Comment on What’s the difference between communism and socialism?

• soratoyuki@piefed.social ⁨16⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  It’s complicated because ‘social democracy’ and ‘democratic socialism’ are two distinct ideologies, who’s definitions have flipped throughout history, and who’s biggest proponents (in the US at least) get it backwards.

  Social democracy isn’t a form of socialism since it’s still capitalism, albeit one with guardrails. Most people that identify as democratic socialists – aside from social democrats misusing the term – are socialists that want to draw a contrast with Marxism-Leninism and other perceived ‘authoritarian’ forms of state socialism. But it’s hard to define a concrete definition for the term since people use it as an umbrella term, including it’s adoption by some state socialists.

  source
• litchralee@sh.itjust.works ⁨16⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  Like with all things, it’s a matter of degree. Democracy and socialism are not inherently incompatible, but can be mixed together at different ratios. For example, a democratic socialist society could follow in the Swiss model of direct democracy, meaning everyone has a say in the policy decisions. Such policy decisions include the law but also how to utilize the means of production, which the state owns entirely.

  Whereas another democratic socialist society could realize their democracy through a representative model, where citizens elect a local representative that goes to the capital and votes in a state committee on how to amend the law or utilize the means of production, which the state owns entirely.

  Yet another democratic socialist society could be much softer on the state ownership of all the means of production. The state might own the utilities, roads, schools, and all land, but may permit certain collectives to privately own businesses that generate value and to distribute those earnings equally amongst themselves. This could be considered a transitional step, since it allows for a controlled amount of capitalist-style development to occur, while avoiding huge concentrations of private capital. But it could also be a step backwards if the state already fully-owned the means of production but then voted to release some of it to small co-ops.

  source

  • a_gee_dizzle@lemmy.ca ⁨4⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    For example, a democratic socialist society could follow in the Swiss

    Is Switzerland a direct democracy?

    source

    • litchralee@sh.itjust.works ⁨2⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      Yes: en.wikipedia.org/…/Mandatory_referendums_in_Switz…

      Switzerland is also a rarity where there isn’t quite a separate head of state (eg UK Monarch, German President) but also the head of government role is done by a council of seven, where the majority decision is what happens. So the legislative body writes the law and the council of seven is tasked with executive power to carry out the law.

      The modern Swiss constitution (1848) took inspiration from the American constitution (1789), but rather than a consolidate head of state/government like the American President, they wanted to hew even closer to the long-standing ideals of democracy amongst the Cantons. Even though the Swiss Federal Council rotates the title of president every year in turn, it confers zero extra powers.

      source
• ChiefEntropyOfficer@lemmy.world ⁨12⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  I think no one can give a clear definition of what a socialist democracy is because they don’t live in one, I do and I work for the state and will try explain it.

  We have a free market economy and stock exchange ergo full-fledged capitalism, however the collected tax/revenue base collected for the state is used to fund three core functions refered to as “Apex Priorities” namely Health, Education and Housing - these are all free to citizens and legal foreign nationals, we have fee-free schools and means-determined fully funded higher education, healthcare is fully free and an application for a basic, but functional dwelling is applied for and built. These are the conditions that the State believes every citizen requires to reach self-actualisation. There are further support functions through social interventions paying for things such as child-care, disability, old-age to provide the unemployed with no means of monthly income a mometary base to take care of their basic needs.

  The State is also responsible for creating new infrastructure based on citizen needs auch as schools, colleges, universities, clinics, hospitals, roads, high-ways, bridges, agriculture, forestry, nature conservation, water supply, electrical supply, sanitation, arts, culture, sport, implementing legislative policies and laws etc etc etc.

  What the State is also responsible for, which people get confused, is that it DOES NOT create jobs or job opportunities, its sole-purpose by doing all of these functions is to create a conducive environment for business to operate, this is from brick and mortar to factory and import/export functionaries - every aspect for business, employer and employee to thrive is to provide all the necessary soft and hard means to execute their goals and conteibute to the economy thus driving further investment from local and foreign entities.

  Nutshell: the State needs to take care of the citizens needs so that capitalism can flourish. The logic is that is a recursive loop where if the citizens can work, the state gets tax to put back into the citizen - if the one fails the other fails.

  N.B. This State is far from perfect but since inception to date we class ourselves as a socialist democracy, and this is why.

  source

  • a_gee_dizzle@lemmy.ca ⁨4⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    Thats interesting. Where do you live if you dont mind me asking?

    source
• aaa999@lemmy.world ⁨16⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  Democratic socialism is when democracy but also the workers control the means of production. Social democracy is when democracy but also private aristocrats control the means of production but also taxes spent on nice things. Democratic Socialists Of America is when democratic socialism but also social democracy but also baby weenie pee pants social democracy but also self sabotage but also like 1% tankies occupying 7% of leadership.

  source
• cecilkorik@lemmy.ca ⁨12⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  Capitalism with wealth redistribution is considered to be a potential method of achieving socialism or at least a significant amount of it.

  When you really get into the weeds on a lot of these ideologies you’ll find that the 40,000 foot overview of the single word that defines them is actually quite different from the actual process of getting there, and the people arguing for these ideologies actually understand that. They also understand that the means of getting to the goal, or even just closer to the goal, is sometimes the more important and worthy part than the actual end which may not even be realistically attainable nor permanent.

  source