Socialism has different faces, and each one has been twisted and recreated to suit whichever party, country, or individual is looking to promote it to its citizens. Depending on which state or media propaganda you’re reading, the term can mask fascism, communism, or imperialism. Unfortunately, in the history of the world, the term Socialism rarely turns out to be true to itself.

During the time of the Soviet Socialist Republic, the brand of Socialism was a form of communism. A world of state-owned property. Forced labor was thrust upon the citizens as if they were living in a hive. Citizens were not permitted to leave their country without the approval of the government. The USSR was the enemy, and its existence was 190 degrees opposite of that of the United States. For many citizens today, the memories of that time are very fresh.

Chairman Mao Zedong of China’s agrarian Socialism turned out to be a form of communism that was more like a monarchy. He was responsible for China’s “Great Leap Forward”; however, this leap killed 20–45 million people between 1958 and 1962. His goal of turning his people towards an industrial future was deadly.

The Scandinavian idea of Socialism is based on homogeneity and caring for likeness. When Scandinavians look into the faces of their neighbors, they see their own families, which makes it easier for them to pay higher taxes to help support them. It’s a psychological and evolutionary fact that we all tend to have more compassion and trust for those who are like us. These higher taxes pay for health, education, and the like. Citizens can prosper and own property and do business outside of their country. But the key things to remember here are the homogeneity and the smaller geographic terrain involved.

The Soviets and the Chinese forced Socialism upon their citizens, whereas the Scandinavians operated like a genetically similar family.

As the debates for the Democratic nominee for the President of the United States heat up, one point becomes very evident. The candidates appear oblivious to why so many American people are so opposed to the idea of Socialism. It’s because we know it can be a mask for Imperialism, Fascism, and Communism.

Whether we are Democrats, Republicans, or Liberals, we understand the definitions of Socialism from the last few centuries and recognize that they don’t fit into our national mosaic. We are not homogeneous, and we certainly don’t want the Soviet or Chinese definition. The Democratic debates are painful to watch because it appears as if few debaters understand these facts. They’re so wrapped up in politics that they ignore the one thing that matters. Most Americans, unlike the Chinese and the Russians, won’t be caught off guard by the term Socialism because we’ve seen what it’s done to those countries and others, for that matter.

So unless they can find another definition for Socialism that WE CAN BUY into, or change their narrative, the Democrats will continue to lose elections. Plain and simple. Heck, even if we do buy into it, it will still be an experiment we might find very deadly.