Democratic Socialists

[LOLseph Stalin]

I'm just curious on what Revleft's stance on Democratic Socialists is. I'm not talking reformist social democrats, but anti-capitalists who prefer to use democratic methods rather than violent revolution to overthrow capitalism. People like Hugo Chavez I suppose. Are they restricted here or are they allowed to post freely on the basis they're anti-capitalist?

P.S-I'm personally not a democratic socialist, but I know a few and I consider them comrades of mine.

[Kindness]

Democratic methods and violent revolution aren't the only options -- non-violent revolutionary tactics (general strikes, non-cooperation) are also possible.

Personally -- I can't speak for all of RevLeft -- I have no problem with democratic socialists using elections, reforms, etc., as tactics, but I don't think that those alone are sufficient to bring about socialist change. I'm also dead-set against violent "revolution" on ethical grounds: it is immoral and destructive to other human beings and nature. I think non-violent revolution is the only way to bring about lasting structural change.

[Kalinin's Facial Hair]

How would the expropriation of the bourgeoisie go pacifically? I don't think anyone prefers a violent revolution; revolutionaries just recognize the unfortunate necessity of violence.

I know some self-proclaimed democratic socialists. Needless do say that this is just an excuse to surrender to parliament and abandon revolution (ie, renounce anti-capitalism, becoming reformists at best).

I'd say that it's not even idealism, it's naive.

EDIT: Just realized that maybe there was no discussion intended itt?

[Kindness]

How would the expropriation of the bourgeoisie go pacifically? I don't think anyone prefers a violent revolution; revolutionaries just recognize the unfortunate necessity of violence.

I know some self-proclaimed democratic socialists. Needless do say that this is just an excuse to surrender to parliament and abandon revolution (ie, renounce anti-capitalism, becoming reformists at best).

I'd say that it's not even idealism, it's naive.

EDIT: Just realized that maybe there was no discussion intended itt?

Violence is never necessary, it is evil and fundamentally reactionary. Personally, I'd prefer no revolution at all over a violent revolution. The ends just don't justify the means.

[Sentinel]

INH, socialists who believe socialism can be achieved through parliamentary means are called reformists and such are restricted, like I tried to explain in my reply to you in 'Unfair restrictions'. And like I also said, threads discussing board policy are not allowed in OI.

But if you wish to discuss how revolutionary left (as in not this board but people with our ideology) views Chavez - and/or 'democratic socialism' vs revolutionary leftism more generally - you may start a new thread on that subject.

Closed.