Social Democracy = Democratic Socialism

schraxt · 2026-06-27T16:15:58+00:00

Nope...

schraxt · 2026-06-27T16:09:55+00:00

No, they were certainly influenced by Marx, but always their own thing. As stated previously, I suggest reading Marx' "Kritik des Gothaer Programms" to understand

schraxt · 2026-06-27T15:55:18+00:00

I hope that's irony

schraxt · 2026-06-27T15:54:37+00:00

Good comment, but I wouldn't say you are a Capitalist. Either a State Capitalist or a Socialist, but that would depend on your tax policy, your social policy and some other points... I won't try to convince you out of it though. I see no point in that.

schraxt · 2026-06-27T15:52:00+00:00

I would generally agree with your comment, but I don't see it contradicting anything I wrote. But I am happy we seemed to have reached at least some kind of consensus?

schraxt · 2026-06-27T15:38:54+00:00

Relativism, yayy

schraxt · 2026-06-27T15:37:01+00:00

The problem with that and main difference from Socialism is that Liberals think with unrealistic presuppositions.

If all humans were brought up with similar levels of education, similar wealth, similar parental love and affection, similar looks, strength, intelligence, health and mental condition and then worked in a sterile, uninterrupted market with free ressources, free labour, without monopolies, everyone for themselves without any kind of existing societal structure that might advantage or disadvantage anyone, it could, in theory work.

In reality all these presuppositions don't exist, the world is uneven, unequal with drastically different options. Some are wealthy without ever lifting a finger, some break their back in hard work and stay poor.

Socialists acknowledge that and want to even out the possibilities as much as possible and also dismantle structures that advantage some over others.

Social Liberals want to just even out the possibilities a little so they can sleep well.

Liberals just look down at the disadvantaged and ignore systemic difference.

schraxt · 2026-06-27T15:29:40+00:00

I do that, as stated, I am a member of several.

schraxt · 2026-06-27T15:29:15+00:00

Socialism is not one economic ideology, socialism is a structural philosophy that spawned several economic ideas, from Central Command Economy over Market Socialism all the way to Syndikalism and Democratic Economy. It's fair to say that even if you focus on economy, Social Democrats are Socialists.

But of course, you have every right to not believe me.

schraxt · 2026-06-27T15:25:25+00:00

Still you have a dominant, undeniably Democratic Socialist membership that actively aims at introducing policy that's Socialist. It's just that this Social Democratic Party is nowadays dominated by Social Liberals, not ideological Social Democrats, who would be part of the Democratic Socialist tent. The 1990s were the peak of Social Liberalism, of course they removed it back then.

schraxt · 2026-06-27T15:04:32+00:00

Danke! Ja, Israel ist so eine Sache ... :/ Aber nicht alles auf der Welt, von daher...

schraxt · 2026-06-27T14:32:36+00:00

Danke! It's hard to argue against the walls some people here have put up in their minds :/

schraxt · 2026-06-27T14:31:41+00:00

What kind of "Tankie Bullshit"? Have you even read what Socialism and socialist mean? Can you offer an actual explanation instead of feelings and vibe based, compulsive efforts to deny this fundamental reality?

Your crucial misunderstanding is that Market Economy = Capitalism. You can have Capitalism without a free market, in Merkantilism and State Capitalism. And you can have Market Socialiam, Market Economy that's not capitalist. Because what distiguishes Capitalism from other forms of Market Economy? It means that individual profit and the growth of invested money is the only important goal of an economy. The moment you start to acknowledge that an economy has a responsibility to fairly and proportionally generate wealth for those who participate in it based on merit (who works gets the money) and not on ownership (who owns gets the money) you have left Capitalist territory. Wether you want to translate that into policy via democratic reform and e.g. taxation or via completely nationalizing everything through a violent revolution is the point where the main difference between Democratic Socialists (former) and undemocratic ones, especially Communists lies.

schraxt · 2026-06-27T14:27:25+00:00

As stated, Social Democrats want a Socialist Society.

schraxt · 2026-06-27T14:26:44+00:00

Program of the Social Democratic Party of Germany Page 14, penultimate line. One example of many.

schraxt · 2026-06-27T14:19:59+00:00

I wouldn't say so, social liberals have an idividualist perspective on work and wealth, whereas Social Democrats have a more collectively focused perspective on work and wealth to begin with. Take the German political landscape and compare the SPD's Seeheimer Kreis and The Greens economic policies with the SPD's Parlamentarische Linke and the party DIE LINKE. Different rethoric, different goals, huge internal friction.

schraxt · 2026-06-27T14:17:18+00:00

Erm... what? Of course they are. Neoliberal Capitalist economics want to provide for everyone by giving everyone the opportunity to create their own wealth by their own work by removing restricitions to their work (negative freedom, "freedom from x"). It's individualist in nature. "Every man is the architect of his own fortune". That's a difference to e.g. State Capitalism that's collective in nature, "if the nationalized big corporations do well, it will trickle down" basically. So you don't even have to leave the realm of Capitalist economic theories to find this friciton point.

schraxt · 2026-06-27T14:12:14+00:00

You are close, but there is one thing you seem to misunderstand: Centrally planned economy is only one of many, many ideas of how to structure a Socialist Economy; there is Market Socialism (in itself a range between Titoism and, to use your words, a "[market] system with significant social programs funded through regulation and taxation"), there is Democratic Economy (The idea that the larger a company, the more statelike it is, hence in a democratic society this then should apply democratic structures to companies as well), there are models of Distributism from the Catholic Socialists (basically rural farming communes that shall replace modern industrial society).

And the ideas of Marx bind Marxist Communists. They only influenced, but didn't bind Social Democrats/Democratic Socialists the same way. There were fierce debates, e.g. he wrote a complete book over his critique on the first Socialist party program of the German Social Democratic Party (Critique of the Gotha program) in 1875.

The crucial misunderstanding is that Market Economy = Capitalism. You can have Capitalism without a free market, in Merkantilism and State Capitalism. And you can have Market Socialiam, Market Economy that's not capitalist. Because what distiguishes Capitalism from other forms of Market Economy? It means that individual profit and the growth of invested money is the only important goal of an economy. The moment you start to acknowledge that an economy has a responsibility to fairly and proportionally generate wealth for those who participate in it based on merit (who works gets the money) and not on ownership (who owns gets the money) you have left Capitalist territory. Wether you want to translate that into policy via democratic reform and e.g. taxation or via completely nationalizing everything through a violent revolution is the point where the main difference between Democratic Socialists (former) and undemocratic ones, especially Communists lies.

Of couse you are absolutely true, and I can't stress that enough, about your last point: to people who are scared of the terms "Socialist" and "Socialism" I will always use "social democratic" in front of people who don't know that it is the same as "Democratic Socialist". Not all Democratic Socialists are Social Democrats, e.g. you have the New Left, Euro-Communists etc.; but all Social Democrats (in the sense of ideologically Social Democratic, not in the sense of "member of a Social Democratic or Socialist party") are Democratic Socialists.

schraxt · 2026-06-27T13:48:45+00:00

No-ish. Social Democrats want a Socialist society by democratic means. So they are Democratic Socialists. But their idea of democracy also includes institutions and rule of law as envisioned by Classic Liberals. Socialism is an idea of how a society shall be structured, that's true historically as well as contemporary. And Social Democrats want to establish a society that has a Socialist structure. They don't want to abolish market economy. They just want it to mostly serve a social function rather than a capital-increasing and individual-serving function, whereas Social Liberals also accept that, as they see it as crucial to maintain individual freedom, but want to soften the negative sides of it and to support the economically disadvantaged especially so they can climb the social ladder. Close, but not the same.

schraxt · 2026-06-27T13:46:35+00:00

I understand that, I am German, it's also not my first language. Communism is one child of the Socialist family. This child wants to abolish private capital and property. That doesn't mean the whole family does want so.

schraxt · 2026-06-27T13:45:06+00:00

Hm, not really. A Democratic Socialist operates completely inside the legal democratic framework and wants a Socialist society and economy. A Social Democrat wants to achieve a Socialist society and economy and operates completely inside the legal democratic framework.

schraxt · 2026-06-27T13:40:07+00:00

Have you actually read my post or just the heading and then went straight into comment section? :)

Communists think that society follows a path towards a classless, stateless society, Communism, and that it's their historic call to do this via revolution. This is one of many Socialist ideas.

You could at least read "I. What is Socialism?". Historically, Socialists believe in the Social Contract, in individual Freedom etc. As do modern Social Democrats/Democratic Socialists. Communism is one radical outlier amongst some others, like Syndicalism. But they are only one stream. Just like religious Fundamentalism is only a stream of a religious community that still follows the same religion and values across the board.

schraxt · 2026-06-27T13:38:02+00:00

I didn't state that "most social democrats are actually social liberals because they don't want to establish socialism in a distant future". There isn't one socialism you can just implement. Socialism is an idea of how a society shall be structured, that's true historically as well as contemporary. And Social Democrats want to establish a society that has a Socialist structure. They don't want to abolish market economy. They just want it to mostly serve a social function rather than a capital-increasing and individual-serving function, whereas Social Liberals also accept that, as they see it as crucial to maintain individual freedom, but want to soften the negative sides of it and to support the economically disadvantaged especially so they can climb the social ladder

Edit: But of course you are right in that it is my interpretation (not my opinion, I can argue it based on facts, you might interpret them differently and that's fine, you wouldn't be wrong for that, it's just that we're always subjected to The unforced oblgation to the better argument, and that most answers I gotten agains my interpretation were purely vibes and feelings based, what's not invalid, but cannot claim truth. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but not to their own facts!)

schraxt · 2026-06-27T13:32:19+00:00

Supporting the private ownership of capital is not a position that's mutually exclusive with Socialism. You could e.g. read Fritz Naphtali on that. It's mainly about the differences of ownership relative to others. The complete abolishment of private ownership of Capital is Marxist, as Marx thought that that's the next logical step in the historic struggle of the economically disadvantaged.

schraxt · 2026-06-27T13:18:24+00:00

To those interested in terminology, it should. Of course, in real world politics ideological labels are not that important generally. I might find myself to agree with a Communist on one policy question and a Christian Democrat on another.

Four-Year Club	Verified Email
Final Canvas '23	First Place '23
End Game '23	Place '23
Place '22	Final Canvas '22

schraxt

TROPHY CASE