"Infrastructure" not "Socialism" [View all]

[DemocracyMouse]

Instead of the duality "socialism vs capitalism" can we start pitching "infrastructure FOR a people's economy"?

A healthy infrastructure of trains, bridges, education, social services and representative government – with the US Constitution at its core – presents a bullseye image where the inner infrastructure supports a non-monopolistic people's economy.

Democrats have understood this intuitively and the economy – the outermost ring – has thrived under Democratic presidents. By reframing the debate we can own the concept that Democrats are better at managing the economy. Stimulus spending on the infrastructure during the Great Depression and the recent Great Recession lead to significant recoveries. The formula is as old as the hills and is even in the Old Testament.

The tiresome oppositional approach – which Republicans goad us into taking – is a rhetorical trap. As my father, an economist, used to say: "Humans wear many hats." We're both cooperative and competitive, builders and reformers, property owners and people sharing a commons. So for the New Year ahead, can we establish an image of nested systems –with the US Constitution as the central operating system? It suggests something positive, anchoring and functional.

The knee jerk Republican effort to destroy the social, physical and institutional supports at the CENTER of our system looks a whole lot worse when we reframe welfare, democratic institutions, education, net neutrality, etc., as infrastructure and not as "socialism."

I hope this makes sense. It's the kind of language and vision change we may need to work on within Democratic circles – a kind of talking point.