Democracy and Socialism

[Mahatma Gandhi]

Every human being in the world has a vote. So, if people really wanted changes, wouldn't they vote for those who try to bring about those changes? For instance, if people really hated homophobia, they'd never dream of voting for a party that has no plans to tackle this problem.

What I am trying to say is this: if workers really cared about socialist ideals like equality, justice, and all that, wouldn't they vote for a socialist party? Since they hardly ever do, would it be reasonable to assume that most workers want to be part of the capitalist system, despite its problems?

[#FF0000]

No.

[Dean]

Every human being in the world has a vote.

So... maybe 33% of human beings in the world have "representative democratic votes" which allow them, every couple of years, to vote betweeen 1 or 2 candidates chosen by the elite, and you have the nerve to blame the whole world population for the government's acts? What the hell?

[Nuvem]

One also very important factor to point out is that not everyone is educated in politics, and there are EXTREME misgivings regarding leftist ideologies. Bourgeois governments actively turn people away from electing our parties democratically with misinformation and slander propaganda. In America, for example, your average Joe industrial worker, unionized or otherwise (there aren't many left in either category), probably buys the idea that Communism= North Korea and Stalin and Socialism= Obama and Hitler. (It's amazing how many people in the States think Hitler and Stalin were best buddies just because they had a non-aggression pact and Molotov-Ribbentrop. Nevermind that one nation smashed the other militarily.)

There's also the fact that most Bourgeois governments have de jure systems in place to prevent "third parties" from gaining power. The American electoral system, for example, is grossly biased against so-called "third parties" and is hopelessly tied down to the Bourgeois, centrist-capitalist Republican and Democrat parties.

Social democracy, I'm afraid, just doesn't work. Too much misinformation, too little interest by constituents, and too much revisionism and centrism on the parts of Social Democrats themselves.

[Leonid Brozhnev]

Gross oversimplification imho.

[Demogorgon]

So... maybe 33% of human beings in the world have "representative democratic votes" which allow them, every couple of years, to vote betweeen 1 or 2 candidates chosen by the elite, and you have the nerve to blame the whole world population for the government's acts? What the hell?
Yeah. I can't recall the precise number, 33% seems a little low-probably closer to 40% but a minority nonetheless of the world's population live in ployarchies and nobody lives in a full democracy, though notably those that come closest do tend to be the most egalitarian.

[MortyMingledon]

Social democracy is vulnerable to influence from capitalists (as it tolerates capitalism). Politics requires money (thinks campaigns, advertisements etc.) and the rich are more than willing to dump money on political candidates until they're submissive and will vote in their favor in parliament.

Representative democracy also doesn't fulfill a basic requirement for a political system: that every human should have a personal say in any decision that affects him/her.

[Die Rote Fahne]

socialism = democracy

[Che a chara]

Every human being in the world has a vote. So, if people really wanted changes, wouldn't they vote for those who try to bring about those changes? For instance, if people really hated homophobia, they'd never dream of voting for a party that has no plans to tackle this problem.

What I am trying to say is this: if workers really cared about socialist ideals like equality, justice, and all that, wouldn't they vote for a socialist party? Since they hardly ever do, would it be reasonable to assume that most workers want to be part of the capitalist system, despite its problems?

Well socialism has been demonised, and partly rightly so, be it because of past actions carried out under the guise of socialism, or because of scaremongering propaganda by the bourgeois and the weakness and inability of the left to challenge these views.

A lot of people are happy enough to live under an illusionary democratic society, where they believe they are free and not being exploited. Of course these conditions feed an apparent sense of pride and selfishness and a fear of change.

If there isn't a proper alternative out there and the means to popularise these positions, then why and how would people be made aware ?

[Bud Struggle]

Social democracy is vulnerable to influence from capitalists (as it tolerates capitalism).

Communist governments have always been vulnerable to the whims and dictates of "Glorious Leaders."

[RGacky3]

Wow, where to begin,


Communist governments have always been vulnerable to the whims and dictates of "Glorious Leaders."

Thats true but those arn't the only options.


and the weakness and inability of the left to challenge these views.

Also the Left is way outfinanced.


A lot of people are happy enough to live under an illusionary democratic society, where they believe they are free and not being exploited. Of course these conditions feed an apparent sense of pride and selfishness and a fear of change.


I disagree, but keep in mind that for most people who live in a capitalist representative state, they are tought from day 1 that the only options are the ones presented to them, just like in the days of monarchies the options were one king or another, people did'nt understnad that you don't need a king, Capitalism has always been presumed and the ruling class makes damn sure and spends a lot of effort making that so. People are not happy, people are frusturated, but they are never presented an option (thats our job).

Ok now to the meaty moronic origional post


So, if people really wanted changes, wouldn't they vote for those who try to bring about those changes? For instance, if people really hated homophobia, they'd never dream of voting for a party that has no plans to tackle this problem.


if you are against homophobia but one part is homophobic and the other party has tons of other policies you don't like, which one do you pick? What if your a gay rich republican? What if your a pro-gun gay guy?

Also homophobia is not a economic issue (i.e. an issue of real power), so there is a HUGE difference.


What I am trying to say is this: if workers really cared about socialist ideals like equality, justice, and all that, wouldn't they vote for a socialist party? Since they hardly ever do, would it be reasonable to assume that most workers want to be part of the capitalist system, despite its problems?

Because socialist parties don't get it done, first of all the real power is not in the seats of parliment or congress, its in corporate board rooms, THATS the power, approaching the issue of socialist only as a matter of regular politics is rediculous, in my opinion voting in a socialist party is only something that might help stem the power of the capitalist class, its a step but thats it, the fact is Socialist party people in power are subject to the exact same economic pressures from the capitalist class as other parties, unless the economic power of big buisiness is attacked voting won't be enough.

We don't live in a Democracy, not in Europe and less so in the United States, whenever its a battle between voters and big buisiness big buisiness ALWAYS wins (thats why I say homophobia is different, big buisiness does'nt have a dog in that fight), and thats what we need to change.

[syndicat]

Voting every few years for oligarchs who have the backing of various sections of the elite classes is not going to ever bring about either real democracy or real socialism.

First of all, real democracy doesn't exist. We have no real control over what the politicians do after being elected. Look at the disappointment of liberals with Obama...a perfectly predictable outcome if one had been in the know about Obama's conservatism and support for capitalist ideology and close links to the elite (as shown by all the warmed over Clintonoids in his service). I was just saying to a woman i met yesterday that politicians are lying snakes and she agreed with me. She's relatively nonpolitical.

So, in the USA half the working class doesn't vote because they perceive this untrustworthiness of the politicians and see that the two parties don't represent their interests.

And then there's the corporate media acting as gatekeepers for who gets taken sersiously or treated with respect. my local city council rep is a socialist and he is constantly attacked and denounced in the local corporate controlled media.

Real socialism has to be based on 1. workers directly managing the industries where we work, and 2. democracy being strongly controlled at the base through the face to face democracy of assemblies, in workplaces and neighborhoods.

this is not likely to come about through passively voting for politicians. it's only likely to come about through the heating up of the class struggle and the development of class consciousness to the point that the working class is moving towards a takeover of responsibility for social production.

the socalled Communist countries had nothing to do with real socialism. they were repressive bureaucratic class dominated regimes.

[mikelepore]

What I am trying to say is this: if workers really cared about socialist ideals like equality, justice, and all that, wouldn't they vote for a socialist party? Since they hardly ever do, would it be reasonable to assume that most workers want to be part of the capitalist system, despite its problems?

I agree with most of that except I would reword the part about "despite its problems." Most workers believe in capitalism because they DON'T KNOW that it causes our problems.

Some of the leading theories about why society has problems are:

(1) These problems will be inevitable in any human society because because reality is never perfect, so grow up and face the truth, and stop whining about it;

(2) Our problem are caused by some immoral pattern of human behavior, such as an insufficient amount of prayer and church attendance, children need to be disciplined more often, people have been corrupted by reading obscene books, etc.;

(3) Our problems will be solved by finding the "good leaders", who must be out there somewhere but haven't been discovered yet, and when we find them they will think of just the right public policies to support.

(4) Single reform suggestions that don't challenge the system itself -- our problems will solved when taxes get raised, when taxes get lowered, when more schools get built, when the population gets reduced, when more people receive therapy from psychologists.

The socialist answer, that each kind of socioeconomic system generates particular outcomes, and the fundamental system can be changed, is never discussed or considered at all by most people. It is our job to teach people that. A revolutionary is above all a teacher.

I always emphasize that socialist education is conceptual, it has to demonstrate specific concepts, in the same way that science education has to explain that the earth revolves around the sun, the heart pumps the blood, etc. Socialist education isn't emotive, that is, it isn't about making people feel angry about injustice. It's about promoting understanding of system characteristics: why the profit motive must be a malfunctioning system, why class division must be a malfunctioning system.

[Ele'ill]

Every human being in the world has a vote. So, if people really wanted changes, wouldn't they vote for those who try to bring about those changes? For instance, if people really hated homophobia, they'd never dream of voting for a party that has no plans to tackle this problem.

What I am trying to say is this: if workers really cared about socialist ideals like equality, justice, and all that, wouldn't they vote for a socialist party? Since they hardly ever do, would it be reasonable to assume that most workers want to be part of the capitalist system, despite its problems?


First briefly- your vote counts more towards systems and organizations that you've never heard of than towards the candidate and their public proposals.

The semi-left parties do not get adequate media coverage. This has a huge effect on their campaign success- there is also the issue of media slandering and lying which ends up scaring and confusing people into being either democrat or republican- in the US anyways.

The lies continually spewed about true leftist politics keeps people not having the slightest inkling that socialism has anything to do with worker's rights or anything that effects people's day to day activities. The public literally doesn't know.

As for other countries in say the Global South- they continuously have illegitimate governments upheld by the U.S. or democratically elected governments off'd by the US.

This is a broad generalization of politics outside of the US and we'd need to look at specific examples to be thorough.

[it_ain't_me]

Every human being in the world has a vote.

what does this even mean