What about democracy? Can't voting fix our problems?

[-] AbeilleVegane@beehaw.org 10 points 4 days ago

The voting for leftists into office one is there twice.

load more comments (1 replies)

load more comments (4 replies)

[-] FreeAZ@sopuli.xyz 44 points 5 days ago

Democratic socialism just means you believe in democratically governed socialism, not that you think you can just vote capitalism into socialism. There's both reformist and revolutionary democratic socialists. I both believe in democracy and also see that the only way to overturn capitalism (at least in the US) would be through revolution. All the democratic part means is that they're opposed to monarchies or dictatorships.

[-] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 5 points 3 days ago

All socialism is democratic, so "democratic socialism" in practice either means reformist socialism, social democracy (capitalism with safety nets, usually dependent on imperialism), or is a means to distance this new socialism from the really existing socialism in the world today and historically. Reformism is wrong and doesn't work, social democracy is still capitalism and depends on imperialism in the global north version, and the last is just red scare "left" anti-communism that reeks of chauvanism.

[-] freagle@lemmygrad.ml 17 points 5 days ago

No. That's incorrect. Democratic socialism is always and has always been an opposite to revolutionary socialism. Read some goddamned books. ALL forms of socialism are democratic, essentially by definition, but certainly by historical precedent. The only undemocratic "socialist" movements have been fascist movements using socialist aesthetics.

[-] Confidant6198@lemmy.ml 18 points 5 days ago

Are you saying that you can have undemocratic socialism?

[-] Una@europe.pub 18 points 5 days ago

Isn't that what USSR was, dictatorship?

[-] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 8 points 3 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

No, the soviet union was democtatic. The soviet union had a more comprehensive and complex system of democracy than liberal democracy.

[-] PolandIsAStateOfMind@lemmy.ml 8 points 3 days ago

It was even dissolved through a vote

Illegally though, most of citizens voted against in a referendum that was just ignored.

[-] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 3 points 3 days ago

Yep, that's also true. My point was more along the lines of Michael Parenti's, where the so-called totalitarian USSR never seemed to need blood to overturn it. Can definitely see how it would be counter-productive to use it as a point, though.

[-] freagle@lemmygrad.ml 19 points 5 days ago

Good question. No. It was not. Please read about it. There is plenty of writing about the political structure of the USSR, its constitutional documents, its legal and court systems, etc. It is imminently possible for you to learn about it if you're curious

[-] Confidant6198@lemmy.ml 14 points 5 days ago

Dictatorship of the proletariat is democracy for the people

[-] psoul@lemmy.world 4 points 4 days ago

There was no dictatorship of the proletariat. Trotsky prevented labor unions from going on strike. War communism was forcing workers to labor as slaves. The new economic policy sent managers bourgeois back to run the factories.

It was a top down dictatorship. Not a bottom up dictatorship of the proletariat. It was supposed to be all the power to the soviets. The soviets ended up being a tool for the politburo.

[-] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 6 points 3 days ago

This is remarkably liberal. In times of existential war, strict control and competent planning was necessary. The NEP was strictly necessary going from barely out of feudalism to a somewhat developed industrial base upon which economic planning can actually function properly. The system of soviet democracy waa far better at letting workers run society, and the wealthiest in the USSR were only about ten times as wealthy as the poorest (as compared to the thousands to millions under Tsarism and now capitalism).

The USSR was a dictatorship of the proletariat, through and through. There is no fantasy version of socialism that can ever exist without needing to deal with existing conditions, obstacles, and barriers.

load more comments (2 replies)

load more comments (32 replies)

load more comments (11 replies)

[-] Plebcouncilman@sh.itjust.works 12 points 5 days ago

Sometimes I wonder how many “Marxists” really have read Marx.