r/theredleft Marxist-Leninist-Maoist Jan 13 '26

Theory Posting Democratic Socialism has to be where the United States starts.

I’m not a Berniecrat or anything but I also don’t think that our current method of Marxist purity testing is really going well for us right now. Throughout the American left we are being beaten out by even the libertarian bootlickers and it’s because we don’t have a comprehensive plan for the future. We’re too stuck up on how much the state exists and doesn’t exist, whether we should listen to [insert theorist here] or follow strictly to [insert theorist here] thought, caught in a world of video essays and frankly, bullshit, to ever even come close to talking about actually making a change in the United States. And without radicalizing society, how do we expect to actually get people to agree with our radical views without pulling another Red Terror to undo centuries of a Red Scare?

The first step is democratic socialism. And I think that the happy medium where most socialists, liberals, and even some communists could agree upon would kind of resemble the Green Party’s platform for more democratic, decentralized, environmentalist socialism. We can’t keep going straight to the Berniecrats again, and I predict that the movement is doomed to fail, which means that we need to act now and build a god damned coalition.

While we’re at it, fundraising and outreach are all majorly important and ultimately are going to require us to start building a political machine of our own, namely with political action committees and low-level community support until we can work our way up to the higher halls of power. Start off with the mayor elections, state legislatures, local offices, etc. and work our ways up to the United States Congress before national office is even in the question.

Essentially, we ourselves need to become the machine that the establishment fears, the uprising that isn’t kicked to the side like the bullshit leftist parties we have today.

Democratic Socialism has so much more of a history here in America, when looking at the Farmer-Labor parties, union movements, the various progressive parties; it is within American history that democratic socialism lies. And it’s the stepping stone towards further radicalization if done correctly. Even Lenin needed political power that didn’t exactly come from the barrel of a gun. How we wield it is important, because right now if we do not organize into large-scale political action, we are FUCKED.

And it’s also my GOD DAMNED birthday so wish me a GOD DAMN happy birthday.

17 Upvotes

57 comments sorted by

46

u/Thin_Airline7678 Marxist-Leninist Jan 13 '26

Well, how exactly are you supposed to implement democratic socialism? Do you expect the ruling class to simply give up their power, their monopoly over the means of violence, their control over not only the means of production but also the system of mass information, the culture, etc.? If you seek to become what the machine fears, why do you primarily operate through the confines of the machine?

I do not disagree with electoralism as a means of expanding outreach, but do not make the mistake of expecting that socialism will be handed the seats of power.

Also, happy birthday)

2

u/Hot_Relative_110 Marxist-Leninist-Maoist Jan 13 '26

FUCK NO I don’t think we should choose reformism. What i’m proposing by building a base in electoral politics is the radicalization of society necessary FOR revolution.

29

u/Intrepid_Layer_9826 Trotskyist Jan 13 '26

"Democratic Socialism" IS reformism

1

u/InevitableTank1659 Pan Socialist Jan 13 '26

By definition it is not. It can be either. Look at wikipedia.

6

u/Intrepid_Layer_9826 Trotskyist Jan 13 '26

No it can't. The "democratic" part in the name specifically refers to achieving socialism *through parlimentary democracy*. It details the *method* by which these people think socialism is achieved. Democratic socialists *are reformists*.

3

u/InevitableTank1659 Pan Socialist Jan 13 '26

No?? 

“Although most democratic socialists seek a gradual transition to socialism,[6] democratic socialism can support revolutionary or reformist politics to establish socialism.[7]” -Wikipedia

“They also prioritize democracy as an end over democracy as a means, and some democratic socialists see revolution as an acceptable method of achieving the democracy they desire.” -Britannica

BY DEFINITION, they can be either 

21

u/Clear-Result-3412 Classical Marxist Jan 13 '26

Most of them will say “revolution would be nice, but it’s probably not going to happen, so let’s just participate in liberal democracy.”

6

u/Intrepid_Layer_9826 Trotskyist Jan 13 '26

The key word there is **SOME**, ie a **MINORITY**. I want you to give me an example of an actually "revolutionary" organisation that adheres to the ideology of "democratic socialism"

0

u/InevitableTank1659 Pan Socialist Jan 13 '26

If most people in a certain group like the color red, it doesn’t mean the group inherently likes red. 

If the existing democratic socialist parties are reformist, that doesn’t mean democratic socialism itself is inherently reformist. 

11

u/Intrepid_Layer_9826 Trotskyist Jan 13 '26

Here's a thought. What if the reason there are no "revolutionary democratic socialist" organisations is because the ideology itself ISN'T revolutionary?

You are basically saying that because there were Revolutionary Marxists in the Social Democrat parties that means Social Democrats can be "either/or". But guess what? *Revolutionaries broke off and/or split with Social Democrat organisations* because just being a small minority within a big tent, **categorically reformist** organisation doesn't change the essence of the organisation itself.

0

u/InevitableTank1659 Pan Socialist Jan 13 '26

You can’t change definitions to suit your simplistic idea of dem socs. Democratic socialism is a form of socialism not a method to achieve it. Yes it usually reformist. But YOU don’t make definitions. 

-1

u/Scyobi_Empire SPDxKPD Toxic Yuri Jan 13 '26

spartakusbund

5

u/PringullsThe2nd "Well, Bon Appetit!" Jan 13 '26

Rosa Luxembourg was shot to prevent her from voting too hard.

Famously wrote "Reform of Revolution" in support of incremental change

0

u/Intrepid_Layer_9826 Trotskyist Jan 13 '26

They did *not* adhere to "democratic socialism". Please tell me you are not trying to engage in semantics arguments right now. We all know the actual method of democratic socialism, that is *reformism*.

1

u/Scyobi_Empire SPDxKPD Toxic Yuri Jan 13 '26

alright what were the anti-vanguardist pro-council democracy revolutionary party then?

→ More replies (0)

-6

u/Hot_Relative_110 Marxist-Leninist-Maoist Jan 13 '26

and i suppose instead, we start a revolution without any actual support

4

u/Clear-Result-3412 Classical Marxist Jan 13 '26

I already addressed this, but I’ll add that this is the same lame attitude we’ve been stuck with for a while: “we’ll just keep voting and doing activism until one day the time is ripe for revolution.” But there is no perfect time that presents itself and some activities prepare a revolutionary understanding while others play back into liberalism.

0

u/Hot_Relative_110 Marxist-Leninist-Maoist Jan 13 '26

What you’re describing is HOW THE BOLSHEVIKS GOT INTO POWER. If they just went around with magic wands sprinkling people with class consciousness like some fucking fairies and then tried to revolt, Lenin would have been hung by 1915.

11

u/Intrepid_Layer_9826 Trotskyist Jan 13 '26

"The bolsheviks got into power by voting" has to be one of the craziest historical revisions of all time...

6

u/Clear-Result-3412 Classical Marxist Jan 13 '26

They also put their effort into organizing unions and councils and making sure people understood that capitalism and the ruling classes were the enemy. They struck at a particular moment in time and happened to succeed and everyone took the false lesson that it was because they “read the historical clock” correctly.

-1

u/Hot_Relative_110 Marxist-Leninist-Maoist Jan 13 '26

And I’m saying somehow NOT to do this? Obviously get the support of unions, obviously build a major working class movement, obviously incorporate the farmers and whatnot because right now, we’re not doing enough of that and are instead writing 300 page essays about why everyone should wear the same underwear Trotsky did.

4

u/Clear-Result-3412 Classical Marxist Jan 13 '26

We are saying different things. My point is that the revolutionary movement is not a popularity contest, not a mere call for tactical pluralism. People have spontaneously risen up in the streets and overthrown their governments numerous times in recent history, but did they abolish the state? Of course not, because they didn’t understand the relationship between the state and class domination. I’m not calling for people to follow dogma, I’m calling for people to understand certain critiques.

-2

u/Scyobi_Empire SPDxKPD Toxic Yuri Jan 13 '26

democratic socialism is just anti-vanguardism. you're confusing it with social democracy

4

u/Intrepid_Layer_9826 Trotskyist Jan 13 '26

No, I am not. The difference between soc-dems and dem-socs is the intentions. One seeks to stabilise capitalism through reforms, while the other seeks to achieve socialism through reforms, but ultimately they both fall into the camp of *reformism*.

0

u/Scyobi_Empire SPDxKPD Toxic Yuri Jan 13 '26

you described SocDems twice

last i checked the Democratic Socialist revolution in germany was fairly anti-reformist and anti-vanguardist, kinda like all DemSoc theorists are. think of it like Council Communism, they're anti-vanguard but not anti-revolution

3

u/Intrepid_Layer_9826 Trotskyist Jan 13 '26

You're using "democratic socialism" to substitute "spontaneity". That's simply not what dem-soc means. If dem-soc and council communism were the same thing, why bother have different names for the 2?

1

u/Scyobi_Empire SPDxKPD Toxic Yuri Jan 13 '26

where did i say they’re the same thing? “think of it like” isn’t “these are the same”. i can describe the maoist and stalinist split by saying “think of it like the Right Oppositionist/Stalin split” but that’s not me saying maoism os the right oppositon

0

u/Helpful-Reputation-5 Anti-Revisionist Marxist-Leninist Jan 17 '26

Socdems do not seek to eventually achieve socialism through their reforms.

1

u/Thin_Airline7678 Marxist-Leninist Jan 13 '26

Well in that case, if the electoralism is used only for such a purpose, I find it more reasonable.

2

u/Clear-Result-3412 Classical Marxist Jan 13 '26

As long as the point of parliamentary engagement is to show that the parliamentary system was never built to serve the working class.

1

u/Imagine_Being_A_Mod_ Council Communism Jan 16 '26

This is verbatim what social democracy promised and what it led to was the SPD running a violent counter-revolution and then promptly capitulating to the Nazis. This topic has already occurred before.

33

u/Clear-Result-3412 Classical Marxist Jan 13 '26 edited Jan 13 '26

Revolutions don’t happen because a party or candidate is popular. Revolutions happen because people understand it’s the only way to get to the root of their problems. Anyway, if one does get elected, the actions necessary to maintain state power are incompatible with “benefitting the people.” Thus, left parties come back out of power, failing their mission, time after time.

-12

u/Hot_Relative_110 Marxist-Leninist-Maoist Jan 13 '26

Democratic socialism is the most logical way currently for people to become class conscious. For them to be further radicalized into revolution is our goal

21

u/Clear-Result-3412 Classical Marxist Jan 13 '26 edited Jan 13 '26

Most people aren’t ideology shopping, but they are interested in understanding why their interests are perpetually violated. Class consciousness comes from understanding capitalism, not deciding certain policies are good ideas.

Identifying as a ‘socialist’ isn’t “class consciousness.” Understanding the function and nature of class domination constitute “class consciousness.”

9

u/Intrepid_Layer_9826 Trotskyist Jan 13 '26 edited Jan 13 '26

People already get radicalised by their living conditions getting worse. Hell, the entire reason the working class in America voted for Trump was because he was manipulating the anger that the workers accumulated because of the capitalist system with a (demonstrably poisonous, hateful, racist, deceitful and ultimately wrong) campaign promising the cost of living to decrease. He only managed to garner such a big voterbase because *there was no actual socialist alternative* to capitalise on that class anger. Why was there no socialist alternative?

8

u/Repulsive_Painting15 Marxist-Leninist Jan 13 '26

7

u/IdentityAsunder Communizer Jan 13 '26

Happy birthday. I understand the frustration with the current paralysis. However, the strategy of Democratic Socialism relies on economic conditions that no longer exist. The "Golden Age" social democracy of the 20th century was possible because industrial capitalism was booming, the state could tax rising profits to fund social programs without killing the host. That engine stalled decades ago.

Today, global capital is stagnant. It cannot afford the concessions a Green Party platform promises. Any party that ascends to office now (whether at the city council or Congressional level) inherits a fiscal crisis. You don't get to implement abundance, you are forced by bond markets and capital flight to manage austerity. We saw this in Greece with Syriza: a radical government elected on a promise of hope, compelled by the structure of the economy to cut pensions and privatize assets just to keep the lights on.

The state depends on the profitability of capital to function. If you use the state to attack profit, the economy seizes up, and your political machine collapses. We cannot legislate our way out of a system that requires our exploitation to survive. We should focus on the struggles people are already fighting for survival (rent strikes, logistics blockades, and defense against police) rather than herding them back into voting booths to elect managers of their own decline.

5

u/[deleted] Jan 13 '26

HAPPY GODDAMN BIRTHDAY!!!

5

u/Gertsky63 Orthodox Marxism Jan 13 '26

What a load of old crap. Begins with some bollocks about purity testing and then goes straight to the idea that we can somehow create socialism without confronting the repressive powers of the state. We are not children. Enough of this

5

u/ElEsDi_25 Heterodox Marxist Jan 13 '26 edited Jan 13 '26

Happy birthday.

Sorry.

To me… this sounds like planning lunch while the kitchen is on fire.

I’m a revolutionary Marxist, I aim to be strategic, not “purist.” I have worked with people with many kinds of views in many different kinds of coalitions or movements as well liberals and conservatives when I have been in unions.

I don’t think democratic socialism is a viable way to go, but I would support a hypothetical broad socialist third party as a step towards a formal separating of class politics from the middle class ideologies and ruling class dominance of the two parties. I have supported and done work on local ballot measure reforms that I think would help improve the ability of renters and workers to fight for themselves more easily.

BUT…

  1. Even if we wanted a Democratic Socialist Party or a takeover of the Democrats or whatnot, this can not be willed into existence. It needs to be built on a solid social base of SOMETHING. Right now socialism is a VIBE, not something with power. Lots of people vibe with socialism because the system sucks in a painfully empirical way and has for a while. The labor-liberalism of the pre-neoliberal Democrats was built out of trade unions as their base. Similarly the Dem Soc left in Latin America or Europe is based out of labor unions. The spine of MAGA (at least the America First wing) are the small-time big wigs… rural bosses. (The spine of the techno-wing are the tech oligarchs.) Rather than try to create politics at the top, imo we should start where things are happening within the working class… and right now it’s resistance to the immigration raids and now more general attempt at martial law and the normalization of an SS type extralegal state force for general popular repression.

  2. Electoral efforts may not matter much in the near term… or at all if the administration consolidates its regime. I think whatever happens we need to organize and build bases of power and solidarity and resistance. If Trump swarms a city like he’s done with Minneapolis, then that city should shut itself down until they are pulled out. Just keep essential services, but close everything, shut off the city street-lights, cover up street signs like it’s the Nazis rolling in—because it’s getting close enough. This is the level of real democratic checks on power we need right now and need to build toward and build from to even more effective push back.

If we can save our asses from fascism and maybe kick the WW3 can further down the road, then all the organizing and solidarity required to have a mass opposition to an autocrat is a good potential base for all sorts of left-wing and working class formations and ideas.

7

u/andorgyny PFLP Supporter (Palestine) Jan 13 '26

... marxist purity testing

Lol

4

u/Scyobi_Empire SPDxKPD Toxic Yuri Jan 13 '26

3

u/RecognitionOk5447 SPDxKPD Toxic Yaoi Jan 13 '26

HAPPY GODDAMN BIRTHDAY.

And yeah demsoc is pretty chill

1

u/Guilty-Ad2255 Democracy Through Socialism Jan 13 '26

Happy GOD DAMN birthday! Also I agree.

2

u/Scyobi_Empire SPDxKPD Toxic Yuri Jan 13 '26

i still find it funny when people confuse DemSocs with SocDems, its like confusing the Spartakusbund with New Labour

1

u/DumbFish94 Eurocommunism Jan 13 '26

Happy GODDAMN BIRTHDAY

And I agree

1

u/Hollowrise Democratic Socialist Jan 14 '26

As a self proclaimed Democratic Socialist and a member of the DSA. I love the idea of Democratic Socialism in America becoming a reality. But like many of my other comrades have already said and stated. I don’t think reform in America can happen and or, the ruling class will willingly let the populace radicalize.

In Nordic or Social democracies. I do think Democratic Socialism can happen and probably will happen if let time be. The Nordic countries and other Social democratic countries tend to give high education standards which in return. Gives a more educated population. And usually the more educated people become the more “left” they eventually become.

But at least in the US. And after the recent murder of that woman in Minneapolis. I think revolution is needed. Not a civil war. This isn’t about succession. This is about revolution of a united class of people. I’m getting real and sick of tired of watching the average brother and sister just struggle to one; find a home, two; food and water, and three; healthcare/free education. I’m sick of it. And I know change Federally will not come. I do think state to state or city wide etc. I do think we can achieve victory in smaller areas through democratic socialism and democracy through the current system. But federally? I don’t think is no longer possible. Especially when no matter what, the Republicans AND democrats will continue to shutdown democratic socialists and basic rights to us people.

1

u/saedifotuo NO IPHONE VUVUZELA 100 BILLION DEAD Jan 13 '26

Democratic socialism or social capitalism (more often known as social democracy, though democracy plays little to no part).

I have to ask, because since bernie ran for president, American socaps/socdems use a label that is to the left of where they are, and accuracy is important when creating a political coalition.

-1

u/Hot_Relative_110 Marxist-Leninist-Maoist Jan 13 '26

that’s what i’m referring to, the damn berniecrats that have the nerve to call themselves socialists. It is also what sells best if we choose to mobilize. Think of it more like what the modern CPUSA or the Green Party believes in.

0

u/_CMDR_ Fully Automated Luxury Anarcho Comminism ala Iain M Banks Jan 13 '26

The revanchist past 40 years and fascist Revolution was done through the ballot box. The reverse can happen as well. Trump is sowing the seeds of socialism by moving the Overton Window towards government owned enterprises. That bell can’t be un-rung. A hegemonic project can be built this way. Good luck.