The term “socialism” turns off many conservative citizens. They quickly equate it with communism. Or confuse it with National Socialism (Nazism) — though White Supremacy resembles Nazism, and the U.S. has groups that identify as Nazi. President Trump faults the Democratic party-all 42 million — for being “socialist,” as though they’re a malevolent horde. It is useful, then, to understand socialism before using the word to denigrate people and countries that are 100% supportive of democracy.

First of all, the varieties of socialism and their differences are so great that it makes little sense to use the word as though having an unambiguous meaning. Marxist socialism prioritized the public (i.e., government) ownership of the means of production (i.e., industry, etc.) and the self-management of workers who supposedly owned the industries where they worked. Secondly, various forms of socialism have departed from strict Marxian ideology. State socialism (e.g., Russia and China) forcibly expropriates the means of production from owners of private property. Since neither Marxist socialism nor state socialism exists in the US, attempts to slander Democrats as socialists are wrong-headed and uninformed.

The most supported variety is social democracy, widely identified with the so-called “Nordic Model” (Denmark, Iceland, Norway, Sweden, Finland). It combines capitalism with a strong social safety net. Thus, these and other countries (e.g., Germany) support a social welfare state within the capitalist global economy. They include strong public (government) provision of social services funded by taxes, including free university education, free or subsidized childcare, job retraining for the unemployed, free (and free-choice) health care, strong labor-force protections through unions, plus generous retirement pensions. The workforce is heavily unionized; thus, wages remain elevated without a minimum wage. And the standard of living is high (internationally, No. 1-6 are Nordic plus Switzerland, US is No. 26; Google “Social Progress Index 2019”), social inequality is low, and upward mobility is high.

The public has historical trust in government’s role in balancing a strong social safety net with a durable capitalist economy. Despite a diversity of political ideologies (e.g., Finland has eight registered parties and 13 unregistered), parliamentary government brings together leading parties that are obliged to work together to reach compromises and work democratically to deal with social and economic challenges. The voting public traditionally has faith in the fairness of public institutions and private companies. Governments invest in private businesses without tending to own them. This investment of public monies in selected businesses (utilities, airlines, etc.) protects the public and results in very low levels of corruption (corruption is seen as unpatriotic).

Taxes needed to pay for the cherished safety net are high but are levied more heavily on very high-income earners, thus redistributing capital. Moreover, given the savings from free social services (e.g., health care), citizens not only don’t complain about high taxes; they tend to resist lowering them since lower taxes mean lower social services (as US Republicans desire) and hence higher personal expenses. Thus they agree with the US voter who protested, “Don’t take away my social security!” Nonetheless, in the US, there are instances of social democracy: The Affordable Health Care Act, Medicare, Medicaid, Children’s Health Care Insurance, veterans’ benefits, and SNAP for low-income families (etc.). Except for social security, conservatives and libertarians accepting of the widening income gap, oppose them all-even when they suffer the ill-effects of that gap!

In distinction to the social democratic Nordic Model, is democratic socialism. “Democratic” refers to reliance on democratic elections that hopefully will increase government control of private capital and improved working conditions that favor labor. Despite this reliance on the ballot box, democratic socialists believe that socialism and capitalism cannot co-exist. They believe in free or low-cost healthcare, tuition-free higher education, and universal childcare as steps in closing the ever-widening income gap between the very rich and the very poor.

Their social, political, and economic priorities are, for the most part, shared with the Nordic social democratic model. However, the belief that capitalism undermines democracy leads some democratic socialists to work for Marxian socialism rather than support the socioeconomic ills of free-market capitalism. Unlike communists, however, such democratic socialists believe in accomplishing socialism democratically, not by revolution. This requires a long-term outlook. As a minority, they hope to convince the majority; but in the meantime, they support social democratic values.

Unless you hate the idea of affordable health care, higher education, childcare, and generous pensions (etc.) plus a high standard of living like the Nordics, calling Democrats socialists only credits them with forward-thinking socioeconomic progress. Some Democratic candidates have defined themselves as democratic socialists. Many political scientists deny that they are. They just share a Democratic and social democratic vision of greater socioeconomic equality where the poor have more chances to better themselves, and a newly empowered middle class can resume its important central role in holding U.S. society together.

Thomas A. Regelski is an emeritus distinguished professor at the State University of New York at Fredonia. Send comments to tom.regelski@helsinki.fi.