Democratic Socialism

[arely staircase]

Here, since nobody seems to know what it means.
Busky, Donald F. (July 20, 2000). Democratic Socialism: A Global Survey. Praeger. pp. 7–8. ISBN 978-0275968861. Democratic socialism is the wing of the socialist movement that combines a belief in a socially owned economy with that of political democracy. Sometimes simply called socialism, more often than not, the adjective democratic is added by democratic socialists to attempt to distinguish themselves from Communists who also call themselves socialists...democratic socialists wish to emphasize by their name that they disagree strongly with the Marxist-Leninist brand of socialism.

You are welcome.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

1. You started a thread asking if Sanders was a communist. I don't think you're qualified

...to remark on the matter.

[Ed Suspicious]

2. Agreed.

[arely staircase]

3. No. I asked the degree to which he believed in private ownership.

Which is much different under a socialist econic scheme, democratic or not.

[whatchamacallit]

17. So, do actually believe Bernie is gonna take your stuff

or is this just demagoguery?

[Hortensis]

30. Surely you believe a candidate's ideology

is an important subject that should be discussed at length? Take a tip from Bernie -- he has discussed it many times and will many more. Trying to smother discussion reveals anxiety over it and is a very, very bad tactic.

I do not want to see the people own the "means of production" in general, though ownership of certain things necessary for the public good that function better that way, like the VA, are fine. But Bernie isn't advocating going that far, so I'm currently fine with him on that.

I do want the people to keep a strong leash on business and not allow anyone or organization to amass the kind of national wealth and power that could threaten our national wellbeing and would be contrary to our establishing principles.

One man, one vote.

[whatchamacallit]

46. Bernie isn't a text book definition

The closest label to his personal ideology is Social Democrat. If you can point to legislation he's sponsored or supported that threatens property ownership or the means of production, then this conversation is germane. Otherwise, it's demagoguery disguised as an innocuous question.

[Hortensis]

47. Ahhhrgggh!

[whatchamacallit]

48. That's a response?

[Hortensis]

50. 68% of Iowa Democrats are OK with Bernie's

Democratic Socialist label. So you should stop acting as if it shouldn't be brought up.

[whatchamacallit]

51. Are you ok with it?

[Hortensis]

53. I thought I indicated that before. Yes.

[arely staircase]

54. It is germane because he wants to represent our party in a presidential election

and he self identifies as a socialist.

This is exactly the time to discuss it.

[treestar]

39. WTF? It's wrong to ask a question?

Good thing Bernie is unlikely to run against a Republican as he would face that question almost immediately. And it sounds like he and his campaign are not up for it.

[arely staircase]

55. Exactly

The fierce resistance to talking about it is unsettling at best.

[kennetha]

4. Sanders has been elusive

on whether he is really and truly a SOCIALIST = in the sense of preferring central planning to a market economy. He hardly ever talks about the role of markets and entrepreneurship. All he ever does, when pressed, is cited elements of the American economy that have a quasi-socialist tinge. He wants more of that, he says. He also has expressed his great admiration for Denmark and other Scandinavian countries. And, of course, he wants to eliminate one entire sector of the American economy -- private health insurers -- and heavily regulate another "break up the big banks."

But does he want to go further? Does he believe in a mixed economy? Or is he truly a Socialist. Socialism is about social control of the economy. DEMOCRATIC socialism, says that the social control should be democratic in nature, rather than the commie's "dictatorship of the proletariat" = the party apparatus as the "vanguard" of the people. I don't at all think Sanders is a communist. And I doubt that he is really and truly a socialist, in the classical sense of that term.

I suspect that he really is a European style social democrat. The European style social democrats believe in a mixed economy. they don't think the government should own the means of production. But they do believe that the market is not at all god, needs to be heavily regulated and that there needs to be non-market mechanisms to provide for basic human rights like healthcare, education, etc.

I think Sanders does himself a disservice by not calling himself a social democrat rather than a democratic socialist. But maybe he did start out in the old days as a good old fashion socialist and doesn't for some reason feel it would be wise to go back on the old label. instead he's sort of trying to fudge the meaning of the label.

[arely staircase]

5. Praise Baby Jesus!

Thank you for that thoughtful response and analysis. I think you are right in that despite calling himself a Democratic Socialist, Social Democrat is more thr type of platform he is running on. But he is going to have to explain what he believes the roll of private property/capital, etc. should be. Screaming red baiter at anyone asking the question won't cut it.

[kristopher]

25. Let's expand on the meaning of "social control of the economy".

Would you mind going into detail on what this means to you?

[kennetha]

31. Well it can mean a range of things.

It's a matter of whether you let the market alone decide or allow some greater or less degree of non-market mechanism in place to distribute goods and services. In a completely command driven economy, the government/social planner purports to occupy what marxists like to call "the commanding heights" -- which is supposed to give them a view of the whole landscape of needs, etc and allow the planner to plan rationally and determine how much of what is to be distributed to whom. In a pure market economy (of which their are probably none in the world) unfettered markets alone decide what is to be produced and how it is to be distributed. If the market decides, for example, that poor people are to have inadequate housing, so be it. The market is a kind of god. Communist/Democratic Socialists/and Social Democrats alike reject the idea that the market is god and all one some degree of "social" control over at least some aspects of the economy. The commies believed that a centrally planned economy would be more efficient, more just, more responsive to human needs. But the trusted a narrow vanguard to do the work of planning the economy on behalf of the proletariat. Democratic Socialism rejects vanguardism. Social Democrats tend to be much more comfortable with a mixed economy. They want capitalism "with a human face."

[kristopher]

33. I agree but...

Since you've done such an outstanding job so far, let me ask you to take it a step further. I see the need for education on this topic so I'm fishing for a simple explanation that makes clear the situation to those who aren't informed on the nuances.
How could you build on the terms "vanguard" and "mixed economy" to bring clarity in a few sentence?

[arely staircase]

56. Cooperatives in which labor and capital manage production together.

It can be through nationalization and government management.

Those are the usual ways.

[kristopher]

61. "Cooperatives"??? You are a red-baiter, aren't you?

[beam me up scottie]

62. Yep, that poster may have fooled a few people but his first op gave him away.

This thread is a set up so they can continue to ask loaded questions.

Obvious poster is obvious.

[Ron Green]

6. Label-mongering.

Tell me how that's useful.

[arely staircase]

13. It is a self applied lable in Sen. Sanders' case

If you have a problem with it talk to the person who called him that.

Him.

[Ron Green]

16. He called himself that to differentiate himself from a Democratic

Party that's lost its way. He does NOT use the label except in response to those who are fixating on it, usually in a "gotcha" sort of way.

Yes, I have a problem with focusing on labels to the detriment of conversations about what can be done better. This thread's an example of that.

[arely staircase]

18. You want to see some fixating.

Nominate a socialist.

And he beter by then have a better explanation than one that doesn't jibe with umderstood academic definition of the term.

[Ron Green]

20. Once again, you've fallen into the labels trap.

I don't know how old you are, but voters have grown increasingly bored with these terms as younger ones have come of age. And that's a good thing; ideas and understanding must replace dogma and labels in a more egalitarian and sustainable world - you know, the kind of world Bernie Sanders is calling for and all the other candidates are fighting against.

[arely staircase]

21. So you suggest a campaign in which words have no meaning.

Good luck with that.

Edited to say you make some good points but I do not share your conclusion.

[Ron Green]

24. No, I suggest a campaign in which voters have to look beyond sound bites and labels

to actual ideas they can understand, and yet have some bearing on policy decisions. Such as reinstating Glass-Steagall, or something like it. Such as prohibiting the TPP and its further corporatization of the world. Such as eschewing wars of convenience and other dangerous adventurism. And on an on.

Just saying "socialist" or even "Democrat" or "Republican" is not useful in most cases unless you're identifying a party that has a specific set of policies that will affect people. As we know, both parties have been hijacked by Wall Street (there's another clear and demonstrable fact that has nothing to do with labels except to co-opt them.)

Look, if you're so scared that the one candidate who's telling the real truth about our situation won't prevail because of labels and names that he'll be called by the minions of the situation itself, I really have no answer for you. Supporting Hillary Clinton as a candidate in view of the needs of the 21st Century is just wrong.

[arely staircase]

37. I will not only vote for Sanders, I will give him money and

work door to door for Bernie and the whole democratic ticket. I probably agree with Bernie slightly more than Clinton on issues. But I think she would be a better president. I think she would be more effective at getting done the 90 percent of things that she and I agree on than Sanders would getting done the 92 percent of things he and I agree on.

[kristopher]

26. I think self applied labels are important - including this one.

The more it is discussed and understood the better, IMO.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

7. So? They are not Marxist-Leninist. They are, however, democrats.

Just as many Democrats are socialists.

[arely staircase]

11. Correct. The Democratic part differentiates them from vanguardist revolutionaries

But they do believe in workers controlling the means of production - to varying degrees To what degree Sanders beleives this is what I cought hell for in the other thread. I will admit my manner of asking it was provacative but not disingenuous.

[kristopher]

27. What do you mean by "workers controlling the means of production"?

That is a classic phrase associated with Leninism that is loaded with pejorative meaning here.

EXACTLY how do you see that functioning?

[arely staircase]

57. No it I s a socialist term widely used by all manner of socialists

Democratic or otherwise. In democratic socialist countries it is usually a coop structure. In undemocratic Marxist countries it is usually confoscation and central planning.

[kristopher]

63. How old are you?

[arely staircase]

64. Why?

That is kind of creepy.

[NCTraveler]

8. If you take his career and objectively look at it.

I think it's hard to fit him into a label. I think he went for Democratic Socialist because of his circumstances.

[arely staircase]

9. I think Social Democrat is a better description

But he is going to have to own, and explain, Democratic Socialism.

[pinebox]

10. Scary!

Snowplows!
Libraries!
Roads!
National Parks!
The post office!
Public education!

Quick! It's a trap!

[arely staircase]

12. Virtually all pf those.things exist in the most right wing of countries

By your definition anyone to the left of Pinochet is a socialist.

[pinebox]

14. And there you have it!

By my definition, that IS socialism. We already have it in this country.

You're on here red baiting on a daily basis and it's obvious you're scared of Norway, Germany and maybe Denmark. Why? What are you so afraid of? Sprechen mit mir, bitte.

What is so wrong with helping the homeless on a state and federal level? What is so wrong with infrastructure? What is so wrong with strengthening social security?

[TheBlackAdder]

15. It takes a perverse mind to think that the American economy is capitalistic, it's really a hybrid.

.


Capitalist utopians would be just as likely to fail as Communist utopias.


.

[arely staircase]

22. I would call it a regulatetd market driven economy

With a democratic-republican form of government. Things like medicare are socialistic but not socialiam per se.

[TheBlackAdder]

65. Seeing how you are wrong on most of your comments, it's not surprising. nt

[arely staircase]

67. And yours are completely without substance nt

[arely staircase]

19. And no academic in the world would agree with you

[pinebox]

34. Really?

So you're telling us that things like the post office and public roads aren't socialism. Tell us more please.

75 Ways Socialism has improved America
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/3/29/1078852/-75-Ways-Socialism-Has-Improved-America

[elias49]

23. Some people seem to like what they see - professional economists, not bloggers..

http://usuncut.com/politics/170-top-economists-back-bernie-sanders-plan-to-rein-in-wall-street/

Check it out.

[daleanime]

28. Democratic Socialist are people who believe in evil things....

like public education, health care, infrastructure, etc....

And they must be stopped.



Just in case.

[orpupilofnature57]

29. Democratic Socialism vs Republican Fascism .

[EdwardBernays]

32. "socially owned economy"

Is utter nonsense.

Visit a country run on Social Democrat policies and marvel at their private enterprise.

Here's what Bernie is espousing:

The Nordic model (also called Nordic capitalism[1] or Nordic social democracy)[2][3] refers to the economic and social policies common to the Nordic countries (Denmark, Finland, Norway, Iceland and Sweden). This includes a combination of free market capitalism with a comprehensive welfare state and collective bargaining at the national level.[4][5]

Although there are significant differences among the Nordic countries, they all share some common traits. These include support for a "universalist" welfare state aimed specifically at enhancing individual autonomy and promoting social mobility; a corporatist system involving a tripartite arrangement where representatives of labor and employers negotiate wages and labor market policy mediated by the government;[6] and a commitment to widespread private ownership, free markets and free trade.[7]

Here's some examples of private enterprise in these countries

Ikea
Nokia
H&M
Carlsberg

All privately owned or market listed companies. None are state or socially controlled or owned.

What it DOES mean though is that workers are given equal footing as ownership at the negotiating table. And workers are protected by the government.

[Agnosticsherbet]

35. Definitions are not static: Democratic Socialist Party (French: Parti socialiste démocratique, PSD)

was a French socialist political party during the French Fourth Republic, founded on 24 August 1945 by members expelled from the French Section of the Workers' International (SFIO) following the Liberation of France for wartime collaboration with the German occupiers.

Only Sanders can explain what he means by Democratic Socialist.

[Agnosticsherbet]

36. I like this one: Alliance for Green Socialism

The Alliance for Green Socialism (AGS) is a socialist and environmentalist political grouping operating across Britain (although its most active membership is in West Yorkshire, particularly in the City of Leeds). Its first annual conference was in 2003 following the 2002 merger of the Leeds Left Alliance (formed by Mike Davies, Celia Foote, Garth Frankland and other former members of the Labour Party) and the Green Socialist Network (whose origins lay in the former Communist Party of Great Britain). The Leeds Left Alliance had previously been involved in the former Socialist Alliance and a small number of AGS members remained involved in it until it was dissolved by the SWP (who had effectively taken it over) in February 2005. The AGS has sponsored various attempts by one of its affiliate organisations (Rugby Red Green Alliance) and the Socialist Alliance Democracy Platform to re-form the Socialist Alliance from 2005 onwards but this has had little success and the AGS concluded in 2011 that such efforts were no longer politically productive (although the AGS still actively supports the idea of a broader Socialist/Environmentalist political alliance).

Now that's cool.

[cherokeeprogressive]

38. Wait. Weren't you the one who asked if Bernie Sanders "believed" in private property?

Now you want to lecture me on Democratic Socialism?

Showin' up to the party a little late.

[orpupilofnature57]

41. + 1000000000000 !!!!!!!!!!!

[arely staircase]

42. Of course. To what extent does he believe in worker control of the means of production?

How would he accomplish that, coops, government ownership? How.

And yes, I understand it would be through the democratic process. That is the "Democratic" part. Now the socialist part?

[cherokeeprogressive]

44. Not what you asked.

[arely staircase]

45. Yes I did.

Last edited Sat Jan 30, 2016, 09:09 PM - Edit history (1)

Socialism is a completely different economy than our regulated (not nearly enough) market driven one. It is literally state or cooperative ownership of a hell of a lot of property. It means nationalizing insdustry or making them have a cooperative structure.

[cherokeeprogressive]

49. "Does Sen. Sanders believe there should be private property?"

I'll just leave this flamebait here and be done with it.

[arely staircase]

58. Provacative, yes. But not an illegitimate question.

And Bernie and his supporters better learn to get used to such questions if they want to Represent our party on a national stage. Shit flinging ain't gonna cut it.

[Bonobo]

59. +1. nt

[Agnosticsherbet]

40. There are many different groups: Party of Democratic Socialism (Germany)

And then there is Greece
Greece: The Dilemmas of Democratic Socialism

And there are so m any more.

Democratic Socialism is not easily pigeonholed in a definition. Each country that tried it, has implemented it differently.


Now, even if Sanders is elected, in order to makes us a "Democratic Socialist" Country, he would need to legislate huge programs and changes, and very likely need to rewrite our Constitution.

I don't support him, but he does have some good ideas. I would rather discuss his ideas than try to tar and feather him with the "Socialist" word.

That is way too Republican for me.

[arely staircase]

43. As for being "too Republican" well that is kind of the point.

He better get a better answer than just claiming that being really progressive is what he means by Socialist if he is to be our standard bearer.

[redstateblues]

52. If Bernie wins the nomination

and his campaign is still trying to explain the difference between Socialism, Democratic Socialism and Social Democracy to the vast under informed American TV watching electorate next October during a barrage of lies from the Republicans- it won't be good. Surely he has a strategy to deal with this the way Obama did to address all the clamoring about his race.

[arely staircase]

60. Let us hope so.

The antagonism here toward the mentioning of it isn't encouraging.

[Gothmog]

66. The terms "socialism" and "socialist" do not poll well

The terms "Socialist" and "Socialism" do not poll well and will be easy to use in attack ads.
From Pew http://www.pewresearch.org/daily-number/little-change-in-publics-response-to-capitalism-socialism/

The word ‘socialism’ triggers a negative reaction for most Americans, but certainly not for all. Six-in-ten (60%) people say they have a negative reaction to the word, while just 31% have a positive reaction. Those numbers are little changed from April 2010....

By contrast, socialism is a far more divisive word, with wide differences of opinion along racial, generational, socioeconomic and political lines. Fully nine-in-ten conservative Republicans (90%) view socialism negatively, while nearly six-in-ten liberal Democrats (59%) react positively. Low-income Americans are twice as likely as higher-income Americans to offer a positive assessment of socialism (43% among those with incomes under $30,000, 22% among those earning $75,000 or more).

From Gallop http://www.gallup.com/poll/125645/Socialism-Viewed-Positively-Americans.aspx

PRINCETON, NJ -- More than one-third of Americans (36%) have a positive image of "socialism," while 58% have a negative image. Views differ by party and ideology, with a majority of Democrats and liberals saying they have a positive view of socialism, compared to a minority of Republicans and conservatives.



....Socialism

Socialism had the lowest percentage positive rating and the highest negative rating of any term tested. Still, more than a third of Americans say they have a positive image of socialism.

Exactly how Americans define "socialism" or what exactly they think of when they hear the word is not known. The research simply measures Americans' reactions when a survey interviewer reads the word to them -- an exercise that helps shed light on connotations associated with this frequently used term.

There are significant differences in reactions to "socialism" across ideological and partisan groups:

A majority of 53% of Democrats have a positive image of socialism, compared to 17% of Republicans.
Sixty-one percent of liberals say their image of socialism is positive, compared to 39% of moderates and 20% of conservatives

[NurseJackie]

68. On the national level, it would cost him the election. There's no two ways about it.

The GOP smear machine would go into high gear over this. Bernie would be spending 95% of his time trying to explain what "Democratic Socialist" means ... and any other message would be lost in the wind. All other things being equal (which they aren't) but if they were, THIS would be the proverbial "final-nail-in-the-coffin" of his presidential aspirations.

Thank goodness we don't have to worry about that.

[Vinca]

69. You'd rather worry about Trump convincing the country Hillary is a criminal?