In my earlier post on Rep. Barney Frank’s statement that the United States federal government will have to spend extra (on social programs) in the coming years, even if this would drive up the federal deficit considerably, and that this growing deficit could then be partially covered by “taxing the rich” more, I gave three reasons why Americans may vote for this policy.

One option I did not give, but which sounds increasingly more likely the more I think of it, is that America is evolving (or devolving depending on one’s perspective) towards a Social Democracy.

The main reason I did not include this option is that it is, quite simply, something most European America specialists don’t think of, or do not consider seriously, out of habit. We are, and we have drilled ourselves to believe that America is inherently different from Europe in many ways, at least different in so far that Americans truly do not want their government to become too big, too influential, too much like a nanny-state.

But that reasoning or that assumption may have to be reconsidered if Americans vote for Barack Obama, a man who promises to “spread the wealth around,” and for a Democratic Party in Congress that promises to the exact same thing, and is becoming increasingly outspoken about it.

In Europe we have accepted the following statement as truth: the more the lower and middle class become emancipated, the more they favor a big, government as Social Democrats want. We accepted this for Europe, perhaps it is time to consider that this could also very well be applicable on the United States.

Now, there is something interesting going on with regards to the elections: one is not allowed to call Obama or Democrats in general a ’socialist.’ Doing so is considered to be highly offensive. Before readers start accusing me of calling them socialists I’ll just point out the following: I am not calling them socialists. His policies and those supported by his party are not socialist, but they are Socioal Democratic in nature. Listen to what they want to do, and look at what European Social Democrats wanted to do decades ago, and advocate doing today. They are one and the same.

An important difference between European Social Democrats and their American brethren are that the latter use words the former would not use, considering them to be too explicit.

Be that as it may, the Democratic Party is becoming increasingly Social Democratic – which is why British Labor and Dutch Labor are not merely rooting for Obama but even trying to work with each other now, and after the American elections (Obama advisers could go to Britain to help Gordon Brown, Labor leader, win the elections in 2010). And Americans reward this trend. This might very well mean that European America analysts and (wannabe) experts such as myself will have to reassess what we consider ‘true’ about America, and untrue. Our preconceived notions might be wrong – we will see in the coming years; whether Democrats will indeed pursue a Social Democratic agenda and whether or not voters will reward them for it.