Social Democratic Illusions....

[RadioRaheem84]

The Monthly Review article titled, " Capitalism:The Absurd System", had me really thinking about their criticism of social democracies. In it the authors assert that the most coveted social democratic country, Sweden under Olof Palme, was only able to implement because favorable policies toward workers because of three reasons:

1.) The USSR was right around the corner.

2.) Worker radicalization and class struggle.

3.) The bourgeoisie of Sweden were still part of the financial and productive elite of the world. They had a reserve army in the third world, arms deals, and investments to keep the afloat.

Now based on point 3, concessions were allowed to keep any socialist revolution at bay.

Could the same be said for most of the social democratic countries?

Howard Zinn outlined the Crisis of Democracy Tri-Lateral Commission Report of 1976*. In it the major US business players decided that too many concessions were made and that stagnation was coming forward, so roll backs were required.

So was Social Democracy this whole time an illusion and totally at the whim of the financial elite to decide when enough was enough?




* It should be noted that the old Tri-Lateral website had all of their reports available to read for free, but now one has to pay. I wish I would've saved a copy of that report. Anyone have one?

[Raúl Duke]

2.) Worker radicalization and class struggle.

Howard Zinn outlined the Crisis of Democracy Tri-Lateral Commission Report of 1976*. In it the major US business players decided that too many concessions were made and that stagnation was coming forward, so roll backs were required. The system cannot ultimately afford concessions, however, the reasons why the concessions were rolled back may have to do with declining class struggle due defeats in the recent past (In the late 60s-early 70s there was a strike wave in some European nations like Italy, France, and perhaps the UK as well) and perhaps a "tame the working class" role played by "socialist" and "communist" parties and some unions.


So was Social Democracy this whole time an illusion and totally at the whim of the financial elite to decide when enough was enough?

Yes and no

To the elites, as a class, social democracy is a temporary thing because perhaps the system cannot maintain it indefinitely. But you cannot roll back concessions unless the working class is in a demoralized/non-militant state, because if you try to roll those concessions back when the working class is militant one would expect a strong reaction towards such an act.