is a socialist democracy possible?

[IronFist_of_proletarians]

havent seen it

[Q]

Socialism starts with the taking over of power by the working class, a radical democratic act of political emancipation.

Given that your post is so short, I'm not sure how much more I could reply. If you're at all interested that is.

[AnonymousOne]

havent seen it

I suspect a troll based on your username and the fact that you seem to be asking if socialism has to be a dictatorship, but I'll answer you honestly.

The only way to achive democracy is through a socialist revolution, the people can not make the decisions in a society when they have to rely upon the Capitalist class for their livelihood.

The only way to achieve socialism, or a classless society is through democracy. If the people are not making the choices than we have simply subsituted the bourgeois with a group of professional bureaucrats who own the means of production.

Are either possible? Yes, I honestly believe that a democratic form of socialism can exist. We're seeing a lot of information agitation, which is very exciting for the prospect of a truly democratic uprising against the bourgeois.

People are holding mass gatherings ousting their government's across the world. People are sitting in chatrooms planning strikes to steal information from the world's military and governmental organizations.

Both of these "movements" are populist, they are the people taking action through democratic means and acting as a collective.

[IronFist_of_proletarians]

.

The only way to achieve socialism, or a classless society is through democracy. If the people are not making the choices than we have simply subsituted the bourgeois with a group of professional bureaucrats who own the means of production.

i totally agree there, these oppressive regimes that call themselves socialist are a joke, you cant repress peoples opinions forever, eventually the people will take control and govern themselves accordingly

[CommunityBeliever]

Capitalist democracy is not possible because you will always just get a phony-democracy ruled by the bourgeoisie. Socialist democracy on the other hand has already happened before in the Paris commune and it is within our reach today.

[Ceauşescu]

havent seen it
yes and no, as for me, I doubt there could be true political freedom in socialism, as a multiparty system would be a problem(right-wing ideology).:confused:

[IronFist_of_proletarians]

Capitalist democracy is not possible because you will always just get a phony-democracy ruled by the bourgeoisie. Socialist democracy on the other hand has already happened before in the Paris commune and it is within our reach today.

seriously exciting stuff

[Desperado]

"Socialism" and "democracy" are pretty much synonymous on this forum. Socialism means for us that the people hold the power. The question is what kind of "democracy" or what kind of "socialism". To some the claimed examples of a dictatorship of the proletariat in Russia, China, Albania are an embodiment of socialism (and hence democracy), others will cite regions of Spain during the Civil War. The best reference point is the Paris Commune, which almost all will agree is a good example of socialism and democracy.

[IronFist_of_proletarians]

"Socialism" and "democracy" are pretty much synonymous on this forum. Socialism means for us that the people hold the power. The question is what kind of "democracy" or what kind of "socialism". To some the claimed examples of a dictatorship of the proletariat in Russia, China, Albania are an embodiment of socialism (and hence democracy), others will cite regions of Spain during the Civil War. The best reference point is the Paris Commune, which almost all will agree is a good example of socialism and democracy.

by democracy i mean, people have a right to choose their leaders based on a vote

[Ballyfornia]

Ideally it would look something like this, http://www.marxists.org/archive/james-clr/works/1956/06/every-cook.htm

[DrStrangelove]

by democracy i mean, people have a right to choose their leaders based on a vote

Question, why do the people need leaders? Can they not lead themselves?

[Reznov]

Using history as our reference, no. So long as Capitalism continues.

[Ballyfornia]

Question, why do the people need leaders? Can they not lead themselves?

Aren't you a marxist-leninist?

[Pretty Flaco]

yes and no, as for me, I doubt there could be true political freedom in socialism, as a multiparty system would be a problem(right-wing ideology).:confused:

Liberal democracies allowed monarchist parties. I think any attempt to revert back would be even less successful in a socialist society because a larger amount of people would be empowered. The capitalist class opposed the monarchists. The proletarian class would oppose the capitalists.

[OhYesIdid]

It better be, or else I'm wating my time. Anon just won this thread, though. Again, if you despise marxist-leninist dicatorships there's plenty of libertarian and anarchist theory to read up on. (http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/anarchist_archives/kropotkin/conquest/toc.html)


There can be no social democracy while there is economical tyranny, and there can be no economical democracy while there is social tyranny