• Tolc@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    3 hours ago

    workers owning means of production is inherently democratic, you dont need an additional democratic label for that.

    Both of them are capitalism

    • Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 hours ago

      Socialism is not the same as democratic.

      Socialism describe how Property right should work.

      Democratic describe how the government works.

      Both are independent Ideologies.

      Socialism is not capitalism and to claim that is ridiculous.

      • Tolc@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 hours ago

        any examples of what is a democratic socialism and what is a social democracy in real life

        It would be easier to draw distinction

        • Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 hours ago

          The distinction is between socialism and capitalism.

          There are no democratic socialist countries.

          Germany is a social democracy.

          • Tolc@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 hours ago

            There are no democratic socialist countries.

            are there any that has ever existed?

            • Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 hours ago

              Well, tankies might disagree with me on some of this.

              Democratic socialism got popular under socialist that opposed the Soviet Union.

              China would like to be seen as democratic and would like to be socialistic but they are effectively a one party system (not very democratic) and they have special economic zones and simplified: the state owns the meaning of production and the worker only by proxy. China admit that they aren’t socialist yet but that they are working towards it. So currently not socialist, and the state owned means of production is in conflict with democratic socialism (or at least, that is my opinion and given that it became popular in opposition to the Soviet Union, I think I have a good case for that)

              The whole state owned means of production issue and/or 1 party system, tend to be the reasons why no country was considered a democratic socialist country to my knowledge.

              • Tolc@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 hours ago

                As a tankie I disagree with you. (Multiparty doesnt mean democracy)

                If there is no example of “democratic socialism” yet then its acceptable to say its hogwash and presents no threat to status quo. I am not even getting into how would it be achieved

                • Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  2 hours ago

                  I never said multiparty means democracy. But okay.

                  Who said it was hogwash? Who said it presents no threat to status quo?

                  We are talking about how the nazis were socialist, or social Democrats. And how you don’t know the difference between social democracy and democratic socialism. And to say that you are a tankie after saying that socialism is capitalism, is wild.

                  • Tolc@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    2 hours ago

                    I never said multiparty means democracy

                    You certainly implied that saying leninist revolutions (like in china and russia) led to single party systems which arent democratic

                    I mean you are not able to give single example of what you would consider “democratic” socialism, neither of present nor historic and the way these terms are used interchangeably in modern discourse its easy to conclude that democratic socialism is the same as social democracy.