What does Smith suggest doing to the Socialist Party platform? Why?

The term "socialism" has been enjoying something of a faddy lately, typically used to describe policies that were part of American mainstream politics as recently equally the 1980s.

For instance, listen to Donald Trump, in his State of the Union accost on Feb. 5: "Here, in the United States, we are alarmed by new calls to adopt socialism in our country…. This night, we renew our resolve that America will never exist a socialist country."

The opening for Trump's remark was provided by politicians such equally Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-New York). She describes herself every bit a "democratic socialist," fifty-fifty though in historical terms her actual policies are resoundingly moderate.

This evening, we renew our resolve that America will never be a socialist state.

— Donald Trump

That includes her proposition that the wealthy pay their fair share in taxes, say 70% of all income over $10 million a year — a revenue enhancement burden on the rich that'south really much lower than those of 1981 or the prosperous 1950s, accounting for inflation.

Conservatives take attempted to tack "socialism" on policies that today enjoy majority back up, such as universal wellness coverage (supported by 70.1% of respondents in a recent Reuters/Ipsos poll) or complimentary college tuition (supported by sixty%).

The truth is that the "socialism" taunt is among the oldest and most discreditable of political chestnuts. It's been used by conservatives to smear Democratic or progressive policies they don't similar (which is most of them) since the 1930s, more than than a decade after the Socialist Political party of America final fielded Eugene V. Debs as a presidential candidate.

Let's take a brief journey downwards retention lane.

The high-h2o mark of conservatives' "socialist" battle cry probably was reached in January 1936, during a remarkable political event at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, D.C.

This was a gala dinner sponsored by the American Freedom League, a splinter grouping of wealthy business leaders and old-guard Democrats formed in 1934 in opposition to Franklin Roosevelt and the New Deal. The glittering star of the Mayflower gala was former New York Gov. Al Smith, who had thrown in his lot with the plutocrats after a distinguished career in which he became an icon of progressive Democratic politics.

As I recounted in my book "The New Bargain: A Modernistic History," Smith's apostasy perplexed and unnerved Democrats — after all, FDR, Smith's successor as governor, had been the man who placed his name in nomination for president at the Democratic convention in 1928 and had bestowed on Smith his nickname, "the happy warrior."

Whether Smith harbored personal resentments over the rise of a man who had been his protege, or was merely dazzled by his rich new friends, he now was at full-calibration war with FDR. Information technology was a delicate moment for the New Deal. FDR'south popularity had fallen to about fifty%, a depression indicate. Business organisation was pushing dorsum against his programs. Roosevelt'southward image as a traitor to his class was reinforced by his proposed Revenue Deed of 1935, which was openly aimed at the wealthy and was passed largely intact. An assail on Social Security, enacted in 1935, would become the fundamental theme of the presidential entrada of Republican Alf Landon in 1936. (Landon got shellacked.)

The Liberty League had a solid full-blooded from the Wall Street fly of the Democratic Party, including John J. Raskob, a former party chairman and an executive of DuPont. The league's board of directors bristled with DuPont family members and executives of large corporations such as Full general Motors. FDR witheringly described the league to reporters as "an organization that just advocates two or three out of the X Commandments…. [They] say you shall love God and and so forget your neighbor."

Roosevelt struck dorsum at the league in his State of the Marriage message in early January 1936, reminding his listeners that his plan had sought "the adjustment of burdens, the assistance of the needy, the protection of the weak, the liberation of the exploited and the genuine protection of the people's property." As a consequence, he said, "we have earned the hatred of entrenched greed…. [B]ut now … they seek the restoration of their selfish power."

Everyone was on tenterhooks to hear how Smith would reply as the keynote speaker of the league gala on Jan. 25, to exist broadcast on a national radio hookup. Mounting the podium in white tie and tails, the sometime hero of the rank-and-file worker fulfilled his hosts' expectations.

He started past punitive FDR for pitting "grade against class." And so he told his audience, "Brand a test for yourself. Only go the platform of the Democratic Party and go the platform of the Socialist Political party and lay them downwards on your dining-room table, side by side…. After you have washed that, brand your mind upwards to pick up the platform that more almost squares with the record, and y'all volition have your manus on the Socialist platform."

"Socialist" policies such as universal health coverage and free higher tuition are favored by a bulk of Americans, according to this Reuters/Ipsos poll.

(Reuters)

Equally for Roosevelt's "young brain trusters," he said, "it is all correct with me if they desire to disguise themselves as Karl Marx or Lenin or any of the rest of that agglomeration, but I won't stand for allowing them to march under the banner of Jackson or Cleveland…. There tin can be but i capital. Washington or Moscow. There can be only i atmosphere of government, the clear, pure, fresh air of complimentary America, or the foul jiff of communistic Russia. There can exist only 1 flag, the Stars and Stripes or the flag of the godless Marriage of the Soviets."

FDR was thunderstruck. "Practically all the things we've done in the Federal Government are like things Al Smith did as Governor of New York," he told his Labor secretary, Frances Perkins. "They're things he would take done if he had been President of the The states. What in the world is the matter?"

Information technology wasn't lost on Smith's onetime political compatriots that he had made mutual cause with people who would never have tolerated anyone so common in the White House. (They demeaned his Catholic upbringing, too.) Hiram Johnson, the progressive Republican senator and onetime governor from California, reacted to the display with contempt. "The Liberty League, with its setting of millions upon millions, with shirt-front respectability militantly displayed, and with a boy from the side-walks of New York and the East side in the role of the hero and savior of wealth and entrenched dishonesty, actually put on a skilful bear witness," he wrote sourly to his son, Hiram Jr.

Simply Roosevelt had the last laugh, bitter every bit information technology was. He unearthed a speech communication from the 1928 campaign in which Smith had ridiculed the same charge of "socialism" from Republicans that he now leveled against Roosevelt.

On that occasion, Smith had said: "The cry of socialism has been patented by the powerful interests that desire to put a damper on progressive legislation. Is that cry of socialism anything new? Non to a homo of my experience. I have heard information technology raised by reactionary elements and the Republican party … for over a quarter century."

And now that weep of "socialism" is back. It'southward a tattered label, equally anyone can tell past noting that the policies it'south applied to take been standard elements of Autonomous and Republican platforms for decades. Harry Truman proposed comprehensive healthcare reform, including a national, universal health insurance program, in 1945. (The American Medical Assn. killed it by smearing it as "socialized medicine.")

Taxes? From 1946 through 1963, a period of unexampled economic growth and broadly distributed gains in family income, the height marginal personal income revenue enhancement rate was 91%, practical to incomes of $200,000 or more (or $2.eight one thousand thousand in today's money as of 1946) until 1955, when the threshold was raised to $400,000 (or $3.8 meg today). In 1955, a 72% marginal rate, alike to Ocasio-Cortez's lxx%, kicked in at $88,000, which would be $828,000 today.

It'southward often said of those old rates that no i paid them, because the rich had access to all sorts of loopholes. Here's a muddy little secret: No 1 pays the top rate today, either, even though it'south but 37%. The wealthy still have plenty of loopholes, the biggest of which is the preferential maximum rate of 23.eight% on upper-case letter gains.

In other words, Ocasio-Cortez'southward proposition of a 70% rate on income over $10 1000000 is modest to its core, any way you lot cut it. "Democratic socialist"? Compared with what taxpayers of the 1950s and 1960s faced, she'd be proposing a tax cutting, making her indistinguishable from a Republican.

The lesson is to be wary of anyone tossing effectually the term "socialist" lightly. If they really think these proposals are socialist, they need to take that up with the shade of President Eisenhower.

Go on up to date with Michael Hiltzik. Follow @hiltzikm on Twitter, see his Facebook page, or e-mail michael.hiltzik@latimes.com.

Return to Michael Hiltzik'due south weblog.

kidneywaintly.blogspot.com

Source: https://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-hiltzik-socialism-20190213-story.html