Vermont Independent Senator Bernie Sanders' presidential runs in 2016 and 2020 raised eyebrows for many reasons, mostly positive. One of the reasons was Sanders being a self-described Democratic Socialist. Many people thought of strict socialism; many thought the term was a bit of an oxymoron.
A similar confusion seems to have risen again with Democratic New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani, who is also a self-described Democratic Socialist. I thought a comparison between Socialism and Democratic Socialism could be helpful.
Before drawing that comparison, a historical comparison is necessary. That comparison is between socialism and communism. There has been a long-standing sense that the two are the same or very, very similar. This perception, which has been around for generations, may be the basis for the misperception. The comparison below is a basic one with very basic definitions of theoretical versions of both..
Communism Socialism
Seeks a classless, stateless society Seeks a more equitable society
No private property or privately-owned Private property and collective ownership
resources of resources
Centralized, authoritarian government Seeks to narrow the gap between classes
Resources allocated by government Resources allocated based on need
determination
While these are very basic definitions, it is also important to remember there have been very oppressive governments in place using these methods.
The other thing to remember is socialism has never been seen historically, or theoretically, as the goal. Socialism is not the end game. Communism has been seen as the end game within this sociopolitical paradigm. Socialism has been seen as the means to a Communism end.
For those of you who may be thinking ahead after that last sentence (e.g. "Wait, if socialism means communism is coming, then any concerns about Mamdani or Sanders must be correct"), the pending comparison should put that concern at ease.
As socialism is the means to an end, often including revolution (which, historically, has included violence), Democratic Socialism is the end goal with democratic processes as both the means and the sustaining system. Here are a few illustrations:
"Democratic Socialism = Communism" is not true. Even though some ideas and concepts can be traced back further, democratic socialism arose in the nineteenth century as a oppositional response to the initial industrial capitalism movement. A form of socialism that is democratic -- a "from the bottom up" modality -- is desired.
"They want a government that controls everything" is not true. Democratic socialism is opposed to any government with absolute control. It seeks to have all social, political, and economic decisions be voted upon by everyone, with everyone having a say in what affects their lives.
"They only care about economic issues" is not true. (You can refer to my explanation directly above on this one.) Democratic socialist oppose all forms of oppression, domination, and inequality. Issues such as racism, anti-LGBTQ+. patriarchy, fascism, and oligarchy are antithetical to, and incompatible with, democratic socialism.
"Democratic Socialists are really just 'Social Democrats' calling themselves by a different name" is not true. Social Democrats have sought what's been called a "third way" of approaching politics, etc., while Democratic Socialists have seen the need to change current systematic structures via re-envisioning what those structures would/could/should look like.
"Democratic Socialists are actually just liberal Democrats" is not true. It can be easy to accept this one as true, but Democratic Socialists see a distinction between liberalism and socialism, with liberalism as merely one element in the Democratic Party. A third political party, one more socialism-based, is often sought.
I am not promoting anything here but education on this topic. I completely get it when it comes to the idea that, if the word "socialism" is in your title, you're promoting something absolutely abhorrent. The history of socialism, both linguistically and politically in the history of the world does give the idea of "democratic socialism" (e.g. any kind of socialism actually being democratic) an uphill battle in acceptance or even simple understanding. I would suspect those who identify as "democratic socialist" also get it. Just like the old idiom "Don't judge a book by its cover", the word "socialism" shouldn't necessarily be an automatic off-switch.
Food for thought.
Terry
