Last week I posted a tweet about how ridiculous it’s getting to see everyone scrambling to label their opponents “socialists”. Since it got some traction online, I figured I’d expand on this thought here.
It’s popping up with every tweet, every mailer and every ad in statewide and national races.
That may be good “political campaigning” but it’s terrible for us voters. You can disagree with your opponent’s ideology and political positions through thoughtful debate but don’t pretend that a label is your winning argument.
This year, we have candidates with legitimate records of service proposing genuine policy ideas, and they’re being condensed down to a single label. You can agree or disagree with these policy positions but calling them “socialist” isn’t a serious argument made by serious people. It’s a label. And it’s easier to attack the person with baseless labels than it is to thoughtfully debate their positions.
Disagreeing on policy, and explaining how you’d do it differently, is healthy. Replacing that disagreement with a label is not healthy. Because, when you resort to this low-end campaigning, you no longer have to explain your positions on insurance, housing or growth management. You no longer have to try to convince voters you’ll be their check on a super majority legislature.
Just get your “team” chanting the label and you can drown out the legitimate questions you’ve been ignoring.
But what are they really chanting?
This year’s socialist angle is being directed at candidates who are trying to make people’s lives more affordable and that, historically, has come with some level of government intervention. But, right now, people are begging for these changes due to crushing housing costs, unaffordable or even unattainable health care, ever-increasing prices due to inflation, and an overall sense of feeling trapped in an economic cycle where they feel left out.
To reverse these financial hardships and get out of their situation, some are looking for extreme solutions and changes, and that seems easy to label as socialism.
But what is socialism? And does it even pertain solely to the left in today’s age of horseshoe theory politics?
We’re told these socialists want to take over the insurance market in Florida. But Citizens Insurance, a government-backed insurer, was created by Republicans in 2002 currently run by a Board appointed by the single-party State.
We’re told these socialists want to take over the housing market nationwide. Meanwhile, there are proposals and actions to stop private investors from buying homes. That means that government wants to dictate whether you, a private homeowner, can sell your house for the highest price to a private investor using their private capital to maximize your profit. That is literally government reaching directly into private transactions. You can be for or against this policy, but you cannot pretend it isn’t government market intervention.
We’re told they want to control energy, corporations and the means of production. The actual ideas behind socialism. But at the federal level today, we have a Republican President with a complicit Republican Congress making “golden share” arrangements where the government will have veto power over corporate decisions. We have chip deals that require kickbacks and ownership stakes for the government. We have our new 35% equity stake in a Venezuelan oil entity.
We now have new government ownership stakes in over 30 companies providing the literal means of production, including tech, minerals, energy and industrial.
What’s more, this has tipped the scales against American companies that have to compete with competitors who’s very success is accretive to a government who determines the rules of the game. That’s concerning for our US oil companies now competing against the US government’s Venezuelan entity. #AmericaFirst?
Let’s throw in some new beef imports with requirements set at “25% below market price” for price controls below breakeven for our US cattle ranchers. And endless anti-capitalist, market-manipulating tariffs which act as a tax on US citizens while those same citizens’ tax dollars are used to subsidize the very corporations and farmers being economically ruined by these actions. #AlsoAmericaFirst?
Ultimately, you start to realize the government (both parties) is deeply, actively involved in the markets and the means of production.
The socialist label is quickly thrown at the left for political points but the current Republican federal government is, at best, socialist-adjacent and, at worst, the most socialist government in the history of our country.
But if everyone is intervening, the question becomes: who is the intervention for? Who benefits when government inevitably gets involved?
If both sides are currently on the socialist spectrum, the difference is now between a government stepping into a market to protect people in need and a government stepping in to protect people who already have the most access, the most money, and the best political connections.
Is the intervention helping a family afford their first home? Is it helping a homeowner keep their insurance? Is it protecting a community from crushing price increases? Or is it socialism disguised as crony-capitalism disguised as conservativism to create special advantages for donors, corporations or interest groups?
Because the label itself isn’t the threat to the political system.
The threat is the political system itself when it’s funded by special interests, validated while trading blind allegiance for “complete and total” endorsements, and marketed through labels rather than honest debate.
If we want better outcomes, we have to start pushing back on these political systems. We have to start demanding answers to the less sensationalized questions.
What’s your actual plan? Who does it help? What does it cost?
What are you actually going to do…and who, exactly, are you going to do it for?
How a candidate answers these questions is the real test. Not what team they’re on. Not who endorsed them. Not what label they use to scare voters.
As we head toward November 3, we all need to insist that both the left-wing “socialists” and the right-wing “socialists” stop throwing around labels…and start answering our questions.
George Kruse is an at-large commissioner on the Manatee County Commission. He was elected 2020 and is in the middle of serving his second term. This column was originally posted on his SubStack. Click here to sign up.
6 comments on this item
Only paid subscribers can comment
Please log in to comment by clicking here.
David Daniels
It is nice to see these comments from Commissioner Kruse - especially challenging the RPOF. But where was Kruse before August 18th? When his comments might have made a difference against RPOF and developer-supported candidates Bill Conerly and J Varnadore? I get not wanting to upset the people who decide state funding - but that kind of thinking needs to end. Every year, our County Commissioners come hat in hand to our state delegation, praising them and pretending there is this great county-state relationship. Then, the state delegation goes to Tallahassee and screws over Manatee county residents with preemption, anti-home rule laws like SB 180. It is long past time that Kruse, Siddique and other leaders grow a spine when it comes to these state races. Coming out 2 weeks after the election is not exactly a profile in courage.
Friday, September 4 Report this
johnschussler
I subscribe to Commissioner Kruse's Substack to read his insightful writing and I suggest others also subscribe. He must maintain a careful balance of recommending changes while also working within our current political system. No other local elected official does it as well, and I commend him for his efforts.
Saturday, September 5 Report this
Manatee Watch
kruse is a bullshit artist and paid off shill for the developers. dont be fooled. he's one of the worst of all of them that has helped destroy the quality of life in east manatee county. he makes these big statements and "opinions" AT THE END OF THE DAY HE IS ANOTHER TOOL FOR THE DEVELOPERS AND **** ON THE VOTER TAXPAYING RESIDENTS. GET HIM OUT OF OFFICE AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. DONT BUY THIS BULLSHIT.
Sunday, September 6 Report this
Debann
I agree with Manatee Watch..
Sunday, September 6 Report this
rayfusco68
The Supreme Courts, Citizens United Ruling, ended the era of government for the people. By allowing corporations the ability to funnel millions of dollars into campaign funding has ushered in the era of the American Oligarchy. With seemingly limitless corporate funds supporting candidates that will do their bidding the average citizen is now duped by their propaganda to actually vote against their best interest. The public needs to wake up and stop voting party lines and insisting that candidates for office support their needs. The problem is we have been indoctrinated to respond to cliches and slogans and not to do the critical thinking that is needed to vote for what truly is in the best interest of all citizens.
Sunday, September 6 Report this
LindaM8490
I agree that labels are lazy and add nothing to the discussion regarding plans to address the needs of everyday citizens. Citizens need to educate themselves on candidates plans to address these needs and the willingness of elected officials to act on those needs. Candidates and citizens alike need to stop throwing around incendiary labels that stop all meaningful discussion related to the problems we face. We need to carefully examine the actions of those who are running again or who are running on ideas of others that are currently "in power" and determine if their actions address our everyday needs for food, housing, education, healthcare, and a healthy environment to sustain us and to help us thrive.
Sunday, September 6 Report this