The term, socialism, is an oxymoron.

In Triadic government, the Bottom is the Many and the Top is the One. In the Democratic form of government, the essence of democracy is at the Bottom of the Triad. That's where millions of individuals are situated in the triad of government. In other words, that's where the social or society is situated. In a democracy, all governing is about governing the social or society. Unfortunately, any Party program designed to organize, help, or assist the Bottom of government is usually referred to as "socialism", but only by the opposing Party. The term is designed and used in a way that gives democracy a bad name. The term has no place in a real democracy. If the Top of government cannot be about 'helping' the Bottom of government, who is the Top supposed to govern? Democratic government is about the Bottom. The Bottom needs government and the Top is elected to provide that government. Obviously, if the Top doesn't govern the Bottom, the Top is just not doing its job. Yet, the opposing Party always hollers "socialism" as if, it was wrong or bad to organize a government of the Bottom by the Top. That's an oxymoron. If the Top legislates for the benefit of the Bottom, the opposition hollers "socialism" instead of "democracy". If the Top is not helping the Bottom, who is the Top supposed to help? What the opposition is actually saying is, "if the Top does its job, it must not help the social". If your confused, so am I. Now, that's an oxymoron. The term is designed to 'confuse'; that's not democracy; that's the kind of confusion introduced by so-called Party loyalty and skewed concepts of government. That's Party rigidity and linguistic ambiguity, used by Party members to 'blacken' democracy. If any policy or law is undemocratic, why not just point it out. Surely, that can be done. "Socialism" is an oxymoron, because government is for the Bottom and the Bottom is the social.