Rosa Luxemburg Was the Great Theorist of Democratic Revolution

[basquebromance]

A reminder for today and every day: “Freedom,” Rosa Luxemburg wrote in 1918, “is always and exclusively freedom for the one who thinks differently.”

Rosa Luxemburg Was the Great Theorist of Democratic Revolution

A new edition of Rosa Luxemburg’s writings, most of which have never appeared in English before, gives us a unique perspective on her thought. Luxemburg believed that a socialist revolution would have to be democratic or else it would be doomed to failure.

jacobin.com

 

[Votto]

This is the problem socialists have, which is, why has it not worked before

As she writes

Firstly, Luxemburg held that the mass strike “is and will remain a powerful weapon of workers’ struggle,” but went on to stress that it was “only that, a weapon, whose use and effectiveness always depend on the environment, the given conditions, and the moment of struggle.” Secondly, she held that the Russian proletariat was “not setting itself utopian or unreachable goals, like the immediate realization of socialism: the only possible and historically necessary goal is to establish a democratic republic and an eight-hour workday.”

In Luxemburg’s view, socialism could not be on the immediate agenda in Russia for two main reasons: the working class at the time constituted only a small minority of the populace of the Russian Empire (less than 15 percent), and it was impossible for socialism to exist in a single country:

The disconnect is that in order for socialism to have a remote chance of working, a government needs to be set up to oversee each and every financial transaction, and then redistribute the money as they see fit. This requires the government to have an inordinate amount of power over the populace, which is why it has been so popular with despots over the years as more have been murdered by Marxism than by any other ideology, hundreds of millions more.

Man's nature is corrupt as it seeks power, secures power, and then seeks more power. There is no underlying concern for "the workers". There is no underlying concern for "democracy".

In fact, if you do away with a free economy, what freedoms do you really have anyway?


But socialists are undaunted preaching that it will somehow work, this time.

 

[whitehall]

Democratic socialist revolution? Another oxymoron.

 

[Votto]

The underlying issue is human freedom.

Do men use their freedom for good or ill?

Both religion and the state have grappled with this issue. Should men be allowed to do bad things, or if they do bad things, what penalty should be imposed in order to stop it?

At the end of the day, I think Ben Franklin was right.

“I agree to this Constitution with all its faults, if they are such: because I think a General Government necessary for us, and there is no Form of Government but what may be a Blessing to the People if well-administred; and I believe farther that this is likely to be well administred for a Course of Years and can only end in Despotism as other Forms have done before it, when the People shall become so corrupted as to need Despotic Government, being incapable of any other.”​

The only way to be a free people is for that society to choose, for the most part, to have a moral code in order to constrain their own freedom. Otherwise, the state will do it for you as they take your freedoms away because you refuse to hold yourself to a moral code that maintains a civil society.

 

[Votto]

Democratic socialist revolution? Another oxymoron.

Hitler was a National Socialist. He started by attempting a violent revolution, but when he wound up in prison instead, he took the democratic path once he got out.

Later, once Hitler gained power, the Nazi party was voted in as they seized control.

The referred to themselves as democratic socislists

LOL.

 

[francoHFW]

This is the problem socialists have, which is, why has it not worked before

As she writes

Firstly, Luxemburg held that the mass strike “is and will remain a powerful weapon of workers’ struggle,” but went on to stress that it was “only that, a weapon, whose use and effectiveness always depend on the environment, the given conditions, and the moment of struggle.” Secondly, she held that the Russian proletariat was “not setting itself utopian or unreachable goals, like the immediate realization of socialism: the only possible and historically necessary goal is to establish a democratic republic and an eight-hour workday.”

In Luxemburg’s view, socialism could not be on the immediate agenda in Russia for two main reasons: the working class at the time constituted only a small minority of the populace of the Russian Empire (less than 15 percent), and it was impossible for socialism to exist in a single country:

The disconnect is that in order for socialism to have a remote chance of working, a government needs to be set up to oversee each and every financial transaction, and then redistribute the money as they see fit. This requires the government to have an inordinate amount of power over the populace, which is why it has been so popular with despots over the years as more have been murdered by Marxism than by any other ideology, hundreds of millions more.

Man's nature is corrupt as it seeks power, secures power, and then seeks more power. There is no underlying concern for "the workers". There is no underlying concern for "democracy".

In fact, if you do away with a free economy, what freedoms do you really have anyway?


But socialists are undaunted preaching that it will somehow work, this time.

You're talking about communism which no one in the United states is for at least with a brain. The British English speakers around the world don't know the difference between socialists and communists. In every democracy, every Socialist Party is for democracy and fair capitalism. Communists want dictatorship that owns all business and industry and it does not work!!!

But British propaganda is so strong, but there's only the United states that is not socialist of all the modern countries because of English speaking propaganda period- but Canada and New Zealand and Australia and even Britain are socialist. But they have to call themselves Labour Party or something. England was lucky after World War Two to get socialism, in other words health care. We are the only country in the modern world without healthcare daycare paid parental leave cheap college and training great infrastructure and vacations and mainly taxing the rich. Because of the brainwash of the GOP garbage propaganda. Super capitalist British propaganda

 

[whitehall]

Idolized as a martyr by the communist East German government that shot people in the back for trying to escape the totalitarian regime. Now idolized by the American left. No surprises here.