@ all
Ombrageux wrote:Evolutionary socialism I think, is pretty bankrupt, socialist economic thought is so fuzzy that any attempt to create or move toward so-called "socialism" would just clumsy bumbling and stabs in the dark. (more often than not, economically damaging for EVERYBODY too, not unlike Allende's stint in Chile or Mitterrand's first two years)
A stubborn porcupine: heredity & nationhood. Meditate, brother!
Recently I opened a thread about the same theme, but this one approaches the question from a different perspective. My horizon with regard to the realization of socialist institutions is limited to Western Europe. Imho democratic socialism (democratic, that is, as opposed to Leninism) is a European phenomenon anyway. Note that until recently (several decades ago) the Second Socialist International was completely European.
Perhaps the socialist movement begins in England, with Robert Owen, and then much later the Fabian Society. After WWII the Attlee government has nationalized many economic activities. However, it soon lost the support of the people. Probably the most powerful socialist movement is German, with Lassalle and Marx as its founders. After WWI, in the twenties of the last century, the SPD participated in several coalitions, and managed to found a system of workers councils. Socialism has supported systems of workers councils since the rise of the trade unions, in order to involve them in the management of the economy. In Russia they turned into a great success. In Germany, however, it never really developed into a vivid and active system. After WWII the SPD abandoned socialism, and in the Godesberger Program advocated a social liberalism.
Noteworthy is also after WWII the system in the Netherlands, which was founded by a socialist-catholic coalition. The Dutch catholics were enthusiast about the corporatist system (following the encyclical letter Quadragesimo Anno). The socialists decided to comply with the catholic idea, and added socialist features. The most noteworthy aspect of the Dutch experiment is that during several decades the wage level (and to a lesser extent, also the price level) was planned by a central council. In this way a full employment could be maintained. Since both catholics and socialists supported this policy, there was a fairly broad social consensus and support. The economist Tinbergen was its most authoritative ideologist. Unfortunately, in the end the attempt failed. Soon a black market for labour emerged. For in a situation of full employment there is a permanent upward pressure on the wages, which is uncontrolable.
I agree that the most sophisticated attempt to build a socialist society has been done by the Mitterrand government, starting in 1981. Note that the PSF had little choice, since she needed the support of the Leninist PCF in order to gain the democratic majority. This socialist experiment already stagnated after only two years, and obviously was not a success. Today only a few elements have survived, such as the 35 hour working-week. However, in order to answer the question of this thread ("What kind of things to democratic socialists do once they have a majority?") it is probably still relevant to summarize the ideas of Mitterrand himself.
Mitterrand calls himself a socialist, not a social democrat, because he reproaches the latter to be reformists. They want to regulate the markets, but that will not change the social relations. A shift in power is required. Mitterrand adheres to the necessity of the class struggle, albeit with democratic means. The workers must realize that they are exploited. Mitterrand even promises some kind of workers self-management, in order to introduce democracy in the private sector. Apparently he has in mind a hierarchy of workers councils. Since WWII France had always applied central planning. Mitterrand wants to intensify this effort. Moreover he wants to nationalize large parts of the private economy, notably big business, for political reasons. The state must control capital, and thus the investments. Mitterrand distrusts the civil society. The unemployment is reduced by means of a shorter working-week. Agriculture must become more collective.
In summary, Mitterrand promotes a traditional socialist policy. This is weird, because the world had already been hit by the oil crises. They had shown that the economy has become global, so that the state can no longer control it. For me, rooted in the German social democracy, it remains difficult to understand why the PSF keeps clinging to policies, which time after time prove to be inefficient and defective.
Mikolaj wrote:How would democratic socialists push real socialist initiatives in such a system where non-majorities, compromise, and interests water down proposals?
The funny thing about the French case is that probably Mitterrand and his PSF had to propose more
extreme policies than their own in order to compete and coalesce with the Leninist PCF.
Adrien wrote:In general, the social-democrats we live with today have a very superficial approach: their action is just about changing the way money is dispatched in the State. Look, I think, to the economic differences that might exist between Democrats and Republicans in the US. The democratic socialists on this forum, I dare speak on their behalf, advocate deep changes, not on the surface of the system, but on the way it functions. It's about reorganizing where and how the State directly intervenes to stimulate a particular kind of growth that benefits the people as citizens and workers.
Mitterrand could have said this - although actually the advancements between the social democrats and the American Democrats started only in the last decade of the twentieth century, with the policy of the
New radical centre (Clinton, Blair, Schroeder). Note also that for a long time the Democrats were rooted in the conservative South. Social democracy is a political movement, and thus dynamic, albeit with a tradition. On the other hand, socialism is an ideology, which rejects private (individual) property. For this reason both V.I. Uljanov and G. Schroeder can call themselves social democrats.
Snoopy: Here's the WWI flying ace posing beside his sopwith camel. My mission is to seek out the Red Baron, and to bring him down! Contact!