Democratic Socialism - It's democracy stupid

In the end, there is no such thing as Democratic Socialism. If the left actually thought about it, they claim that democracy in our country was almost taken away by Trump & Co and that we were perilously close to Trump turning the country into a dictatorship. Let's assume that is all 100% true. The Democratic Socialists want to give government total control over the economy and society. That is their goal. And if they have the presidency, the House, and the Senate, if Manchin and Sinema would just play along, they could get rid of the filibuster and pass any and all laws they wanted, cementing total and complete control over the country forever, AKA a dictatorship. No one could stop them.
Communist Utopia is a stateless society where all social and economic decisions are made democratically.

Socialism is where the state (government) makes those decisions.

Which of those to is closer to Democratic Socialism?
 
People get all tangled up in the equivocation around the term "socialism", but in my view the most dangerous view of the left is their blind commitment to "democracy" as the answer to all things.


It's right there on their calling card: "Democratic Socialists believe that both the economy and society should be run democratically"

"The economy and society" is pretty much everything. They want every single aspect of our lives subjected to majority rule. No thanks.

Neither the economy nor society should be run democratically. Government should be run democratically, but government should run neither the economy nor society. Government should keep the peace, manage the commons and protect the freedom of We the People to run the economy and society voluntarily and collaboratively, without resorting to coercive state mandates.
Your words need to be read carefully and understood. You are subconsciously supporting a move to fascism as a kneejerk reaction to the current condemnation of Trump's behaviour on Jan.6 especially, but not limited to that.

their blind commitment to "democracy"

Can you explain that claim with some details on why a commitment to democracy is wrong?
 
Communist Utopia is a stateless society where all social and economic decisions are made democratically.

Socialism is where the state (government) makes those decisions.

Which of those to is closer to Democratic Socialism?
There is no such thing as Democratic Socialism because once you give total and complete power to the government and the few top people who run it, Democracy is gone. They have the power to pass any and all laws they wish to keep themselves in power forever (pretty much like Russia and Venezuela who have "democratic" socialism. There will be no way to vote them out if you decide you don't like "Democratic" Socialism.
 
Communist Utopia is a stateless society where all social and economic decisions are made democratically.
Obviously just the opposite for a communist system in which decisions are not made democratically!
Socialism is where the state (government) makes those decisions.
No, but a bit closer to the truth than the above ridiculous claim.
Which of those to is closer to Democratic Socialism?
That can't be answered without correcting your ridiculous claim.
 
You are subconsciously supporting a move to fascism as a kneejerk reaction to the current condemnation of Trump's behaviour on Jan.6 especially, but not limited to that.
WTF?? This has exactly nothing to do with Trump or Jan 6th.

Can you explain that claim with some details on why a commitment to democracy is wrong?
It's not so much the commitment to democracy that's wrong. As I said, government should be run democratically. It's the idea that democracy should be applied to any and every social decision that is dangerous.

Democracy is a reasonable way to make a decision when it's actually necessary to force everyone to abide by one course of action. But usually, forcing such conformity is unnecessary. That's the bit democracy zealots don't get. We don't need to take a vote on how to do religion, and force everyone to subscribe to the same one. We don't need to take a vote on how to do social media, and force everyone to do it the same way. We don't need to take a vote on how to do health care, and force everyone to play along. In most cases, it's fine to let people decide for themselves.
 
There is no such thing as Democratic Socialism because once you give total and complete power to the government and the few top people who run it, Democracy is gone.
You're describing fascism.

No democracy on the face of the earth can function without some inclusion of 'socialist' policy.
Socialist policy is only less present in America than other democratic countries.
They have the power to pass any and all laws they wish to keep themselves in power forever (pretty much like Russia and Venezuela who have "democratic" socialism. There will be no way to vote them out if you decide you don't like "Democratic" Socialism.
Your inclusion of the word 'democratic' proves the opposite, by definition.
 
Your words need to be read carefully and understood. You are subconsciously supporting a move to fascism as a kneejerk reaction to the current condemnation of Trump's behaviour on Jan.6 especially, but not limited to that.
Brought-To-You-By-The-Letters.jpg
 
WTF?? This has exactly nothing to do with Trump or Jan 6th.


It's not so much the commitment to democracy that's wrong.
You've retracted the mistake you made.
As I said, government should be run democratically. It's the idea that democracy should be applied to any and every social decision that is dangerous.
And again I'm asking for an example of that which you imagine.
Democracy is a reasonable way to make a decision when it's actually necessary to force everyone to abide by one course of action.
No, your inclusion of the word 'democracy' proves you wrong by the very definition. You're unconsciously referring to fascism in which decisions are made by elected government leaders making all decisions. This differs from a republic as the elected leaders of government become fascists in that they won't forfeit power in the next prescribed election.
But usually, forcing such conformity is unnecessary. That's the bit democracy zealots don't get. We don't need to take a vote on how to do religion, and force everyone to subscribe to the same one. We don't need to take a vote on how to do social media, and force everyone to do it the same way. We don't need to take a vote on how to do health care, and force everyone to play along. In most cases, it's fine to let people decide for themselves.
Your country isn't a democracy in which there is a vote on everything to be decided. It's a republic.

You're making exaggerated claims and that's the reason why you can't provide the example I've asked for.
 
You've retracted the mistake you made.
Nope. But you're fixated on proving I made a mistake. How come?
No, your inclusion of the word 'democracy' proves you wrong by the very definition. You're unconsciously referring to fascism in which decisions are made by elected government leaders making all decisions. This differs from a republic as the elected leaders of government become fascists in that they won't forfeit power in the next prescribed election.
You seem pretty fucked up. That's not an insult. Your brain just seems off kilter. Has anyone else mentioned it?
Your country isn't a democracy in which there is a vote on everything to be decided. It's a republic.
Yep. So far. Bunch a fools are trying to change it though. That's sorta the point of the thread.
You're making exaggerated claims and that's the reason why you can't provide the example I've asked for.
LOL - sure man. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:

Forum List

Back
Top