#REDIRECT Democratic socialism
[[Image:Red_carnation.jpg|frame|100px|right|A red carnation held in a closed fist is the international symbol of democratic socialism.]] Democratic socialism is an broad politics movement propagating the ideals of socialism within the context of a democratic system. In many cases, its adherents promote the ideal of socialism as an evolutionary process within the framework of a parliamentary democracy. Other democratic socialists favor a revolutionary approach that seeks to establish socialism within a non-parliamentary system, usually based on workers' councils or similar organizations. Thinkers, writers and activists such as Robert Owen, Karl Marx, George Orwell, and Sidney Webb and Beatrice Webb can all be said to have contributed to "democratic socialist philosophy". However, popular movements such as the growth of trade unionism, the Chartists and the Labour Party (UK) (a "democratic socialist party" according to the first line of its constitution) or the SPD in Germany (Sozialdemokratische Partei Deutschlands) are equally critical to understanding Democratic Socialism. ==Definitions== An alternative and new definition to the one mentioned above involves the consensus of the members of Socialist International in the XX Congress in New York in 1996. Democratic Socialism was redefined and would become the ideological foundation of which Social democracy would be the application. Other goals like the welfare state and social justice are still held in equal regard in both. See [http://www.socialistinternational.org/main.html SI] It should be noted, however, that many of those who describe themselves as "socialists" often argue that socialism necessarily implies democracy, thus making "democratic socialism" a redundant term. The fact that one specific movement is called Democratic Socialism does not mean that other branches of socialism must be any less democratic. The terms "Democratic Socialism" and "social democracy" have often been used interchangeably, and, indeed, many have considered them synonymous until recently. Today, however, they usually denote two different things: Social Democracy is more centrist and supports a broadly capitalism system, with just a few reforms intended to make it more equitable and humane. Meanwhile, Democratic Socialism is more left-wing and it supports a fully socialist system, seeking to establish that socialist system, either by gradually reforming capitalism from within, or via a revolutionary transformation. Thus, Democratic Socialism can be either an evolutionary socialism movement or a revolutionary movement. This tension between the revolutionary and evolutionary tendencies of democratic socialism can be seen in the Socialist Party USA, which has members who advocate both types of positions (although the party statement of principles does use the word "revolution" to describe its position). Revolutionary democratic socialists accuse those who favor evolution as of supporting a kind of "socialism from above" that is achieved via legislation and which does not abolish the capitalist system. Evolutionary democratic socialists accuse supporters of revolution of being impractical and of supporting pie-in-the-sky approaches. Evolutionary democratic socialists and social democrats both typically advocate at least a welfare state, although some social democrats, being influenced by the Third Way, would be willing to consider other means of delivering a social safety net for the poorest in society. Revolutionary democratic socialists support a welfare state, not as a means toward achieving socialism, but as a way of providing relief until revolutionary change happens, and also as a means of mobilizing the populace towards revolutionary ideals. Evolutionary democratic socialists maintain a commitment to the redistribution of wealth and the nationalisation of major industry, and some believe in a planned economy, while revolutionary democratic socialists support a decentralized system that is governed from below via popular organizations (such as workers councils); these are all concepts which social democrats have largely abandoned. In addition, many democratic socialists retain a Marxist analysis (though sometimes a reformism one), while social democrats reject Marxism. Democratic socialist parties appeared before the World War I, when no single country could be described as democratic in the modern use of the term, because of electoral discrimination on the basis of gender, race or wealth. What frequently distinguished these democratic socialists from others was a willingness to work through a parliamentary democracy (even if people were still disenfranchised) to both improve the lives of working classes and win the vote, rather than resort to revolution (the overthrow of the state). ==History== Many early varieties of socialism, particularly those stemming from the Sans-culottes branch of French Revolutionary politics, took for granted democratic characteristics such as universal (manhood) suffrage and equality before the law. Notable among such currents are the egalitarian Jacobinism of Babeuf, the humanistic revolutionary spirit of Louis Blanc, Robert Owen's so-called utopianism, and Karl Marx. Such early socialisms might in retrospect be included as democratic socialist. The late nineteenth century and early twentieth century Socialist Industrial Unionism of Daniel DeLeon in the United States represented another strain of early democratic socialism, which favored a revolution to form a new government based on industrial unions, but which also favored achieving this revolution via the ballot box, thus combining both evolutionary and revolutionary aspects. However, democratic socialism as such only becomes a movement in its own right as a current rejecting both Stalinism (with its distinctive visions of the vanguard party and the dictatorship of the proletariat) and, preferably, the reformism characteristic of yellow socialisms and social democrats. During the 1920s, Council communism anticipated democratic socialist positions in several respects, notably through renouncing the vanguard role of the revolutionary party and holding that the system of the Soviet Union was not authentically socialist (describing it as defective or specious socialism). However, council communism has generally tended towards the "ultraleft" position of opposing any reforms of capitalism in the short term. The guild socialism of G. D. H. Cole was a conscious attempt to envision a socialist alternative to Soviet-style authoritarianism. During India's Indian independence movement, many figures on the Left of the Indian National Congress organized themselves as the Congress Socialist Party. Their politics, and those of the early and intermediate periods of JP Narayan's career, combined a commitment to the socialist transformation of society with a principled opposition to the one-party authoritarianism they perceived in the Stalinist revolutionary model. The ''folkesocialisme'' or Popular Socialism that emerged as a vital current of the Left in Scandinavia beginning in the 1950s could also be characterized as a democratic socialism in the same vein. In much of Europe and North America during the 1960s, there was a strong current of democratic socialism in the politics of the New Left. For example, the classic Port Huron Statement of the Students for a Democratic Society combines a stringent critique of the Communist model with calls for a democratic socialist reconstruction of society. In western Europe, Dany Cohn-Bendit, the situationists, and various groups taking to the streets in May 1968 articulated similar positions. The New Left legacy of democratic socialism may be clearly seen in the post-Marxist positions of a wide range of intellectuals (often identified with post-modernism or post-structuralism), from Chantal Mouffe in Europe to Cornell West in the United States. Simultaneously in Eastern Europe (particularly Czechoslovakia), there was a tendency towards socialism with a human face meant to endow a Marxist-Leninist political establishment with more authentically democratic credentials. Since the end of the Cold War, many traditionally Marxist-Leninist groups and parties have evolved positions more closely resembling democratic socialism. The parties of the European United Left today often include both a "conservative" Marxist-Leninist wing and a "liberal" democratic socialist tendency. The boundaries of what might be categorized as "democratic socialism" are thus necessarily fluid. On the right, democratic socialism shades seamlessly into social democracy; on the left, it passes into various hybrids and permutations of Leninism. Furthermore, it also shades off into a variety of radical progressive groups not specifically identifying with the history or symbolism of "socialism" as such. Since the 1990s much of the political activity of the democratic Left has fed into the international Anti-globalization. Many anti-globalist groups describe themselves as anti-capitalist without self-identifying as socialist, despite sharing a great many positions and analyses with the New Left and democratic socialism. ==Characteristics== Democratic socialists have normally defended the role of the public sector, particularly as regards the provision of key services such as health care, education, utilities, mass transit, and sometimes also banking, mining, and fuel extraction. For evolutionary democratic socialists, their economic vision has often included a mixed economy with a greater emphasis on worker and consumer co-operatives, credit unions, family farms and small businesses, as compared to authoritarian Marxist-Leninists. In India, democratic socialists have to varying degrees seen the traditional village-based peasant economy as a model to be supported and enhanced. Revolutionary democratic socialists usually favor the role of the public sector, not as a means of achieving socialism, but as a means of ameliorating the worst effects of capitalism until a revolution is accomplished. Regarding tactics, democratic socialists include a spectrum of positions, from those advocating nonviolent resistance against capitalism, or the possibility of violent resistance under certain circumstances, to those committed exclusively to anti-capitalist reforms through parliamentary means (see evolutionary socialism and Fabianism). Democratic socialists advocating direct action may tend to similar positions with anarcho-syndicalism (with which democratic socialism shares the characteristics of being both anti-capitalist and anti-authoritarian), although evolutionary democratic socialists and revolutionary democratic socialists differ on whether they regard the state itself as an evil to be abolished. ==List of Democratic Socialist parties== The following political parties are either democratic socialist in themselves, social democratic parties with significant numbers of democratic socialist members, or other left-wing parties with democratic socialist members: *Party of European Socialists, European Union **Sozialdemokratische Partei Deutschlands (SPD), Germany **Labour Party (UK), UK **Parti Socialiste, France **Parti Socialiste, Belgium **Irish Labour Party, Ireland *European United Left - Nordic Green Left, European Union **Left Party, Sweden **European Left, European Union ***Party of Democratic Socialism (PDS), Germany *Samajwadi Party, India *Democratic Socialist Party, Japan *New Democratic Party, Canada *Union des forces progressistes, Quebec (Canada) *Democratic Socialists of America, USA *Socialist Party USA, USA **Debs Tendency, USA (A group within the Socialist Party USA which support revolutionary socialism) *Australian Labor Party, Australia *Movement for the Fifth Republic, Venezuela ==See also== *Progressivism *Libertarian socialism ===Books=== * Donald F. Busky, ''Democratic Socialism: A Global Survey'' ===Papers=== ==External links== *[http://www.socialistinternational.org/ The Socialist International] zh-cn:民主社会主义 Socialism
128.193.88.202 wrote: ((municipal tax = 25%-35%) + (state tax = 25%-30%) = 50%-70%) :Where did you get this from? The municipal tax (kommunskatt) is about 20% and the "county"-tax (landstingsskatt) is about 10%. Plus a small church-tax which is <1%. What do you mean by "state tax"? Maybe you are thinking about VAT? Source: http://www.rsv.se/ ---- I am sorry, but this page appears to be a joke. Or at best a POV to the max power charachterisation of the European political landscapae. Please edit it. User:Cimon avaro 22:20 4 Jun 2003 (UTC) Much better. Let's see how long it lasts. -- User:Cimon avaro 00:37 6 Jun 2003 (UTC) Next time you edit it yourself! :)) -- User:Ruhrjung 00:43 6 Jun 2003 (UTC) ---- Now I am even more worried about the page. Is there anybody out there who can verify that those two outside links to ''American'' Socialist organizations have anything whatsoever to do with the historical concept of "Democratic socialism". Let me emphasize, that I would be very glad indeed to hear that yes, they do indeed epitomize that very ideological concept in a historically ''representative'' way, but would like some very convincing evidence. Please! -- User:Cimon avaro 18:23 15 Jun 2003 (UTC) ---- Instead of moaning why dont you edit it User:G-Man 09:19 17 Jun 2003 (UTC) :Because I don't feel qualified to do so. I don't know enough to feel more than disquiet about the article. I might be wrong, and the article spot on! I have no qualifications at all to expound on American socialist movements/parties, so if my concerns were perceived as "moaning" by true experts, I would take that on the chin. -- User:Cimon avaro 09:29 17 Jun 2003 (UTC) ==Merge with Social democracy== Google hits on wikipedia&mirrors first, and to pages that use the term interchangably with social democracy next. This page should be merged (as required) and otherwise redirected to social democracy, unless someone can convince me differently? User:Kim Bruning 21:36, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC) :To be honest, I'm not entirely sure. I'm not satisfied with the state of either entry as it currently stands; but I ''do'' think there's some degree of difference we should try to enunciate. From my view, at least, there's a world of difference between, say, the Socialist Alliance (Australia) of Australia and the Australian Labor Party, but both would be categorised under the same heading if the articles were to be merged. I really don't know if their respective ideologies have that much in common. User:Lacrimosus 04:22, 25 Sep 2004 (UTC) :I think that the distinction is very subjective. I think what we are dealing with is two issues. (1) Many social democratic parties are less leftwing than they used to be. For some reason, people want to reserve the term "social democracy" for the rightwing of social democracy, rather than for the left of social democracy. (2) Many Leninist parties are becoming less revolutionary and more democratic, hence the Australian Socialist Alliance is being cited as an example of "democratic socialism", which in the past no one would have taken seriously because it comprises mainly Trotskyist organizations. It may prove very difficult to decide definitely which organizations are social democratic and which democratic socialist, if a distinction is drawn between the two terms. I personally doubt whether Trotskyists should be classified in either category, since there could be (and probably are) separate entries for Leninist and Trotskyist parties. The usage of the term "democratic socialism" varies so widely - for example, the British Labour Party describes itself as democratic socialist and yet others are claiming it doesn't qualify as social democratic - it makes no sense to have the distinction. The "social democracy" article could discuss both the right and the left of the movement, but would of course exclude Leninist parties (which have not been counted as social democrats since about 1917). User:rjpuk 20:32, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC) I do think that the distinction here between democratic socialism and social democracy is important, but it could maybe be expanded on somewhat... There are at least two branches of democratic socialist praxis that I'd like to see mentioned here (I'll add them myself, if nobody objects): the participatory democracy wing of the New Left in Europe and North America (the names Tom Hayden and Dany Cohn-Bendit spring to mind), and in India the anti-totalitarian socialism of JP Narayan and his sometime associates such as Acharya Narendra Deva and other Congress Socialist Party luminaries. I'm sure other folks could come up with examples from elsewhere. In both instances, we have a definite revolutionary Left politics that's anti-Leninist but also not anarchist. But rjpunk's observations about the subjectiveness of the term might make a handy contribution to the article itself: in reality, most movements do seem to want to swing either towards reformism pure and simple, or to some degree of authoritarianism (quite a problem!). Oh, I thought of a third current: the Left-wing "radical democracy" movement coming out of a lot of post-structuralist and feminist theorizing these days (think of Chantal Mouffe). User:QuartierLatin1968 01:40, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC) A naive reader will not distinguish between "social democracy" and "democratic socialism". I think that we should either #Merge the articles, and emphasize the difference within the articles #Clearly state in the introduction that these are different concepts/movements, perhaps with a disambiguation notice. User:AdamRetchless 14:07, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC) ==NPOV== This is a copy of my NPOV comments in Social Democracy's talk page. The article does not give due justice to the recent Socialist International's councils and the groups statutues and principles. The article just discusses the old school meaning during the turn of the 20th century which was even pre-cold war, not the 21st which is the priority. SI redefined social democracy and Democratic Socialism. Today, DS forms the ideology and theory, meanwhile SD forms the application and integration with the real world. Issues like welfare, etc, were already reconciled between the 2 former ideologies. These were completely ignored by the article, it was not even considered in the start. SD now is the ideal representative democracy and objective, and not a political ideology. DS is the ideology. See [http://www.socialistinternational.org/4Principles/dofpeng.html SI Principles in the web] ==On DS== DS and SD should not be merged. DS should be updated for the new definition which is the reconciled definition of the old 20th century definitions of DS and SD. SD becomes the ideal application of the said. SD is no longer an ideology, and DS is now more accomodating for the centrist view, not just the leftist view. ''Stranger'' :Okie-doke. However, there are still tons of people holding to the "old 20th century definition", as you call it, of democratic socialism – I'm one democratic socialist who doesn't give a rat's ass for what the SI says democratic socialism should be. (They should ''practise'' it first if they want people to take their preaching seriously.) But by all means, integrate what they have to say into the article – it's very important that all relevant definitions and understandings of democratic socialism be included. Cheers, User:QuartierLatin1968 14:17, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
See other meanings of words starting from letter:
Words begining with Democratic_socialism:
Democratic_Socialism
Democratic_socialism
Democratic_socialism
Democratic Socialism
#REDIRECT Democratic socialism
Democratic socialism
[[Image:Red_carnation.jpg|frame|100px|right|A red carnation held in a closed fist is the international symbol of democratic socialism.]] Democratic socialism is an broad politics movement propagating the ideals of socialism within the context of a democratic system. In many cases, its adherents promote the ideal of socialism as an evolutionary process within the framework of a parliamentary democracy. Other democratic socialists favor a revolutionary approach that seeks to establish socialism within a non-parliamentary system, usually based on workers' councils or similar organizations. Thinkers, writers and activists such as Robert Owen, Karl Marx, George Orwell, and Sidney Webb and Beatrice Webb can all be said to have contributed to "democratic socialist philosophy". However, popular movements such as the growth of trade unionism, the Chartists and the Labour Party (UK) (a "democratic socialist party" according to the first line of its constitution) or the SPD in Germany (Sozialdemokratische Partei Deutschlands) are equally critical to understanding Democratic Socialism. ==Definitions== An alternative and new definition to the one mentioned above involves the consensus of the members of Socialist International in the XX Congress in New York in 1996. Democratic Socialism was redefined and would become the ideological foundation of which Social democracy would be the application. Other goals like the welfare state and social justice are still held in equal regard in both. See [http://www.socialistinternational.org/main.html SI] It should be noted, however, that many of those who describe themselves as "socialists" often argue that socialism necessarily implies democracy, thus making "democratic socialism" a redundant term. The fact that one specific movement is called Democratic Socialism does not mean that other branches of socialism must be any less democratic. The terms "Democratic Socialism" and "social democracy" have often been used interchangeably, and, indeed, many have considered them synonymous until recently. Today, however, they usually denote two different things: Social Democracy is more centrist and supports a broadly capitalism system, with just a few reforms intended to make it more equitable and humane. Meanwhile, Democratic Socialism is more left-wing and it supports a fully socialist system, seeking to establish that socialist system, either by gradually reforming capitalism from within, or via a revolutionary transformation. Thus, Democratic Socialism can be either an evolutionary socialism movement or a revolutionary movement. This tension between the revolutionary and evolutionary tendencies of democratic socialism can be seen in the Socialist Party USA, which has members who advocate both types of positions (although the party statement of principles does use the word "revolution" to describe its position). Revolutionary democratic socialists accuse those who favor evolution as of supporting a kind of "socialism from above" that is achieved via legislation and which does not abolish the capitalist system. Evolutionary democratic socialists accuse supporters of revolution of being impractical and of supporting pie-in-the-sky approaches. Evolutionary democratic socialists and social democrats both typically advocate at least a welfare state, although some social democrats, being influenced by the Third Way, would be willing to consider other means of delivering a social safety net for the poorest in society. Revolutionary democratic socialists support a welfare state, not as a means toward achieving socialism, but as a way of providing relief until revolutionary change happens, and also as a means of mobilizing the populace towards revolutionary ideals. Evolutionary democratic socialists maintain a commitment to the redistribution of wealth and the nationalisation of major industry, and some believe in a planned economy, while revolutionary democratic socialists support a decentralized system that is governed from below via popular organizations (such as workers councils); these are all concepts which social democrats have largely abandoned. In addition, many democratic socialists retain a Marxist analysis (though sometimes a reformism one), while social democrats reject Marxism. Democratic socialist parties appeared before the World War I, when no single country could be described as democratic in the modern use of the term, because of electoral discrimination on the basis of gender, race or wealth. What frequently distinguished these democratic socialists from others was a willingness to work through a parliamentary democracy (even if people were still disenfranchised) to both improve the lives of working classes and win the vote, rather than resort to revolution (the overthrow of the state). ==History== Many early varieties of socialism, particularly those stemming from the Sans-culottes branch of French Revolutionary politics, took for granted democratic characteristics such as universal (manhood) suffrage and equality before the law. Notable among such currents are the egalitarian Jacobinism of Babeuf, the humanistic revolutionary spirit of Louis Blanc, Robert Owen's so-called utopianism, and Karl Marx. Such early socialisms might in retrospect be included as democratic socialist. The late nineteenth century and early twentieth century Socialist Industrial Unionism of Daniel DeLeon in the United States represented another strain of early democratic socialism, which favored a revolution to form a new government based on industrial unions, but which also favored achieving this revolution via the ballot box, thus combining both evolutionary and revolutionary aspects. However, democratic socialism as such only becomes a movement in its own right as a current rejecting both Stalinism (with its distinctive visions of the vanguard party and the dictatorship of the proletariat) and, preferably, the reformism characteristic of yellow socialisms and social democrats. During the 1920s, Council communism anticipated democratic socialist positions in several respects, notably through renouncing the vanguard role of the revolutionary party and holding that the system of the Soviet Union was not authentically socialist (describing it as defective or specious socialism). However, council communism has generally tended towards the "ultraleft" position of opposing any reforms of capitalism in the short term. The guild socialism of G. D. H. Cole was a conscious attempt to envision a socialist alternative to Soviet-style authoritarianism. During India's Indian independence movement, many figures on the Left of the Indian National Congress organized themselves as the Congress Socialist Party. Their politics, and those of the early and intermediate periods of JP Narayan's career, combined a commitment to the socialist transformation of society with a principled opposition to the one-party authoritarianism they perceived in the Stalinist revolutionary model. The ''folkesocialisme'' or Popular Socialism that emerged as a vital current of the Left in Scandinavia beginning in the 1950s could also be characterized as a democratic socialism in the same vein. In much of Europe and North America during the 1960s, there was a strong current of democratic socialism in the politics of the New Left. For example, the classic Port Huron Statement of the Students for a Democratic Society combines a stringent critique of the Communist model with calls for a democratic socialist reconstruction of society. In western Europe, Dany Cohn-Bendit, the situationists, and various groups taking to the streets in May 1968 articulated similar positions. The New Left legacy of democratic socialism may be clearly seen in the post-Marxist positions of a wide range of intellectuals (often identified with post-modernism or post-structuralism), from Chantal Mouffe in Europe to Cornell West in the United States. Simultaneously in Eastern Europe (particularly Czechoslovakia), there was a tendency towards socialism with a human face meant to endow a Marxist-Leninist political establishment with more authentically democratic credentials. Since the end of the Cold War, many traditionally Marxist-Leninist groups and parties have evolved positions more closely resembling democratic socialism. The parties of the European United Left today often include both a "conservative" Marxist-Leninist wing and a "liberal" democratic socialist tendency. The boundaries of what might be categorized as "democratic socialism" are thus necessarily fluid. On the right, democratic socialism shades seamlessly into social democracy; on the left, it passes into various hybrids and permutations of Leninism. Furthermore, it also shades off into a variety of radical progressive groups not specifically identifying with the history or symbolism of "socialism" as such. Since the 1990s much of the political activity of the democratic Left has fed into the international Anti-globalization. Many anti-globalist groups describe themselves as anti-capitalist without self-identifying as socialist, despite sharing a great many positions and analyses with the New Left and democratic socialism. ==Characteristics== Democratic socialists have normally defended the role of the public sector, particularly as regards the provision of key services such as health care, education, utilities, mass transit, and sometimes also banking, mining, and fuel extraction. For evolutionary democratic socialists, their economic vision has often included a mixed economy with a greater emphasis on worker and consumer co-operatives, credit unions, family farms and small businesses, as compared to authoritarian Marxist-Leninists. In India, democratic socialists have to varying degrees seen the traditional village-based peasant economy as a model to be supported and enhanced. Revolutionary democratic socialists usually favor the role of the public sector, not as a means of achieving socialism, but as a means of ameliorating the worst effects of capitalism until a revolution is accomplished. Regarding tactics, democratic socialists include a spectrum of positions, from those advocating nonviolent resistance against capitalism, or the possibility of violent resistance under certain circumstances, to those committed exclusively to anti-capitalist reforms through parliamentary means (see evolutionary socialism and Fabianism). Democratic socialists advocating direct action may tend to similar positions with anarcho-syndicalism (with which democratic socialism shares the characteristics of being both anti-capitalist and anti-authoritarian), although evolutionary democratic socialists and revolutionary democratic socialists differ on whether they regard the state itself as an evil to be abolished. ==List of Democratic Socialist parties== The following political parties are either democratic socialist in themselves, social democratic parties with significant numbers of democratic socialist members, or other left-wing parties with democratic socialist members: *Party of European Socialists, European Union **Sozialdemokratische Partei Deutschlands (SPD), Germany **Labour Party (UK), UK **Parti Socialiste, France **Parti Socialiste, Belgium **Irish Labour Party, Ireland *European United Left - Nordic Green Left, European Union **Left Party, Sweden **European Left, European Union ***Party of Democratic Socialism (PDS), Germany *Samajwadi Party, India *Democratic Socialist Party, Japan *New Democratic Party, Canada *Union des forces progressistes, Quebec (Canada) *Democratic Socialists of America, USA *Socialist Party USA, USA **Debs Tendency, USA (A group within the Socialist Party USA which support revolutionary socialism) *Australian Labor Party, Australia *Movement for the Fifth Republic, Venezuela ==See also== *Progressivism *Libertarian socialism ===Books=== * Donald F. Busky, ''Democratic Socialism: A Global Survey'' ===Papers=== ==External links== *[http://www.socialistinternational.org/ The Socialist International] zh-cn:民主社会主义 Socialism
Democratic socialism
128.193.88.202 wrote: ((municipal tax = 25%-35%) + (state tax = 25%-30%) = 50%-70%) :Where did you get this from? The municipal tax (kommunskatt) is about 20% and the "county"-tax (landstingsskatt) is about 10%. Plus a small church-tax which is <1%. What do you mean by "state tax"? Maybe you are thinking about VAT? Source: http://www.rsv.se/ ---- I am sorry, but this page appears to be a joke. Or at best a POV to the max power charachterisation of the European political landscapae. Please edit it. User:Cimon avaro 22:20 4 Jun 2003 (UTC) Much better. Let's see how long it lasts. -- User:Cimon avaro 00:37 6 Jun 2003 (UTC) Next time you edit it yourself! :)) -- User:Ruhrjung 00:43 6 Jun 2003 (UTC) ---- Now I am even more worried about the page. Is there anybody out there who can verify that those two outside links to ''American'' Socialist organizations have anything whatsoever to do with the historical concept of "Democratic socialism". Let me emphasize, that I would be very glad indeed to hear that yes, they do indeed epitomize that very ideological concept in a historically ''representative'' way, but would like some very convincing evidence. Please! -- User:Cimon avaro 18:23 15 Jun 2003 (UTC) ---- Instead of moaning why dont you edit it User:G-Man 09:19 17 Jun 2003 (UTC) :Because I don't feel qualified to do so. I don't know enough to feel more than disquiet about the article. I might be wrong, and the article spot on! I have no qualifications at all to expound on American socialist movements/parties, so if my concerns were perceived as "moaning" by true experts, I would take that on the chin. -- User:Cimon avaro 09:29 17 Jun 2003 (UTC) ==Merge with Social democracy== Google hits on wikipedia&mirrors first, and to pages that use the term interchangably with social democracy next. This page should be merged (as required) and otherwise redirected to social democracy, unless someone can convince me differently? User:Kim Bruning 21:36, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC) :To be honest, I'm not entirely sure. I'm not satisfied with the state of either entry as it currently stands; but I ''do'' think there's some degree of difference we should try to enunciate. From my view, at least, there's a world of difference between, say, the Socialist Alliance (Australia) of Australia and the Australian Labor Party, but both would be categorised under the same heading if the articles were to be merged. I really don't know if their respective ideologies have that much in common. User:Lacrimosus 04:22, 25 Sep 2004 (UTC) :I think that the distinction is very subjective. I think what we are dealing with is two issues. (1) Many social democratic parties are less leftwing than they used to be. For some reason, people want to reserve the term "social democracy" for the rightwing of social democracy, rather than for the left of social democracy. (2) Many Leninist parties are becoming less revolutionary and more democratic, hence the Australian Socialist Alliance is being cited as an example of "democratic socialism", which in the past no one would have taken seriously because it comprises mainly Trotskyist organizations. It may prove very difficult to decide definitely which organizations are social democratic and which democratic socialist, if a distinction is drawn between the two terms. I personally doubt whether Trotskyists should be classified in either category, since there could be (and probably are) separate entries for Leninist and Trotskyist parties. The usage of the term "democratic socialism" varies so widely - for example, the British Labour Party describes itself as democratic socialist and yet others are claiming it doesn't qualify as social democratic - it makes no sense to have the distinction. The "social democracy" article could discuss both the right and the left of the movement, but would of course exclude Leninist parties (which have not been counted as social democrats since about 1917). User:rjpuk 20:32, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC) I do think that the distinction here between democratic socialism and social democracy is important, but it could maybe be expanded on somewhat... There are at least two branches of democratic socialist praxis that I'd like to see mentioned here (I'll add them myself, if nobody objects): the participatory democracy wing of the New Left in Europe and North America (the names Tom Hayden and Dany Cohn-Bendit spring to mind), and in India the anti-totalitarian socialism of JP Narayan and his sometime associates such as Acharya Narendra Deva and other Congress Socialist Party luminaries. I'm sure other folks could come up with examples from elsewhere. In both instances, we have a definite revolutionary Left politics that's anti-Leninist but also not anarchist. But rjpunk's observations about the subjectiveness of the term might make a handy contribution to the article itself: in reality, most movements do seem to want to swing either towards reformism pure and simple, or to some degree of authoritarianism (quite a problem!). Oh, I thought of a third current: the Left-wing "radical democracy" movement coming out of a lot of post-structuralist and feminist theorizing these days (think of Chantal Mouffe). User:QuartierLatin1968 01:40, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC) A naive reader will not distinguish between "social democracy" and "democratic socialism". I think that we should either #Merge the articles, and emphasize the difference within the articles #Clearly state in the introduction that these are different concepts/movements, perhaps with a disambiguation notice. User:AdamRetchless 14:07, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC) ==NPOV== This is a copy of my NPOV comments in Social Democracy's talk page. The article does not give due justice to the recent Socialist International's councils and the groups statutues and principles. The article just discusses the old school meaning during the turn of the 20th century which was even pre-cold war, not the 21st which is the priority. SI redefined social democracy and Democratic Socialism. Today, DS forms the ideology and theory, meanwhile SD forms the application and integration with the real world. Issues like welfare, etc, were already reconciled between the 2 former ideologies. These were completely ignored by the article, it was not even considered in the start. SD now is the ideal representative democracy and objective, and not a political ideology. DS is the ideology. See [http://www.socialistinternational.org/4Principles/dofpeng.html SI Principles in the web] ==On DS== DS and SD should not be merged. DS should be updated for the new definition which is the reconciled definition of the old 20th century definitions of DS and SD. SD becomes the ideal application of the said. SD is no longer an ideology, and DS is now more accomodating for the centrist view, not just the leftist view. ''Stranger'' :Okie-doke. However, there are still tons of people holding to the "old 20th century definition", as you call it, of democratic socialism – I'm one democratic socialist who doesn't give a rat's ass for what the SI says democratic socialism should be. (They should ''practise'' it first if they want people to take their preaching seriously.) But by all means, integrate what they have to say into the article – it's very important that all relevant definitions and understandings of democratic socialism be included. Cheers, User:QuartierLatin1968 14:17, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
See other meanings of words starting from letter:
D
DA | DB | DC | DE | DF | DG | DH | DI | DJ | DK | DL | DM | DN | DO | DP | DR | DS | DT | DU | DW | DX | DY | DZ |Words begining with Democratic_socialism:
Democratic_Socialism
Democratic_socialism
Democratic_socialism
Sponsored links: praca, nurkowanie.
These materials are based on Wikipedia and licensed under the GNU FDL
YouTube.com videos better site than Turbo Tax 2007
