Moving this to the US Politics thread as requested...
hwhatting wrote: ↑Mon Feb 06, 2023 6:43 am
Travis B. wrote: ↑Fri Feb 03, 2023 10:23 am
Note that liberal democracy and socialism are by no means incompatible; liberal democracy by no means necessitates capitalism. However, actual socialism (which requires democracy), as opposed to state capitalism, needs a general consensus to function, and cannot be simply imposed by the state. However, liberal democracy makes it possible for it to function within a politically pluralistic society.
Well, here we go back to that whole Capitalism thread - what is it exactly what we call Capitalism and what Socialism. I don't have the time right now to explain my views on this, so I'll just watch this discussion for now
My view of the matter is that socialism means
social, i.e. worker, ownership and management of capital; big-C Communism, i.e. Marxism-Leninism and its offshoots, as opposed to little-c communism, e.g. anarcho-communism, is not
socialist to me because it simply replaces the private capitalist with the state and the party while not actually changing the relationship between workers and capital. As such, to me socialism requires democratic control of workplaces, and more direct such democratic control is the better. Note that such democratic control can only be brought about through the will of the workers themselves, and cannot be simply imposed by the state, as that will inevitably lead to state capitalism; this is why I believe socialism can only be brought about from below and not from above. For this reason also I believe that some sort of democratic government, be it parliamentary government or workers' councils (as anarchists would be for, even though they would not use the word "government" to describe them), is needed, because it will reflect the will of the people and will serve to enable the people to bring about socialism themselves rather than simply impose the will of a party dictatorship, which can only result in state capitalism.