A better term would be social democracy not socialism

[Rosa Luxemburg]

discuss

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_democracy
http://www.gabrielperi.fr/Swedish-Social-Democracy-between

[provis99]

1. I agree, but only to a point

Europeans would instantly know what we are talking about when we say social democracy. but your average low information American voter would think it meant communist-Democratic party, or some such. Why not just call it the "Best Idea" approach rather than attaching an obscure label to it? We could call Repuke ideas the "Worst Ideas". Keep it simple for the folks.

[Djinn]

10. why not call it what it is

robber baron capitalism?

The idea that the US is even remotely close to "social democracy" because they elected Obama is hilarious

[readmoreoften]

2. But social democracy has a different meaning for most.

The slowly transforming the world from into a socialist economy without any confrontation between classes. If we could find a way to drug Madoff, the Republicans, and Banksters, this might work. Beyond that, I think they'll catch on. Judging from your name, though, I'll assume you know what you're talking about.

[BluePatriot21]

3. I like

Democratic Socialism myself, I've been thanking reich wingers for helping to get us here and I ask them why they supported Democratic Fascist Dictatorship under bush. It's all about the delivery. If it wasn't for them being such failures we couldn't have gotten Obama elected, thank a republitard today for their help in making America a better place.

To me I see nothing wrong with helping the majority of Americans and a word doesn't make that any more or less negative as long as the end result is truly helping Americans, and not just the rich elite that scavenge the money from the middle and poor classes.

[napoleon_in_rags]

4. That's the strange rabbit hole of socialism...

The fact that so much is owed to Comrade Rove and pals! :)

I've been chewing on this post for a few minutes. Basically I like Marxist stuff if its descriptive, which is to say it predicts the state which free people will eventually choose, of their own will, to organize themselves. When its prescriptive or dogmatic it becomes a different beast, as we've seen with so many communist regimes. These parties have nothing to do with Democrats or progressives, but rather groups like CPUSA. However, I suppose it is possible to be a progressive who hypothesizes that in time Marxist descriptive theories are correct. Regardless its interesting to contemplate.

[readmoreoften]

5. Geez. CPUSA is practically the hardly even more left than DU.

In reality, it's pretty hard not to be "dogmatic" when you're fighting against horrible, violent injustice. As a lesbian, I'm pretty "dogmatic" about my right to survive and thrive with my partner. (And I think that capitalists are quite "dogmatic" about their magical market, but being that they're in power, they're way more relaxed. Kind of like the homophobes who make gay jokes. Relaxed.) You really can't fight US involvement in the training of Latin-American right-wing death squads without drawing a hard line.

In practice, it becomes hard to both fight and maintain a sweet and reasonable disposition or an "open mind" about the "necessity" of "death squads" or the "preservation of traditional marriage." Most people end up screaming.

[napoleon_in_rags]

6. Sounds like you are in need of some hope.

Here's some: In my town, the best value comes from joining the local food coops. Organizations are forming which keep business local. Our food coops include cooperative banking now. All these things are growing because the people in the town find they can rely on local food, local banks, etc. And these are democratically controlled. As a result of all this, my town is strong: We are preventing our wealth from being sent off to China, and its continuing to grow.

But here's the thing: The people involved in this are thinking about healthy food, community strength, economic safety, etc. They are not thinking about any political theory, they are just working together to see what works for them. Even conservatives are in the mix.

Here's the thing: You either believe in the descriptive Marxist theory (that these social structures arise naturally if people are free) or you don't. If you do, your fight is smaller than you think: Preserve liberty, let people make choices. If you don't, then you're fighting a hopeless fight. I really think we make this more complex than it needs to be.

Peace.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

7. interesting

it is encouraging that groups do form but these are just in small pockets? I have always believed in deregulation of power to the very local level.

[napoleon_in_rags]

8. What I can tell you without any hesitation is that its extremely empowering...

for whatever group of people does this, I've seen it a couple times. It just seems to deal with economic realities: Walmart sends money out of town, largely to China. The people have no control over the products they are offered. However if the people control their own economy... 2+2=4 stuff really.
A strange irony is that this often stops because the town itself becomes very "Bourgeois". Culture prospers, real estate values sky rocket, the sense of egalitarianism that propelled the original movement can get replaced by a smugness, an elitism. Houses in my town are still in the $500,000 dollar range for instance, while my friend in Buffalo NY got hers for $30,000.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

12. I think there has to be a will to do it

many of our poorer communities around here don't seem to have the will and way on their own but I have seen in Europe cooperative housing communities initiated by city councils. This has helped to rejuvenate high unemployment areas.

[napoleon_in_rags]

13. That's one of the challenges in building a cooperative society.

The will, and means to do it at all. Basically those who do it benefit a great deal, but this can give them a status above and beyond those who don't, and then there is less incentive in the short term to make it spread. You can see this when Union pay is a LOT high than pay for non-union workers. Its good for them, but if unions were spending money expanding a lot more resources would be going toward that, and union pay would be only slightly better. Put simply, its not the most profitable thing to do for the union guys in the short term.
I'm not a marxist guru or anything, but I believe this is one of the things the concept of a "Vanguard Party" was supposed to address. You take this really dedicated group of proactive people who act as a transformative force for majority of people, who of themselves can't be expected to understand these things. As a Jeffersonian Democrat, I disagree with that notion. I think when the people are well informed they will make the right decisions for themselves...But the key word is well informed, I think that's what we are lacking. I believe that if people had quality information, they would be making much better decisions and our world would be a lot better. I see the challenge of our time, the Information age, as the discovery and propagation of TRUTH, no matter what forms it takes....Regarding a cooperative society, I am of the opinion that the VAST majority of us would choose it if we really understood it. That's our challenge. :)

[Cleita]

9. I like social democracy. n/t

[inthebrain]

11. It's still ridiculous

Look, socialism is just economic democracy. It's all it really is.

Obama ain't advocating that. Anyone that does think the ruling classes are gonna tolerate that is a damn fool. Much less offer it.

[Kip Humphrey]

14. Sure beats social fascism (e.g., banned stem cell research, privatized military/government, etc.)