Page 1 of 13 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 195

Thread: "Democratic Socialist" an Oxymoron?

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    West Seneca
    Posts
    612

    "Democratic Socialist" an Oxymoron?

    I am confused by this phrase. MikeWrona identifies himself on another thread as being one. Maybe my confusion lies in the fact that I am sort of black and white in my thinking when it comes to theories of global political science, but to me this idealogy sounds a lot like being "a little bit pregnant".

    I am not a student of economics or geopolitics, but my rudimentary understanding of American democracy is that it fundamentally recognizes and protects personal liberty, private property, and freedom of choice and selection of governance. The Founding Fathers also recognized a Public Benefit in protecting the general health and welfare of the populace.

    An alternative to democracy (including our representative democracy) is communism and its corollary of socialism. Again, my basic understanding is that these precepts are antithetical to the foundational tenets of democracy. Does not socialism subjugate the individual to the collective and strive toward the common control and ownership of the 'means of production'?

    Are not Democratic Socialists really not striving toward a utopian ideal of plain old socialism, either through evolution or revolution? Isnt the cloak of Democracy, just a 'means to an end'?

    I often wonder how many of today's unionites recognize the socialistic themes and rhetoric they have been indoctrinated with in the guise of 'empowering' them to achieve the materialistic American Dream of middle class success? I wonder how many unionites would be as enthralled with the "union label" if they also saw the themes of socialism which drive that engine and recognized that pure socialism is in fact working against their middle class ideals.

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,474

    "pure socialism"

    is that a uthopian society ? I am in the PBA, a Bflo Cop. I see Unions as necessary. I think Unions are necessary because some business owners , and Govt in some cases, will exploit workers without them. Look no further than our current situation where a valid , binding , contract isn't being honored. Without Unions this would occur much more often than it does. Look at how Delphi is paying out millions in bonuses to management, under the guise of retaining managerial talent, while they want to cut the pay of laborers by 2/3's. I don't think that is right. Do you ? Walmart has been caught using illegal immigrants, do you agree with this practice ? I don't.

  3. #3
    Member Batman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    720
    Does not socialism subjugate the individual to the collective and strive toward the common control and ownership of the 'means of production'?
    That's exactly what it means. The founding fathers also understood that democracy in it's pure form is mob rule. That's why we are not a democracy but a democratic republic. The use of the term democracy has been twisted such as in "make the world safe for democracy" or "install a democracy in Iraq".

  4. #4
    Member mikewrona's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Amherst
    Posts
    4,271
    Quote Originally Posted by CindyLocklear
    I am confused by this phrase. MikeWrona identifies himself on another thread as being one. Maybe my confusion lies in the fact that I am sort of black and white in my thinking when it comes to theories of global political science, but to me this idealogy sounds a lot like being "a little bit pregnant".

    I am not a student of economics or geopolitics, but my rudimentary understanding of American democracy is that it fundamentally recognizes and protects personal liberty, private property, and freedom of choice and selection of governance. The Founding Fathers also recognized a Public Benefit in protecting the general health and welfare of the populace.

    An alternative to democracy (including our representative democracy) is communism and its corollary of socialism. Again, my basic understanding is that these precepts are antithetical to the foundational tenets of democracy. Does not socialism subjugate the individual to the collective and strive toward the common control and ownership of the 'means of production'?

    Are not Democratic Socialists really not striving toward a utopian ideal of plain old socialism, either through evolution or revolution? Isnt the cloak of Democracy, just a 'means to an end'?

    I often wonder how many of today's unionites recognize the socialistic themes and rhetoric they have been indoctrinated with in the guise of 'empowering' them to achieve the materialistic American Dream of middle class success? I wonder how many unionites would be as enthralled with the "union label" if they also saw the themes of socialism which drive that engine and recognized that pure socialism is in fact working against their middle class ideals.

    Understandable confusion. I will try to help clarify.

    source: dsausa.org
    "Democratic Socialists believe that both the economy and society should be run democratically—to meet public needs, not to make profits for a few. To achieve a more just society, many structures of our government and economy must be radically transformed through greater economic and social democracy so that ordinary Americans can participate in the many decisions that affect our lives."

  5. #5
    Member Batman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    720
    It all sounds good and just but there's one problem. It kills incentive and ambition. Why would anyone invest sweat and capital into a venture if their profits are to be seized by the government to redistribute more "fairly". More importantly, what is so just and right about people gaining from someone elses work?

  6. #6
    Member Batman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    720
    Incidentally, all these "robber barons" sure provide plenty of jobs.

  7. #7
    Member mikewrona's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Amherst
    Posts
    4,271
    Quote Originally Posted by Batman
    It all sounds good and just but there's one problem. It kills incentive and ambition. Why would anyone invest sweat and capital into a venture if their profits are to be seized by the government to redistribute more "fairly". More importantly, what is so just and right about people gaining from someone elses work?
    Economy requires three elements (not listed in order of importance because there is no economy with even one missing)
    Capital
    Labor
    Materials

    Your argument continually views the economy from the singular point of view that it is capital that only matters.
    You don't believe the worker has the right to any of the profits. Because you believe labor is undignified and below that of the investor.

  8. #8
    Member mikewrona's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Amherst
    Posts
    4,271
    Quote Originally Posted by Batman
    Incidentally, all these "robber barons" sure provide plenty of jobs.
    Don't forget the Southern Plantation owners. They put 3.5 million slaves to work.

    Otherwise they'd be out on the street causing trouble.

  9. #9
    Member Batman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    720
    Your argument continually views the economy from the singular point of view that it is capital that only matters.
    You don't believe the worker has the right to any of the profits. Because you believe labor is undignified and below that of the investor

    What about profit sharing plans, bonuses, 401k's with employer contributions, discount stock purchase plans, etc. in addition to a regular wage/salary? Let's not forget health insurance, either. It seems to me that most employers provide these to their employees, especially bigger corporations. I would say the employees are getting part of the profits.

  10. #10
    Member Batman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    720
    Don't forget the Southern Plantation owners. They put 3.5 million slaves to work.

    Otherwise they'd be out on the street causing trouble.

    Nice try.

  11. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    West Seneca
    Posts
    612

    Egalitarianism?

    Quote Originally Posted by mikewrona
    Understandable confusion. I will try to help clarify.

    source: dsausa.org
    "Democratic Socialists believe that both the economy and society should be run democratically—to meet public needs, not to make profits for a few. To achieve a more just society, many structures of our government and economy must be radically transformed through greater economic and social democracy so that ordinary Americans can participate in the many decisions that affect our lives."
    Sorry MikeWrona; this quote does little to clarify without an explanation of what 'democratically' means in its above context; and without a description of what the many structures of our government and economy will look like after the 'radical transformation'.

    Is it safe to say that in a world desired by a democratic socialist, all "outputs" are equal among all citizens regardless of the degree, quality, quantity, effort, value, or scarcity of the "inputs" contributed by each citizen?

    IF YES. Then in reality, isnt the only viable government/economy, one that is based on State Ownership and State Distribution?

  12. #12
    Member mikewrona's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Amherst
    Posts
    4,271
    Quote Originally Posted by CindyLocklear
    Sorry MikeWrona; this quote does little to clarify without an explanation of what 'democratically' means in its above context; and without a description of what the many structures of our government and economy will look like after the 'radical transformation'.

    Is it safe to say that in a world desired by a democratic socialist, all "outputs" are equal among all citizens regardless of the degree, quality, quantity, effort, value, or scarcity of the "inputs" contributed by each citizen?

    IF YES. Then in reality, isnt the only viable government/economy, one that is based on State Ownership and State Distribution?
    Cindy, your focus is too narrow. We don't live in a world that is made up of notions relating to only two choices of government. One that let's business operate freely and one that controls all business. Until you get over that fact, I don't think a discussion is possible.

    The history of government philosophy is more diverse than you can imagine.

    List of political ideologies
    (wikipedia.com)

    The following list attempts to divide ideologies into a number of groups; each group contains ideologies that have a certain theme or idea in common. Note that one ideology can belong to several groups, and there is sometimes considerable overlap between related ideologies.

    Ideologies emphasizing class struggle

    • Anarchism
    Socialism
    • Communism
    • Marxism
    o Leninism
    o Stalinism
    o Maoism
    o Trotskyism
    o Left communism
    o Council communism
    o Eurocommunism
    o Western Marxism

    Ideologies emphasizing the individual

    Libertarian socialism
    o Anarchism
     Anarcho-syndicalism
     Anarcho-communism
     Christian anarchism
     Individualist anarchism
    o Council communism
    o Autonomist Marxism
    o Social ecology
    • Liberalism
    o Social liberalism / New liberalism
     Georgism
    o Ordoliberalism
    o Classical liberalism
    o American liberalism
    • Libertarianism
    o Anarcho-capitalism
    o Neolibertarianism
    o Minarchism
    o Paleolibertarianism
    o Geolibertarianism

    Ideologies emphasizing the collective

    Socialism
    o Guild socialism
    o Participatory economics
    o Marxism
     Leninism
     Stalinism
     Maoism
     Trotskyism
     Left communism
     Council communism
     Eurocommunism
     Neo-marxism
    o African socialism
    o Religious socialism
    Christian socialism
    o Democratic socialism
    o Infosocialism
    o Libertarian socialism
    o Utopian socialism
    Social democracy
    • Communitarianism
    • Communism
    o Religious communism
     Christian communism
    • Populism
    • Feminism
    • Ecologism

    Ideologies emphasizing ethnicity or nationality

    • Nationalism
    o Zionism
    • Regionalism
    • Pan-Africanism
    • Pan-Arabism
    • Ethnic supremacy
    • Fascism
    o Neo-fascism
    o Clerical fascism
    • Nazism
    o Neo-nazism
    • Racism, Racialism

    Ideologies emphasizing tradition

    • Christian democracy
    • Conservatism
    o Liberal conservatism
    o Paleoconservatism
    o Neoconservatism
    o Social conservatism

    Ideologies based on religion

    • Christian-based ideologies
    o Christian anarchism
    o Christian communism
    o Christian socialism
    o Christian democracy
    o Clerical fascism
    o Dominionism
    • Hindu-based ideologies
    o Hindu nationalism
    • Islam-based ideologies
    o Islamism, Muslim fundamentalism
    • Jewish-based ideologies
    o Religious zionism
    • Theocracy
    • Communalism (South Asia)
    • Religious communism
    Religious socialism

    Foreign policy ideologies

    • Internationalism, Cosmopolitanism
    • Pacifism
    • Unilateralism
    • Just war theory
    • Neoconservatism
    • Realism
    Other ideologies
    • Centrism
    • Republicanism
    • Federalism
    • Syndicalism
    • Pragmatism
    • Green politics
    • New humanism
    • Neoliberalism
    • Economic liberalism
    • Feminism
    • Consistent Life Ethic
    • Militarist ideology
    • Multiculturalism

    One-issue stances

    • Agrarianism
    • Animal welfarism
    • Euro-scepticism
    • Masculism
    • Feminism
    • Minorities defence, Minoritarianism
    • Pensioners' defence
    • Majoritarianism
    • Egalitarianism

  13. #13
    Member mikewrona's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Amherst
    Posts
    4,271
    Quote Originally Posted by Batman
    Your argument continually views the economy from the singular point of view that it is capital that only matters.
    You don't believe the worker has the right to any of the profits. Because you believe labor is undignified and below that of the investor

    What about profit sharing plans, bonuses, 401k's with employer contributions, discount stock purchase plans, etc. in addition to a regular wage/salary? Let's not forget health insurance, either. It seems to me that most employers provide these to their employees, especially bigger corporations. I would say the employees are getting part of the profits.
    Your "facts" appear to be your "opinions." I think the Bureau of Labor Statistics would disagree with you on the concept of "most employers"
    Last edited by mikewrona; July 4th, 2006 at 04:59 PM.

  14. #14
    Member mikewrona's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Amherst
    Posts
    4,271
    I should mention that I own stock, so I'm not in favor of government owned business and industry.

  15. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    West Seneca
    Posts
    612

    Smile

    Quote Originally Posted by mikewrona
    Cindy, your focus is too narrow. We don't live in a world that is made up of notions relating to only two choices of government. One that let's business operate freely and one that controls all business. Until you get over that fact, I don't think a discussion is possible.

    The history of government philosophy is more diverse than you can imagine.

    List of political ideologies
    (wikipedia.com)

    The following list attempts to divide ideologies into a number of groups; each group contains ideologies that have a certain theme or idea in common. Note that one ideology can belong to several groups, and there is sometimes considerable overlap between related ideologies.

    LIST OMITTED BY CL TO SAVE SPACE
    Mike; seeing your Litany made me think of a quip a lawyer friend (a litigator) says from time to time; "Never let the facts get in the way of a good story!"

    Its a shame you wont debate the issue in a focused manner. Perhaps you consider my postulates as too simplistic. And I admit I ascribe to simple truths; there is no ying in yang or up in down; all extremes exist to describe and create the opposite. The examples you posted only serve to show the continuum between the the two opposite nodes. My point in starting this conversation was to parse what is to me a conundrum. Ie, you cant be "a little bit pregnant."

    Ultimately, I suspect that Democratic Socialists are at their core socialists who are willing to 'work within' the current democratic system to achieve an end, but that end will have very little to do with tenets of American Democracy (meaning a fundamental belief in and recognition of personal liberty, individualism, and private property) in the end. Capeche?

Page 1 of 13 12311 ... LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 16 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 16 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •