What are social-democrats?

[comradeRed:)]

Hey comrades! :)


I have heard about these people for a while but don't fully understand what they are? Are they even socialist's? :confused:

[Broletariat]

From what I gather they are Socialists that are reformists rather than revolutionaries. They seek to change the system by using the system instead of by using outside means.

[¿Que?]

They're just democrats who happen to be outgoing at parties and social events. You know, social democrats? LOL. Sorry for the stupid joke. I have nothing to offer here.:blink:

[A.R.Amistad]

Its safe to say that they aren't really socialists, since Tony Blair technically could be labeled a "social-democrat," Brian Moore called himself that, the PSOE in Spain carries the name and various other opportunistic individuals and organizations carry this hackneyed crucifix of a label. I think the "social" in social-democrat has become little more than a relic of the past, since in every western nation except the US social-democratic parties represent the interests of the liberal bourgeoisie. In the earlier years of the twentieth century they may have been somewhat socialist in their rhetoric, but today you can expect nothing but hollow utilitarian liberal nonsense from such a "socialist," so its safe to say no, social-democrats are not socialists.

[Red Commissar]

It is necessary to know what social democracy was in the past, and what social democracy is currently.

In the late 1800s and early 1900s, social democracy was a catch-all for various groups who believed that a transition from capitalism to socialism could be achieved through their respective governments. Marxists were also present in social democratic parties, and so by extension many believed it possible to transition into communism.

"Social Democrat(ic)" was prefixed to many parties in Europe before World War I. In many cases as Marxism began to develop different interpretations and schisms, they became a chaotic multi-tendency big tent party. The Bolsheviks and Mensheviks, for example, arose out of split in the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party.

After World War I, the larger social democratic parties largely lost their Marxist wings after factions developed within those that set themselves against the Soviet Union. From this point on, they focused on simply transitioning to socialism through progressive legislation. To this end many social democratic parties typically nationalized parts of the economy, provided a large amount of social services, and made "labor-friendly" policies. Private property was still kept, however, and thus no socialist society was realized.

Some social democratic parties maintained two factions, a faction committed to "Democratic Socialism", and another that favored regulations.

As the decades rolled on, social democratic parties continued drifting right, to the centre of their respective country's politics.

With the rise of neoliberalism in the end of the 1980s, many social democratic parties completed their drift into their current state. Rather than arguing for for a transition to socialism, most focus on a middle path between capitalist and socialist principles, often being termed "third way".

However in practice the situation was much different. As evidenced by the policies of New Labour in the UK, and the actions of the social democratic parties in France (Parti Socialiste) and Germany (SPD) in the 1990s, their third-way policies were merely a a cover for their drift to the centre. Though they claim to "middle-ground" between capitalism and socialism, they are still in favor of capitalism, albeit in a more "regulated" form. To claim that it's an "acceptable" middle ground between two economic principles, it would have to be different, and business still exist in the same manner they would in a capitalist country.

Social Democracy currently is a concept that attempts to regulate capitalism in such a way that they think will make them "fairer". Social Democracy completed this after most of them lost their genuine democratic socialist wings who went on to form their own parties, and they are no longer "socialist", but simply progressive. The use of red and even the term "socialist" is a relic from the times they still practiced "democratic socialism".

[Die Neue Zeit]

I should add that, in some cases, mainstream social democracy today may be more right-wing than some instances of progressivism (at least the more populist parts of progressivism). I've read "progressive" blogs in the US calling for transforming finance into a permanent public utility and for returning to FDR-level taxation levels.

[Comrade Gwydion]

Old Style Soc-Dems are indeed socialists who use the current system to make a gradual transition. Those do not exist anymore. There are however still "Social-Populists", who come rather close to the soc-dems, but not quite, and the 'Soc-Dem parties', who are simply neo-liberal but were founded decades ago as socdems. :(

[ContrarianLemming]

Old Style Soc-Dems are indeed socialists who use the current system to make a gradual transition. Those do not exist anymore. There are however still "Social-Populists", who come rather close to the soc-dems, but not quite, and the 'Soc-Dem parties', who are simply neo-liberal but were founded decades ago as socdems. :(

what social democracy used to be is now democratic socialism
what social democracy is now is market capitalism with strong regulation

[Comrade Gwydion]

what social democracy used to be is now democratic socialism
what social democracy is now is market capitalism with strong regulation

By that reasoning we should accept that An-Caps are anarchists too.
When I use the word Social Democracy I usually refer to the original meaning.
When refering to modern 'social democrats' (like PS (fr), SPD (de), PvdA (nl)) I usually use the term Labour or Social-Liberals.

[HammerAlias]

Social democrats advocate a mixed economic structure, a secular society, a fair trade over free trade mentality, progressive taxation and private ownership.

[Lenina Rosenweg]

Social Democrats like PASOK in Greece are the left wing of capitalism. They are brought into power as the kinder, gentler face to make neo-liberalism more palatable to the working class. Social democrats,despite their interesting history, today, like the Democrats in the US, are the enemy.

[ZeroNowhere]

From what I gather they are Socialists that are reformists rather than revolutionaries. They seek to change the system by using the system instead of by using outside means.
A reformist is somebody who seeks to simply reform the system, rather than change to a different one, and therefore one can hardly have a reformist who is a socialist. Modern 'social democrats' are generally reformists, and thus support capitalism.

Socialists are necessarily revolutionary; although they may support different means of attaining their end, their end is an associated mode of production, rather than simply a reformed sort of capitalism.

[chegitz guevara]

A social democrat is anyone who thinks that socialism can be brought about without revolution, without the worker class (alone or at the head of a coalition of classes) forcefully seizing power from the ruling class.

We should recognize that there can be very militant social democrats, people who look and sound like communists or anarchists in rhetoric, but whose practical activity is completely oriented towards reformism. For example, a group could talk about revolution in its papers and speeches, but in its trade union work, never brings up the necessity for a break with the system, etc.