HE AIN'T HEAVY, HE'S MY BROTHER

Nowadays, companies and their ad agencies have access to sophisticated polling and market research to test new slogans and products.  When I was growing up, though, it was often trial and error.  “Run it up the flagpole and see who salutes,” was the phrase advertising men used. 

Donald Trump has surely heard the phrase, though it’s hard to know whether he realized he was following that principle in his State of the Union message last week.  But it’s clear that his advisors and speechwriters have decided that “socialism” is the latest addition to their list of MAGA scare words, along with “MS-13,” “ISIS,” “taxes,” “Pocahontas,” and “Nancy Pelosi.” 

I’m not going to debate the “true” meaning of socialism, because I don’t think it matters.  The United States is a post-ism society.  The primary characteristic of American culture is its ability to absorb (co-opt, if you prefer) aspects of other cultures, whether in the form of food, music, or whatever.  If we like something, we’ll embrace it, whatever its origins.  And in the process of embracing a foreign influence, we’ll tinker with it if we’re in the mood.  Which we usually are.  We wind up with Pizza Hut and Taco Bell, and we think of them as just as American as KFC and McDonalds.  Which they basically are.

Donald Trump, of course, couldn’t define socialism if his life depended on it.  But that doesn’t matter, because as of Trump’s State of the Union message, socialism is whatever Democrats propose in the way of policy.  Never mind that some of those proposals call for a return to tax rates that Republicans thought were fine during the Eisenhower and Reagan administrations.  That was then, this is now.  Yesterday’s Republican saints are today’s Deep State traitors. 

My view – feel free to call me a socialist if you like – is that government does a better job at providing critical public services – national defense, police, fire, and utilities like gas, water, and electricity – than private businesses ever could.    

For protection against evil doers, foreign and domestic, I’d rather rely on the American military and my local law enforcement personnel than on a collection of militia goobers.  My utilities are remarkably stable.  Apart from infrequent and temporary storm-related outages, I don’t have to wonder whether I’ll have electricity or hot water in my house. 

Sadly, I’m not nearly so confident about the reliability of services from private businesses.  As an example, last week our Wi-Fi was down for three days.  Based on past experience with my internet service provider, similar outages will likely happen once or twice again before 2019 is over.  First world problem, sure.  But I live in the first world, so those are the kind of problems I have.

On its surface, the debate over “socialism” is about which public services are critical to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and whether government (at the national, state, and/or local levels) can provide those services less expensively and more efficiently than the private sector.  For those inclined to mutter darkly about faceless government bureaucrats taking away their freedom, here’s a clue.  Faceless bureaucrats also run Big Pharma, Big Medicine, and Big Insurance.  Some bureaucrats – public and private – work hard to deliver positive outcomes for their paying customers.  Others just go through the motions and collect a paycheck.  You can find the full spectrum of energy and sloth, of competence and incompetence, on both sides of the public/private divide. 

The real debate over socialism, though, isn’t about efficiency or any other practical matter.  It’s a continuation of a philosophical debate that goes all the way back to the Book of Genesis.  Adam and Eve had two sons, Cain and Abel.  Cain murdered his brother and when God called him on it, Cain basically shrugged and asked “Am I my brother’s keeper?”  As far as Cain was concerned, the answer was obviously no.  God disagreed. 

Centuries later, after attempting to work first through a series of patriarchs, then a series of kings, and finally a series of prophets, God finally sent his only begotten son to straighten things out.  Jesus (Luke 10:27) endorsed this recipe for achieving eternal life: “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbour as thyself.

Wait a minute, one of Jesus’ enemies said.  That sounds good, but who is my neighbor?  Jesus replied with the story of the Good Samaritan (Luke 10:30-37).  The story has lost most of its punch because modern readers don’t understand what a Samaritan was. 

Two thousand years ago, the Roman province of Judea was divided into four parts, one of which was Samaria.  Samaritans were regarded by other Judeans as outcasts.  They were heretics, who worshiped their sacred Mount Gerizim and had their own set of ten commandments.  They were unclean.  Good Jews shunned them.

Jesus used the parable of the Good Samaritan to respond to the Pharisee’s question about whom we’re obliged to love in the same way we love ourselves.  A traveler on an isolated road is attacked by thieves and left to die.  A prominent member of society passes by and ignores the injured man.  So does a prominent religious figure.  Then a Samaritan comes along and helps him.  Which of the three, Jesus asks, was more neighborly?  Obviously, it was the much-despised Samaritan. 

Dang.  Even if your neighbor is your worst enemy – a member of ISIS, a member of MS-13, even a member of the Democratic Party – a Christian is obliged to love him just as they love themselves.  That, of course, is the last thing that Republicans want to hear.  Oh, they’ll pay lip service to Jesus.  Just don’t ask them to actually follow his teachings.

What remains of the loose affiliation of millionaires and billionaires in the Republican Party know a dog whistle when they hear it; they’ll repeat the mantra du jour without really caring how much truth it contains.  MAGA types are more gullible, so maybe some of them will fall for the con and start seeing socialists lurking in every shadow. 

But the real point of the exercise is to find a rhetorical weapon that will intimidate Democrats into abandoning their progressive legislative agenda.  If they can do that by calling us socialists, their next step will be to demand that Dems purge left-leaning members like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.  AOC, I’m sure, will simply carry on, mocking her critics along the way.  I hope the rest of the party follows suit.  I’m not worried about the newly elected congressional Democrats, and I’m sure as hell not worried about Nancy Pelosi caving, since she’s one of the toughest, smartest, people around.  But there are some older Democratic politicians who may need some hand-holding from the leadership when the usual Beltway pundits criticize them for refusing to compromise.  

I believe I’m better off when my fellow citizens are happy, healthy, peaceful, and safe.  For various reasons, many of my fellow citizens can’t afford those things.  My investments are several zeros smaller than those of Jeff Bezos, but I have more money than I’m likely to be able to spend before I die.  I’d be happy to pay more in taxes in order to live in a more just and peaceful society. If this be socialism, make the most of it.