Shortly after the election of Barack Obama, many of those opposed to him latched onto the idea that he is a “socialist.” Many threatened to “move to Canada,” failing to realize that Canada’s socialized medicine and politically viable Green party were a far cry from any measures Obama has proposed.

Canada aside, the idea that socialism is the enemy of capitalism has recently revived itself as a talking point.

We’ve heard it constantly for the last few months, “the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression,” and we’re right in the thick of it. The real tragedy is that the circumstances surrounding this economic crises and the famous crash of the 1930’s are eerily similar.

The Great Depression followed a period of rampant prosperity due to rapid industrialization of US cities. Corporations had fared especially well due to deregulation and “Laissez-faire” policies of the Coolidge administration. Banks allowed people to buy stock on credit, knowing many of them had no means to pay up. The situation finally broke when someone — God knows who — asked for the money, money that never truly existed.

This economic downturn follows a period of prosperity due to the rapid growth of technology and internet-based businesses. Corporations fared especially well under the Bush administration’s tax cuts and deregulatory policies. Banks loaned people money for exorbitant houses that had no hope of being paid off. Bad loans were re-packaged and re-sold, creating money that didn’t really exist.

So here we are. Re-living the glory days of the Great Depression. This is where a dose or two of socialism could go a long way. The government needs to re-structure itself in such a way that another sweeping economic failure can’t possibly happen.

I’m not asking for full on Sweden-or-Iceland-style socialism, just a taste.

The real problem with socialism is that it calls for an overarching, overinflated, all-knowing, all-powerful government: an idea that doesn’t sit well with the largely freedom-minded American public. I believe that President Obama understands the benefit of finding balance in the economic policies he presents in the coming days.

Twice in the last century America has proven that government cannot simply kick back and be a spectator, yet the spirit of our independence prevents us from embracing government as an active economic participant.

What America needs is a referee. Coaches and players can do anything they want, with no interference from a referee, so long as it is within the well-established rules of the game. A government that only regulates but does not participate is not true socialism, and is really the best of socialism and capitalism. A referee can blow a loud whistle whenever someone goes out of bounds, just as the government could bring litigation against companies or banks that break the rules. Refs are expected to protect the players and the integrity of their sport, just as a hybrid government could be expected to protect the well-being of its citizens and upholding the integrity of the economy.

David Riegner

Sophomore

Materials Engineering