The last item on 4/6 Afternoon Daily Digest about the relative popularity of “socialism” and Teabaggers got me thinking. If the GOP (or at least right-wing activists and opinion makers) is willing and eager to embrace the tea-party movement, why is it that Democrats continue to treat “socialism” as toxic? Certainly, its a losing proposition nationally (no Democratic candidate for president should EVER call themselves ‘socialist’). In some parts of the country though, my hunch is that progressives/liberals/Democrats/the left ought to revisit their assumption that ‘socialism’ is to American politics as oil is to water.
The question I’m exploring here is:
Where might ‘socialism’ have either 50+ favorablity, or at least net postitive favorability?
The Gallop poll referenced here (http://www.gallup.com/poll/125645/socialism-viewed-positively-americans.aspx) was taken in January 2010. It found socialism at 36-58 overall, but at 53-41 among Democrats, and and 61-34 among liberals. Using Gallop’s own data on party affiliation and ideology by state (http://www.gallup.com/poll/125066/State-States.aspx), we can extrapolate views of socialism state by state:
DC (adjusted by ideology): 41/48
DC (adjusted by party affiliation): 47/47
MA (by ideology): 38/53
MA (by party): 40/54
VT-ideology: 39/53
VT-party: 39/54
NY-ideology: 37/53
NY-party: 39/55
OR-ideology: 37/54
OR-party: 37/56
CT-ideology: 37/54
CT-party: 38/55
RI-ideology: 37/54
RI-party: 40/53
HI-ideology: 38/52
HI-party: 39/54
MD-ideology: 37/54
MD-party: 39/54
I’ll stop here. The states (and district) that I tested here are a few of the most left-leaning out there, yet only in DC under one method did I find socialism not to be a net negative, and only in DC did I not find it to be over 50% unfavorable. So unfortunately, the numbers don’t support my hypothesis. A few concluding thoughts on this:
– My calculations assume that opinions of socialism are uniform nationwide among parties and ideological groups. This may not necessarily be true, but without state-by-state data on this question, I think this was the best I could do.
– My guess is that views of socialism correlate more strongly to ideology than to party affiliation. In practice though, the numbers are similar regardless of which method you use.
– The party and ideology data are from 2009. I think this may be a good thing though, since 2009 was in between a good year for Democrats and a bad one, so 2009 may be the year with data that best reflects the “starting point.”
– A major problem that socialism has is that, in political terms, it has been defined by its opponents. No one (except perhaps for Bernie Sanders) in mainstream American political discourse ever sticks up for socialism. On the other hand, Republicans bash it constantly. Additionally, many Americans probably associate it with communism and the Eastern Bloc. Perhaps if the left made an investment in trying to “sell” socialism to the public, these numbers would improve.
– A fundamental assumption that I have made, that a socialist would only be electable if socialism has a net positive favorability rating, is probably wrong on its face. Vermont, for example, elected a Socialist Senator despite socialism having a net rating of minus 14 or 15 there. Many self described Liberals hold statewide office in America, despite liberals being only 20-30% of the electorate in any given state, and nationally.
– Related to the point above, Socialism actually seems to be viewed favorably by a larger percentage of the electorate than the percentage identifying themselves as Liberal. This holds true both nationally and in every state I tested.
– In the long run, running away from labels isn’t a viable strategy. The American Left has been running away from the word “Liberal” ever since the 80s. People have thought its cute to call themselves “Progressives” instead, and Glenn Beck’s recent paranoid tirades against Progressivism are a consequence of that. What’s the next word we’re all going to flee to now that conservatives are saying bad things about “Progressivism”?
– I really don’t like the term “Liberal”. Not because it doesn’t poll well, but because its actually really inaccurate. At least on economic policy, Conservatives are far more “liberal” than “Liberals” are. “Progressive” is probably better, because it implies a belief in using government as an instrument of social progress, but again, I don’t like the way that term is used by people who are afraid being called “Liberal”.
– I consider myself a Socialist, or more specifically, a Social Democrat. This doesn’t mean I believe in Marx, revolution, the abolishment of capitalism, or anything else crazy like that. It means I believe in government as a means to establish a better, fairer society. I believe Big Government is not inherently good or bad, its what you make of it. I believe the free market is generally good, but never perfect, and that the job of Government is to fill the gaps of capitalism that too many people would otherwise fall through. My views are most in line with the Canadian NDP, or the UK Labour Party (pre-Blair and “New Labour”). I support single-payer health insurance, strong bank regulation, and cap-and-trade, but I believe in compromise. I’m a proud Democrat, I don’t do anything stupid like voting Green, I support Obama, and think “liberal No” votes are counterproductive. Were I in Congress, I would have proudly voted yes on the health care bill. I don’t think I have radical views (by international standards I’m center-left), yet the word that describes them best is politically taboo in America.
– As a “bonus”, I ran the numbers two more times, first on New York according to the 2008 exit polls, which I thought have somewhat better results (41-53 by ideology, 38-54 by party). Secondly, I tried my hometown of New York City, using numbers from this (http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=c4719d83-23d9-4e1d-95a6-975f4e2562e4) poll from last year’s mayoral election. Here I found 37/46 by ideology, and 43/50 by party. I think its worth noting that opposition to socialism is at or under 50% here.
Final Conclusion: Socialism probably doesn’t poll as well as I would have liked to see. Nonetheless, it seems to outperform Liberalism, and the stigma attached to it thus seems highly disproportionate. A candidate would almost certainly prefer to call himself a Liberal than a Socialist, yet this suggest that the “S” word is probably less of a liability than the “L” word. Certainly, a “Socialist” candidate should not have a hard time winning a Democratic Primary in areas where the Democratic nomination is tantamount to election.
Loading ...
I never did understand what all the furor over socialism was about. I mean, it’s just a philosophy. Maybe it’s because I didn’t grow up in the Cold War.
As for liberalism – I like the word. “Liberal” has historical connotations dealing with freedom, revolution, the resistance of tyranny, and so on. It’s a beautiful word.
Blue state Democrats shouldn’t call themselves socialists because, unfortunately, few of them actually are socialists. If more were, we would already have universal health coverage, like the rest of the countries with advanced economies.
Seriously though all these labels are pretty silly. I mean does anybody look at something and think they have to have a certain opinion on it because of their ideolgy? Maybe some but personally I take everything on a case by case basis and decide where I stand using common sense. And it just happens that what I decide generally means I agree with Democrats far more than I agree with Republicans.
Democratic Socialists of America
http://www.dsausa.org/dsa.html
The were formed in the 1970s by the writer Michael Harrington as the “Democratic Socialist Organizing Committee” and in the early 1980s they merged with the progressive “New American Movement” to form the “Democratic Socialists of America”
They were a bit more prominent in the 1980s, working to strengthen the left wing of the Democratic party, build awareness of socialist thought, and help elect progressive candidates. Among other prominent members have been Ron Dellums, Ed Asner, Gloria Steinam.
They continue plugging away, but they don’t have the membership or heft that they used to.
As for the question of whether Democratic candidates should run with the label “socialist”, the answer is probably “no.” As the polling indicates, the label still involves very negative connotations in many voters’ minds. It makes fare more sense to run on socialist principles and ideas without feeling a need to use the label.
And the choice isn’t simply between calling oneself a “socialist” or a “liberal” — I’d actually suggest a better term is “progressive” — it is actually (for complex historical and political philosophy reasons) a more accurate term, and one that doesn’t carry the emotional baggage of the other terms.