Yet when one flips open its pages, there is nary a mention of Obamacare, town hall meetings, or even the Obama administration itself. Instead, inscribed in dense, heavily-umlauted text, lies an account of how the Left Party, a remnant of the old East German communist party, has been taking elections in Europe's economic heart by storm.
At first glance, both these resurgences of welfare liberalism appear to be identical symptoms of the omnipresent global depression. When one digs down and examines the true shifts in power, however, it becomes apparent how shallow and confused the uproar over creeping socialism is, at least in the United States.
Anyone maintaining even tenuous contact with the world of politics, regardless of where in the world they reside, cannot help but be conscious of the debate raging across the United States about health care. The potential reforms, some conservative pundits say, are just one more example of how democratic socialism is going to pulverize this country's prosperity.
Perhaps they have a point, but if supporting health care reform is all it takes to garner a label as strong and specific as socialist in America, it's no wonder that politicians shy away from taking bold, original tacks through the dangerous waters of public opinion. This sorry state of affairs has spawned the oft-repeated comment, "All politicians are the same."
In Germany, the contrasts between parties and political platforms are much starker. Voter turnout is much higher, and debate far from the constant back-and-forth exchange of groundless accusations one sees on American television. The Left Party, proud possessor of a quarter of the vote in some parts of the country, is hardly even heard describing itself as socialist. That term is too weak, too pedestrian, the party says, and it gladly cedes the word to the middle. Indeed, the Social Democrats are huddling around the center, staring leftwards in confusion at this upstart of a party that is quickly eroding their power base.
On the other side of the Atlantic, universal health care is uncontroversial, supported by even the most conservative party in parliament, the Free Democratic Party (FDP). While the system may or may not be socialist in any one person or politician's eyes, the word is almost never used when discussing it.
Socialism is a component of specific political ideologies, and it is futile to politicize something that is an axiomatic, expected part of society like universal health care. Instead, the Socialists are a distinct, and fairly well-defined group in parliament, and the term is a descriptor rather than a pejorative. The same is true in most other countries in that diffuse ideological bloc known as the West.
In the United States though, socialism remains an amorphous, vaguely sinister concept, a word that should only be said in hushed tones or in an angry yell. Political debate, as we have been seeing, is stifled by the yells of those confused and ignorant of what socialism and other viewpoints are, and who only know that they don't like them.
In Germany, being called socialist is a role given to middle-of-the-road politicians, and judging by Obama's roughly 50 percent approval rating, the same is true in the United States. And yet, if you smash the political spectra of these two nations together, they hardly overlap, with the rightmost, laissez-faire, German FDP agreeing with the American Democratic Party on many fronts. So how does one reconcile the existence of these two, vastly different middles, both of which are tagged with the moniker of socialism?
The plan which has caused socialism to be bandied around is Obamacare. Yes, it would take money in the form of taxes from some citizens and redistribute it to others. Simply on this basis, Obamacare seems to fit the mold for a socialist plan. But one must wonder, doesn't the opposition also support a plan that sounds almost identical on paper, save for the target beneficiaries? Medicare and Medicaid take money in the form of taxes from some citizens and redistribute it to others, and no one is raising pitchforks in anger, marching on Washington, and demanding the repeal of these programs.
The only real difference between Obamacare and these programs lies in which groups benefit from them. Considering what they have in common, it's ludicrous to apply the term socialist to Obamcare, and not to Medicare and Medicaid.
Confusion currently encapsulates American political debate. Much of this confusion is due to a lack of understanding of the terminology that the participants employ. This causes the opposing sides in American politics to use words that describe viewpoints as expletives.
Unless political discourse is purged of this misleading use of words, the cloud of agitation and antipathy floating over Washington will coalesce, crippling public understanding of politics and hindering progress in this country.
Benjamin Ziomek is a member of the Class of 2013.