The case for Bernie Sanders: Now here's your Straight Talk Express

Perhaps the most intriguing question raised by U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders' presidential campaign is why the candidate deflects questions about the nature of his "democratic socialism." Does he see this discussion as a hopeless quagmire? A trap? A quicksand pit out of which there can be no escape once the pundits pile on? Sen. Elizabeth Warren pre-empted such questions by declaring herself "a capitalist to the core." If Medicare for All sounds like socialism, well, she didn't say it.

But Sanders? "If they don't know the definition, tell 'em to look it up," I can imagine an irascible Bernie barking at a staffer before flashing the youngster one of his trademark ear-to-ear grins.

Bernie's supporters don't have to look it up, of course. They already know that Medicare itself is socialism. They know that public schools, fire and police departments, the water utility and the military are also entirely subsidized by taxpayers. They know that ordinary Americans have far more say in the administration of these services than they do private-sector businesses that are beholden only to shareholders and consumers.

They see authenticity in Bernie's stubborn refusal to explain himself. Indeed, authenticity is rare in these times of branding and spin. "We're in this togethuh," he shouts from the podium. "We" not "I." "Our" not "mine."

Bernie's mere existence at 78 reassures the young that life will go on … and on … and on. Then there's the candor. Bernie tells it like it is. No Ted Cruz style pedantry, no parsing of plans and programs, just straight talk about haves vs. have-nots, right vs. wrong.

This is as American as the flag. Keeping it simple assures his supporters that Bernie's solutions won't be mired in bureaucracy (the anti-socialist's worst nightmare) or useless intellectualizing. On the contrary, they will be as expeditious as common sense.

Americans' faith in problem-solving is why FDR's New Deal succeeded. Heck, it's why the American Revolution succeeded. Critics say the Green New Deal is too simple, but at this time in our history (especially after the endless impeachment hearings) brevity is rare and all the more precious for that. Lincoln's Gettysburg Address was short.

Keeping it simple won Ronald Reagan two terms and icon status among presidents, in sharp contrast to his one-term predecessor. Even liberal pundits still condescendingly refer to Jimmy Carter's post-presidency public service as redemption for having gotten too deep in the weeds, and for asking Americans to turn down the thermostat. Seeing how that went, Reagan threw caution to the wind, slashing taxes on the rich and reducing government spending so as to grow GDP and everything else, including the oil lobby.

It's bred into the bone of capitalist democracies that pendulums swing. Capitalism creates boom-bust cycles. Democracy sets things right. Sanders doesn't have to explain that the postal service, invented by Ben Franklin in 1775, did not turn into a gateway drug for more of the same only worse. Indeed, Franklin's bright idea is now being threatened not by better technology but by unsustainable consumerism. FedEx, UPS and Amazon have made package delivery more convenient. This innovation in turn made a handful of people billionaires. Is this the American dream? Profits were plowed into shareholder equity and more customer convenience.

Had the post office been adequately funded, it, too, might have offered same-day service. Which begs the question: Do I really need same-day service? Which turns you, too, into a Bernie supporter.

The IRS is in similar straits, as are public schools and Medicare and Social Security. The right defunds them so as to be able to decry their inefficiency, as if government agencies were for-profit businesses. Meanwhile, regulatory agencies like the SEC are actually a gift to the capitalist monopolists. Woefully understaffed, they remain in place to give the appearance of legality. That Sanders' bid to restore the rule of law will require a revolution by his own reckoning tells us how far we've gone in the wrong direction.

Socialism smacks of communism, his critics say. Sanders remains defiantly mute, but his supporters hear him loud and clear: "That is feayah-muhngering at its very worst." Sanders' revolution isn't an open invitation to China to join him in a communist takeover. It is a response to growing wealth inequality and climate change.

Bernie's supporters also know that socialism isn't the Fed or the World Bank or the IMF or NATO or NAFTA or NGOs or the Nature Conservancy or the New York Times. These promote corporate capitalism, not a woman's right to choose. However, to the extent that reproductive rights are protected by Roe v. Wade, that is socialism, and if the Supreme Court had outlawed abortion, the ruling's enforcement would also be socialist. The same is true for national parks and clean air.

Sanders' supporters know that the more such protections are weakened in the name of freedom, the more glaring are the negative consequences of that weakness, and the more imbalanced our society becomes. On the theory that gun control is a government takeover, gunmakers implicitly condone school shootings as a cost of doing business in a free society.

Despite his politically correct stance on guns, "Stop and Frisk" Bloomberg was nothing if not himself on the debate stage in Nevada. Bernie doesn't have a monopoly on authenticity. There were no rehearsals to polish the prickly street fighter as he mocked Sanders' comment that workers feel like cogs in a wheel. Why shouldn't they, was Mike's knee-jerk response. Workers are cogs in a wheel. That's why robots so seamlessly replace them. What are you suggesting, Bernie, that workers should sit around eating grapes instead of working?

This response says it all about Bloomberg's immense cluelessness. He may be self-made, but he himself was never a cog in a wheel. He seems unaware that guys like him get rich thanks not to their smarts but to their pathological insensitivity. They are simply unable to comprehend complexities of thought that often trouble and even paralyze intelligent human beings as they weigh the pros and cons of lucrative work in an uber-capitalist world.

At least the cog in a wheel doesn't feel tortured by a nagging sense of self-compromise, as so many thoughtful people do whose work involves creating devious ad campaigns or hawking fraudulent bank loans or polluting the environment. Assembly-line workers suffer a different kind of angst. But both types are why Sanders is gaining in the polls.

When Sanders laments "cog in a wheel" labor, he is mostly remarking on material insecurity that stalks low-wage workers, the long hours and low pay. As a democratic socialist, he believes that in return for making the products that so handsomely reward the billionaire class, workers should receive a larger share of the rewards in the form of a more secure job with health care and child care.

But Jeff Bezos regards unions as obstacles to his own goals of global domination. Karl Marx wrote that the goal of unregulated capitalism is "one man ruling the world." Bezos already controls more wealth than most countries. And as for the environment, the private sector can fix this, Bezos claims, as he pledges $10 billion to the cause. (To him, it's like tithing.)

Bernie Sanders doesn't have to explain his democratic socialism in order for working Americans to feel the disconnect between words and deeds on both sides of the political aisle, notwithstanding the efforts of the billionaire class to keep us distracted from thinking about our common malaise with an avalanche of apps, deals, disposable products, Instagram posts and online messages that encourage us to scapegoat poor people.

Bernie doesn't have to mention this, either, in order to present America with a starkly contrasting message. All he has to do is repeat over and over what is so painfully obvious that even his "moderate" liberal opponents on the debate stage are hard-pressed to disprove it: The wealth gap is killing our human spirit for the same reason climate change is killing our planet. The reason isn't an overabundance of socialism, but a disgraceful, as Sanders would say, lack of it.

Socialism, in his opinion (if he ever were to offer it), is not so very unlike compassion.

Once again, why define socialism when the suffering of so many defenseless creatures and human beings is being condoned by whatever the behavior is — I would call it unregulated capitalism — that socialism seeks to redress? A little bit of socialism isn't just a good thing, it is essential in maintaining the balance between the profit motive and the public good. This simple idea, discussed with great complexity by the Enlightenment philosophers and enshrined in our Constitution, is what Sanders means by socialism. If he framed it in those terms, though, he'd be laughed off the debate stage.

We live in a cynical age. Idealism is regarded as weakness. Perpetuating that misconception is Mike Bloomberg's task as a presidential contender. That Sanders chooses not to dignify such motives is just another sign of his intelligence. He may not have as many homes as Bloomberg, but he is a far superior human being.