30
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 04 Oct 2026
30 points (91.7% liked)
Socialism
7052 readers
1 users here now
Rules TBD.
founded 7 years ago
MODERATORS
It's an artifact of political debate done within the bubble of people who read too much theory or engage in discussions only with other political people. People who do politics and organizing in the real world are not so concerned about all these ideological nuances or asserting the value of one model over another.
If you don't have the power to change things, all these abstracts models are useless and uninteresting. Discussing how to build power in the real world is a much better way to spend your political energy.
Marx, Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right.
Ew, no. There is a fundamental misunderstanding here. This is not merely an ideological nuance (although your opposition to that is weird and gross) Democratic Socialism vs MLs and Anarchists is primarily a discussion on the methods of leftist organization and action. MLs and Anarchists tend to believe that establishing socialism in the current system is impossible and so the only option is to violently remove the powers at be. Democratic Socialists, on the other hand, believe that socialism can be achieved through reform. A Democratic Socialist tells you to vote while a ML tells you to strike. That is the practical difference.
Huh? Democratic socialists tell you to do both. My local DSA has a Labor Working Group which works closely with [EWOC](http://www..com/ https://workerorganizing.org/) to encourage unionizing and striking. Just last week I personally helped organize a workshop on unions, including discussions about historical and contemporary strikes.
What makes you think democratic socialists don't want to help you strike?
Whoosh
What?
the decision of what's possible or impossible shoudln't be done through ideological discourse but through empirical practice. Ideologies are not tools for strategic development and they should stop being treated as such.
I agree with this. However, It has now been almost two hundred years of empirical practice, and the data is in.
yeah, we know that the conditions on which these practices developed don't exist anymore, the context keep shifting and anything that is conceptually stable for more than a decade probably is unfit to create the change we need.