June 26, 2026
Don't Let 'em Call it "Democratic Socialism"
Timothy Birdnow
This article is correct if rather mundane, bordering on cliche'. The reason I'm linking it is just to complain about how so many on our side have allowed the misconception of "Democratic Socialism" to become conventional wisdom in recent years. There is no such thing.
Socialism is usually voted in, not seized by force as in the Russian Revolution. All of the Eastern Block elected Communists shortly after the Soviets came in following WWII. Now there was duress, certainly, but the Communists in Poland or Czechoslovakia were elected, by hook or by crook, and that was that.
"Democratic socialism" is often portrayed as Scandinavia and Greece and other such places, but those places are in no way socialist. Yes, they have big welfare systems, funded by their not having to pay for any sort of national defense (the U.S. has done that for them for decades) but they are in many cases MORE capitalistic than the U.S., with fewer regulations on businesses and lower corporate taxes. They are big on inviting foreign investment. Likewise they have protectionist legislation and tariffs on foreign imports to encourage their own industries.
Socialism is the ownership or control of the means of production, that is the definition. I've had this argument with many liberals, and eventually they have to concede they are in error by promoting "democratic socialism" insofar as they cannot justify it based on historical evidence. In point of fact the Fascist economies - Italy and Nazi Germany - were socialist and after a few years they began winding down in their abilities to produce wealth as the loss of competition stagnated them. Both Italy and Germany tried to keep a permanent wartime economy running to keep production and consumption up but all that did was make life harder for the citizenry. We know how it ended.
But other types of countries experimented with this and failed. Sweden tried it during the seventies and gave up on it as a terrible idea, one that was ruining their economy. The government sold off the industries and companies it owned.
"Democratic socialism" is just a nice-sounding phrase but what does it mean? It means socialism in it's infancy in a society. Socialism is always soft words and velvet gloves until it stops working and the iron boots and war hammers come out. MOST socialist countries started out with the velvet glove and then wound up with gulags.
Yet we on the right have allowed the Left to co-opt the language yet again, tricking young people into thinking "democratic socialism" is somehow inherently different and untried and workable. They know the record of socialism otherwise - poverty, despair, gulags, medical abuse of people based on "insanity" claims, etc. They know the Little Black Book of Communism. So they repackaged the damned evil thing and called it "democratic socialism" - and everyone has forgotten that the most Communist countries called themselves democratic and it was even in their names. One of the most evil, tyrannical states to ever exist was called the German Democratic Republic, for instance. Many more use "Peoples Republic" in theirs, such as the People's Republic of China. But the People have no say in how the country is run. Democratic socialist states do neither as the governments suppress free speech and free assembly and other things that may remove the boot from the economic throat of the producers.
You can't have socialism without that boot. It is not in the nature of human beings to give away the fruits of their labor for free. That fruit must be plucked from the hands of those who tended the trees by force, and that is in no way a free system.
It is democratic only insofar as the old idea of democracy devoid of any moral restrictions is implemented. We know that Plato said pure democracy is the last stage before tyranny and history has born him out.
We've got to take back the language and to do that we've got to stop acquiescing to these sorts of linguistic tricks. Whenever someone starts blathering about democratic socialism we need to come down on them like a ton of bricks (which, if you are lucky, the government will pay you with in a democratic socialist state - you can at least barter that. We need to drag the language back, stop this Overton Window crap where they slowly but steadily erode our understanding of words. Sociallism is about power, the use and abuse of power to steal from the productive and give to thos e politically connected or politically expedient. It is a slow poison, but in the end it will kill you. Think Madam Curie and radium.
We need to "true the language" as Confucious said was necessary in ancient China to restore a nation. As long as they can gloss over what htey actually are doing and will do they can trick the maleducated. And of course most people who attended public schooling are maleducated.
"Democratic socialism" is nothing but Venus fly trap for human insects. It smells goods and you fly into the maw and then that's it - a slow, horrible death and eventual digestation by the horrid weed.
Every time someone uses the phrase we need to say "there is no such thing". There isn't after all. All socialism is inherently non-democratic. It requires force to compel.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
11:20 AM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 906 words, total size 6 kb.
1
The usual answer to the true statement that socialism has never worked is that, "That's because they did it wrong. We will do it right." Presumably "they" did just plain socialism. We will do "Democratic Socialism."
Posted by: Bill H at June 26, 2026 11:06 PM (FRG6e)
2
Yeah, Bill. The idea that "They've never tried the real thing" really means they've never tried it without its having eventually to be forced on the people. And we know why that is: because nobody likes having anything forced on them, even paradise.
Actually, that's not 100% true. Small Christian colonies in this country have tried it for awhile, like the Shakers (they died out for other reasons) and it worked for a short time before failing for one reason or another, not because it was forced but just because it didn't work.
Actually, that's not 100% true. Small Christian colonies in this country have tried it for awhile, like the Shakers (they died out for other reasons) and it worked for a short time before failing for one reason or another, not because it was forced but just because it didn't work.
Posted by: Dana Mathewson at June 27, 2026 12:06 AM (/xiww)
3
Amen to both of you guys! Yeah Bill; they claim the "right people" haven't run socialism (ignoring the factthat all differet sorts have tried to run it and failed - like the first English colonists in America who nearly starved because they had a socialist system in place and only survived after people were given their own land to work for profit.
Dana those are excellent points. There are a number of Christian colonies that practiced a kind of socialism and it worked for them mainly because these folks voluntarily joined it and were more interested in their community - something you get in a religious community you won't find in a non-religious one.
Take teh Amana Colonies in Iowa. They were founded as a communal society and people lived in dormatories - especially the young. It worked; we all have heard about Amana refrigerators, right? That was their company. But they voted to end communal life in the early twentieth century and that in many ways because it no longer was working as too many young people wanted out.
Then too you have New Harmony, Indiana. Founded as a religious communal colony it flourished but then it fell on hard times and sold out to a rich socialist artsy type of guy. The new colony went bankrupt within a few years and had to end the communal way of life. It retained the artsy character and is now a vacation destination of sorts (My mother and father - in-laws used to go there). They don't sell liquor there, it was founded as a temperance place. On the other hand you can't go anywhere in the Amanas without tripping over a winery or brewery.
Cathy and I used to go to the Amanas a lot. Great food but they loved their wine SWEET - too sweet for my tastes. But the only other thing you had to do there was shop and there were some quaint places, but it's only good for a couple of days.
At any rate the right people don't even seem to make it work.
BTW I caught James Carville on Fox News this morning talking about the imbecility of the Democrats turning to socialism. He said "well, everyone has a different definition of socialism" and that is true, many of those who hold a favorable position on it don't know what it is. (Carville also said the Democrats don't hate anyone which made me guffaw and wonder why the Fox gal didn't mention Carville saying of Trump recently "I hate the Mer Fer".) The point si they don't know what socialism is. They have flooded America with immigrants, maybe they should talk to the ones who came here from Venezuela, or Cuba.
Even China pulled back on socialism in the 21st century although they still officially practice
Dana those are excellent points. There are a number of Christian colonies that practiced a kind of socialism and it worked for them mainly because these folks voluntarily joined it and were more interested in their community - something you get in a religious community you won't find in a non-religious one.
Take teh Amana Colonies in Iowa. They were founded as a communal society and people lived in dormatories - especially the young. It worked; we all have heard about Amana refrigerators, right? That was their company. But they voted to end communal life in the early twentieth century and that in many ways because it no longer was working as too many young people wanted out.
Then too you have New Harmony, Indiana. Founded as a religious communal colony it flourished but then it fell on hard times and sold out to a rich socialist artsy type of guy. The new colony went bankrupt within a few years and had to end the communal way of life. It retained the artsy character and is now a vacation destination of sorts (My mother and father - in-laws used to go there). They don't sell liquor there, it was founded as a temperance place. On the other hand you can't go anywhere in the Amanas without tripping over a winery or brewery.
Cathy and I used to go to the Amanas a lot. Great food but they loved their wine SWEET - too sweet for my tastes. But the only other thing you had to do there was shop and there were some quaint places, but it's only good for a couple of days.
At any rate the right people don't even seem to make it work.
BTW I caught James Carville on Fox News this morning talking about the imbecility of the Democrats turning to socialism. He said "well, everyone has a different definition of socialism" and that is true, many of those who hold a favorable position on it don't know what it is. (Carville also said the Democrats don't hate anyone which made me guffaw and wonder why the Fox gal didn't mention Carville saying of Trump recently "I hate the Mer Fer".) The point si they don't know what socialism is. They have flooded America with immigrants, maybe they should talk to the ones who came here from Venezuela, or Cuba.
Even China pulled back on socialism in the 21st century although they still officially practice
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at June 27, 2026 09:07 AM (oflqW)
30kb generated in CPU 0.3524, elapsed 0.4444 seconds.
37 queries taking 0.3765 seconds, 188 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
37 queries taking 0.3765 seconds, 188 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
