Every radical left organization regardless if they are Hoxhaist or anarchist should adopt the label "democratic socialist". Normies fucking LOVE the term and Bernie popularized the hell out of it. And technically, every single Marxist and anarchist tendency IS 'democratic socialism' so we wouldn't be dishonest at all.
I think it's a great way to attract progressive and socdem normies into the anticapitalist movement. What are your guys thoughts?
Not arguing for reformism, just adopting the demsoc label. Every single revolutionary socialist ideology is democratic to some degree except maybe Bordigism. Why shouldn't we take advantage of a popular label?
I'm actually ok with this, so long as you use it to push an adamantly anti-capitalist message. Entryism is important. But as soon as the person starts backing off you need to use groupthink to make that person "not a comrade". Socdem bullshit is not acceptable.
No. Socialism is inherently democratic - the label of “democratic socialism” implies otherwise. Pushing it will only serve to bolster any misconceptions that people may already have about socialism.
bordigism is democratic it just doesn´t support the ruling democracy it tries to change
Agreed, and we should replace "democrat" in the degenerated sense with "electoralist." Direct democracy would be a lovely angle of approach. "No, I'm not an electoralist, I'm a democratic socialist. Democracy must come from the people, it can't come from electing representatives chosen by corporate lobbyists." Push the studies demonstrating that elections and policies in the US reflect the interests of the 0.0.1% and support neighborhood initiatives, point to the grassroots disaster relief efforts etc.
Democratic socialism implies that its origins are not democratic. Better word it in a way that its part of the country, part of the nation, more relatable that way. What about Not Socialism?
That's a good point. Historically, socialists used to call themselves social democrats even.
In Portugal, the communist party refers to the dictatorship of the proletariat stage as "advanced democracy", which I think is pretty cool.
Every American communist I know of is a Bernie bro democratic socialist anyway.
Let's face it. Only a LARPing good for nothing edgy kid would seriously call himself Maoist-Horchaist Anarcho-Minarcho-Communalist or something.
You faggots don't even realise the Bernie did more for daddy Marx in America, and the picture is very much related, than a million of you kids would.
Historically, every Marxist politician called himself Social democrat. Lenin was the first to rebrand, because it was opportune, and there is no sense to cling to the brand if it's weighing you down.
The problem with the term is that it, in just two words, manages to convey the idea of a failed project that can only be redeemed by modeling ourselves after American-style totalitarianism. Since that's all "democracy" means today anyways.
It's a disgusting, cowardly concession to capital. A reflection of the communist movement's pathetic inability to see past the bourgeois model of state in any significant way. This cause will go NOWHERE until people like OP are seen as a laughing stock among all communists.
Absolutely. We need to convey that we have no interests in keeping the bourgeois institutions on which American government operates, i.e., congress and the constitution. A socialist America will have democracy, but Democracy in burger language means American democracy as it exists today.
But enough about Marxism-Leninism.
Why do millenials keep forgetting that socialism was already tried? They fail to realize that they are materialist conservatives.
Why shouldn't it be tried again?
Feudalism has already been tried too, but try telling that to an ancap
This Cirno is making me think weird things…
This. Just call yourself a socialist and hide your power level.
"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."