This article is about socialism emphasising democracy. For the form of democracy emphasising socialism, seeSocialist democracy. For the ideology focusing on the gradual transition to socialism by democratic processes, seeSocial democracy.
Thehistory of democratic socialism can be traced back to 19th-century socialist thinkers across Europe and theChartist movement in Britain, which somewhat differed in their goals but shared a common demand for democratic decision-making andpublic ownership of themeans of production and viewed these as fundamental characteristics of the society they advocated for. From the late 19th to the early 20th century, democratic socialism was heavily influenced by thegradualist form of socialism promoted by the BritishFabian Society andEduard Bernstein'sevolutionary socialism in Germany.[9]
Democratic socialism is contrasted withMarxism–Leninism, whose opponents often view as being authoritarian, bureaucratic, and undemocratic in practice.[18] Democratic socialists oppose theStalinist political system and theMarxist–Leninist economic planning system, rejecting as their form of governance theadministrative-command model formed in the Soviet Union andother Marxist–Leninist states during the 20th century.[19] Democratic socialism is also distinguished fromThird Way social democracy[20][nb 1] because democratic socialists are committed to the systemic transformation of the economy from capitalism to socialism,[nb 2] while social democrats use capitalism to create a strongwelfare state, leaving many businesses underprivate ownership.[26] However, many democratic socialists also advocate for state regulations andwelfare programs in order to reduce the perceived harms of capitalism and slowly transform the economic system.[26]
Capitalism is a system designed by the owning class to exploit the rest of us for their own profit. We must replace it with democratic socialism, a system where ordinary people have a real voice in our workplaces, neighborhoods, and society.We believe there are many avenues that feed into [democratic socialism]. Our vision pushes further than historic social democracy and leaves behind authoritarian visions of socialism in the dustbin of history.
Tony Benn, a prominent left-wing Labour Party politician,[53] described democratic socialism as socialism that is "open, libertarian, pluralistic, humane and democratic; nothing whatever in common with the harsh, centralised, dictatorial and mechanistic images which are purposely presented by our opponents and a tiny group of people who control the mass media in Britain."[54]
Some uses of the termdemocratic socialism represent social democratic policies within capitalism instead of an ideology that aims to transcend and replace capitalism, although this is not always the case. Robert M. Page, areader in Democratic Socialism and Social Policy at theUniversity of Birmingham, wrote about transformative democratic socialism to refer to the politics of Labour PartyPrime MinisterClement Attlee and itsgovernment (fiscal redistribution, some degree ofpublic ownership and a strong welfare state) and revisionist democratic socialism as developed by Labour Party politician Anthony Crosland and Labour Party Prime MinisterHarold Wilson, arguing:
The most influential revisionist Labour thinker, Anthony Crosland, contended that a more "benevolent" form of capitalism had emerged since the Second World War. ... According to Crosland, it was now possible to achieve greater equality in society without the need for "fundamental" economic transformation. For Crosland, a more meaningful form of equality could be achieved if the growth dividend derived from effective management of the economy was invested in "pro-poor" public services rather than through fiscal redistribution.[60]
The political scientistLyman Tower Sargent offers a similar definition based on the practice of social democracy in Europe:
Democratic socialism can be characterised as follows:
Much property held by the public through a democratically elected government, including most major industries, utilities, and transportation systems
A limit on the accumulation of private property
Governmental regulation of the economy
Extensive publicly financed assistance and pension programs
Social costs and the provision of services added to purely financial considerations as the measure of efficiency
Publicly held property is limited to productive property and significant infrastructure; it does not extend to personal property, homes, and small businesses. And in practice in many democratic socialist countries [sic], it has not extended to many large corporations.[61]
In the 19th century, democratic socialism was repressed by many governments; countries such asGermany andItaly banned democratic socialist parties.[62][63] With the expansion ofliberal democracy anduniversal suffrage during the 20th century, democratic socialism became a mainstream movement which expanded across the world. Democratic socialists played a major role in liberal democracy,[64] often forming governing parties or acting as the mainopposition party (one major exception being theUnited States[65]).
Social democracy prior to thedisplacement of Keynesianism by neoliberalism andmonetarism, which caused many social-democratic parties to adopt theThird Way ideology, acceptingcapitalism as the currentstatus quo andpowers that be, redefiningsocialism in a way that it maintained the capitalist structure intact,[23] has been occasionally described as a form of democratic socialism. The new version ofClause IV of the British Labour Party's constitution, first adopted by former party leaderTony Blair, usesdemocratic socialism to describe a modernised form of social democracy.[66] While affirming a commitment to democratic socialism,[67] it no longer commits the party to public ownership of industry and, in its place, advocates "the enterprise of the market and the rigour of competition" along with "high quality public services ... either owned by the public or accountable to them."[67] Donald F. Busky'sDemocratic Socialism: A Global Survey describes social democracy as a form of democratic socialism that follows a gradual, reformist or evolutionary path to socialism rather than a revolutionary one.[68] This tendency is captured in the statement ofLabour revisionistAnthony Crosland, who argued that the socialism of the pre-war world was now becoming increasingly irrelevant.[69] This tendency has been evoked in works such asRoy Hattersley'sChoose Freedom: The Future of Democratic Socialism,[70] Malcolm Hamilton'sDemocratic Socialism in Britain and Sweden,[71] and Jim Tomlinson'sDemocratic Socialism and Economic Policy: The Attlee Years, 1945–1951[72] A variant of this set of definitions isJoseph Schumpeter's argument inCapitalism, Socialism and Democracy (1942)[73] thatliberal democracies were evolving fromliberal capitalism into democratic socialism with the growth ofindustrial democracy,regulatory institutions andself-management.[74]
A key difference is that social democrats are mainly concerned with practical reforms within capitalism, with socialism either relegated to the indefinite future or perceived to have abandoned it in the case of the Third Way.[75] More radical democratic socialists want to go beyond mere meliorist reforms and advocate the systemic transformation of themode of production fromcapitalism tosocialism.[76]
While the Third Way has been described as a new social democracy[77] or neo-social democracy,[78] standing for a modernised social democracy[79] and competitive socialism,[80] the form of social democracy that remained committed to the gradual abolition of capitalism and social democrats opposed to the Third Way merged into democratic socialism.[81] During the late 20th century and early 21st century, these labels were embraced, contested and rejected due to the development within the European left ofEurocommunism between the 1970s and 1980s,[82] the rise of neoliberalism in the mid to late 1970s,[83] thefall of the Soviet Union in December 1991 and ofMarxist–Leninist governments between 1989 and 1992,[84] the rise and fall of the Third Way[23] between the 1970s[85] and 2010s[86] and the simultaneous rise ofanti-austerity,[87]green,[88]left-wing populist[89] andOccupy[90] movements in the late 2000s and early 2010s due to the globalfinancial crisis of 2007–2008 and theGreat Recession,[91] the causes of which have been widely attributed to the neoliberal shift[92] andderegulation economic policies.[93] This latest development contributed to the rise of politicians that represent a return to the post-war consensus social democracy, such asJeremy Corbyn in the United Kingdom andBernie Sanders in the United States,[94] who assumed thedemocratic socialist label to describe their rejection ofcentrist politicians that supportedtriangulation within theLabour andDemocratic parties such as withNew Labour and theNew Democrats, respectively.[95]
Social democracy originated as arevolutionary socialist orcommunist movement.[96] One distinction to separate the modern versions of democratic socialism and social democracy is that the former can include revolutionary means.[97] In contrast, the latter asserts that the only acceptable constitutional form of government isrepresentative democracy under therule of law, which is to implement social change viareformism.[98] Many social democrats "refer to themselves as socialists or democratic socialists", and some "use or have used these terms interchangeably."[99] Others argue that "there are clear differences between the three terms, and preferred to describe their own political beliefs by using the term 'social democracy' only."[100] In political science,democratic socialism andsocial democracy are occasionally seen as synonymous or otherwise not mutually exclusive,[101] while they are usually sharply distinguished in journalistic use.[102] While social democrats continue to call and describe themselves asdemocratic socialists or simplysocialists,[99] the meaning ofdemocratic socialism andsocial democracy effectively reversed.[103]Democratic socialism originally represented socialism achieved by democratic means and usually resulted in reformism, whereassocial democracy included reformist and revolutionary wings.[104] With the association of social democracy as a policy regime[105] and the development of the Third Way,[23]social democracy became almost exclusively associated with capitalist welfare states,[106] whiledemocratic socialism came to refer to anti-capitalist tendencies, includingcommunism,revolutionary socialism, andreformist socialism.[107]
While most social-democratic parties describe themselves asdemocratic socialists, withdemocratic socialism representing the theory andsocial democracy the practice and vice versa, political scientists distinguish between the two.Social democratic is used for centre-left political parties,[108] "whose aim is the gradual amelioration of poverty and exploitation within a liberal capitalist society."[109] On the other hand,democratic socialist is used for left-wing socialist parties, includingleft-wing populist parties such asThe Left,Podemos andSyriza.[110] This is reflected at the European party level, where the centre-leftsocial democratic parties are within theParty of European Socialists and theProgressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats, while left-wingdemocratic socialist parties are within theParty of the European Left and theEuropean United Left–Nordic Green Left.[111] Thesedemocratic socialist groups often includecommunist tendencies, in contrast tosocial democratic groups which excludeanti-capitalist tendencies.[112]
According to Steve Ludlam, "the arrival ofNew Labour signalled an unprecedented and possibly final assault on the [British]Labour Party's democratic socialist tradition, that is to say the tradition of those seeking the transformation of capitalism into socialism by overwhelmingly legislative means. ... It would be a while before some of the party's social democrats—those whose aim is the gradual amelioration of poverty and exploitation within a liberal capitalist society—began to fear the same threat to Labour's egalitarian tradition as the left recognised to its socialist tradition."[109] This was reflected similarly inLabour: A Tale of Two Parties by Hilary Wainwright.[113]
According to Andrew Mathers, Hilary Wainwright's 1987 workLabour: A Tale of Two Parties provided "a different reading which contrasted the 'ameliorative, pragmatic' social democratic tradition expressed principally in the Parliamentary Labour Party with a 'transformative, visionary' democratic socialist tradition associated mainly with the grassroots members engaged closely with extra-parliamentary struggles."[114]
A democraticallyplanned economy has been proposed as a basis for socialism and variously advocated by some democratic socialists who simultaneously rejectmarket socialism andSoviet-type economic planning.[118] Democratic economic planning implies some process of democratic or participatory decision-making within the economy and firms in the form ofindustrial democracy. Supporters of democratic economic planning often reject market socialism on the basis that it fails to broadly coordinate information and resources according to social needs, and reject the Soviet model-basedadministrative-command system due to inefficient or undemocratic operation.
On the other hand, democratic socialist proponents ofcentralised planning argue that it is better equipped to carry out economy-wide coordination and strengthen the collective power of the working class.[123][124]David McNally, a professor at theUniversity of Houston, has argued in the Marxist tradition that the logic of themarket inherently producessocial inequality and leads tounequal exchanges, writing thatAdam Smith's moral intent and moral philosophy espousing equal exchange were undermined by the practice of the free market he championed as the development of the market economy involved coercion, exploitation and violence that Smith's moral philosophy could not counteract. McNally criticises market socialists for believing in the possibility of fair markets based on equal exchanges to be achieved by purging parasitical elements from the market economy, such as private ownership of the means of production, arguing that market socialism is an oxymoron when socialism is defined as an end towage labour.[125][122]
Variouscomputer scientists andradical economists have also proposed computer-based forms of democratic economic planning and coordination between economic enterprises, based on either centralised or decentralised models.[126] Chile explored computerised central planning from 1971 to 1973 withProject Cybersyn.[126][127][128] In 1993, computer scientistPaul Cockshott and economics professor Allin Cottrell proposed inTowards a New Socialism a computerised central planning model based ondirect democracy and modern technological advances.[121]
Some proponents ofmarket socialism see it as an economic system compatible with the political ideology of democratic socialism.[129] Democratic socialist advocates of market socialism often support the development ofworker cooperatives, and sometimes market-basedsovereign wealth funds.
Advocates of market socialism, such asJaroslav Vaněk, argue that genuinely free markets are impossible underprivate ownership ofproductive property. Vaněk contends that theclass differences andunequal distribution of income andeconomic power that result from private ownership of industry enable the interests of the dominant class to skew themarket in their favour, either in the form ofmonopoly andmarket power or by utilising theirwealth andresources to legislate government policies that benefit their specific business interests. Additionally, Vaněk states that workers in a socialist economy based onworker-owned cooperatives have more substantial incentives to maximise productivity because they would receive a share of the profits based on the overall performance of their enterprise, plus their fixed wage or salary.[130]
TheLange–Lerner model is a model first proposed byOskar R. Lange in 1936 in response to thesocialist calculation debate and later expanded byAbba P. Lerner in 1938, which is based on public ownership of the means of production with simultaneous market-based allocation of consumer goods. While this model is typically considered a type of centrally planned economy, Lange and Lerner referred to it as a market socialist model.[131][132]
Sometimes referred to as left-wing market anarchists,[145] proponents of this approach strongly affirm theclassical liberal ideas ofself-ownership andfree markets while maintaining that taken to their logical conclusions, these ideas supportanti-capitalist,anti-corporatist,anti-hierarchical andpro-labour positions in economics,anti-imperialism in foreign policy and radically progressive views regarding sociocultural issues such as gender, sexuality and race.[146] Echoing the language of these market socialists, they maintain that radical market anarchism should be seen by its proponents and by others as part of the socialist tradition because of its heritage, emancipatory goals and potential and that market anarchists can and should call themselves socialists.[147] Critics of the free market andlaissez-faire, as commonly understood, argue that socialism is fully compatible with amarket economy and that a genuinely free-market orlaissez-faire system would be anti-capitalist and socialist.[134]
According to its supporters, this would result in the society advocated by democratic socialists, when socialism is not understood as state socialism and conflated withself-described socialist states.[148] The free market andlaissez-faire are free from all economic privilege, monopolies and artificial scarcities.[135] This is consistent with theclassical economics view thateconomic rents, i.e. profits generated from a lack ofperfect competition, must be reduced or eliminated as much as possible through free competition rather than free from regulation.[149]
Whennationalisation of large industries was relatively widespread during theKeynesianpost-war consensus, it was not uncommon for some political commentators to describe several European countries as democratic socialist states seeking to move their countries towards asocialist economy.[159] In 1956, leading BritishLabour Party politicianAnthony Crosland claimed that capitalism had been abolished in Britain. However, others, such as WelshmanAneurin Bevan, Minister of Health in the firstpost-war Labour government and the architect of theNational Health Service, disputed the claim that Britain was a socialist state.[160] For Crosland and others who supported his views, Britain was a socialist state. According to Bevan, Britain had a socialistNational Health Service, which opposed thehedonism of Britain's capitalist society.[161] Although thelaws of capitalism still operated entirely as in the rest of Europe andprivate enterprise dominated the economy,[162] several political commentators claimed that during the post-war period, when socialist parties were in power, countries such as Britain and France were democratic socialist states. The same claim is now applied to Nordic countries with theNordic model.[163] In the 1980s, the government of PresidentFrançois Mitterrand aimed to expanddirigisme by attempting to nationalise all French banks, but this attempt faced opposition from theEuropean Economic Community, which demanded acapitalist free-market economy among its members.[164] Nevertheless,public ownership in France and the United Kingdom during the height of nationalisation in the 1960s and 1970s never accounted for more than 15–20% ofcapital formation.[162]
The form of socialism practised by parties such as the SingaporeanPeople's Action Party during its first few decades in power was pragmatic, as it its rejection of mass nationalisation characterised it. The party still claimed to besocialist, pointing out its extensive regulation of the private sector, activist intervention in the economy and social welfare policies as evidence of this claim.[165] Singaporean Prime MinisterLee Kuan Yew stated that he had been influenced by the democratic socialist factions of the British Labour Party.[166]
Karl Marx, whose thought influenced the development of democratic socialism, with some endorsing it and others rejecting it[nb 3]
Democratic socialism involves the majority of the population controlling the economy through somedemocratic system, with the idea that themeans of production are owned and managed by theworking class.[3] The interrelationship betweendemocracy andsocialism extends far back into the socialist movement toThe Communist Manifesto's emphasis on winning as a first step the "battle of democracy",[168] withKarl Marx writing that democracy is "the road to socialism."[169] Socialist thinkers such asEduard Bernstein,Karl Kautsky,Vladimir Lenin andRosa Luxemburg[170] wrote that democracy is indispensable to realising socialism.[171] Philosophical support for democratic socialism can be found in the works of political philosophers such asAxel Honneth andCharles Taylor. Honneth has put forward the view that political and economic ideologies have a social basis, meaning they originate from intersubjective communication between members of society. Honneth criticises theliberal state and ideology because it assumes that principles ofindividual liberty andprivate property are ahistorical and abstract when they evolved from a specific social discourse on human activity. In contrast toliberal individualism, Honneth has emphasised the intersubjective dependence between humans, namely that human well-being depends on recognising others and being recognised by them. With an emphasis oncommunity andsolidarity, democratic socialism can be seen as a way of safeguarding this dependency.[172]
We are not among those communists who are out to destroy personal liberty, who wish to turn the world into one huge barrack or into a gigantic workhouse. There certainly are some communists who, with an easy conscience, refuse to countenance personal liberty and would like to shuffle it out of the world because they consider that it is a hindrance to complete harmony. But we have no desire to exchange freedom for equality. We are convinced that in no social order will freedom be assured as in a society based upon communal ownership.[174]
Theoretically and philosophically, socialism itself is democratic, seen as the highest democratic form by its proponents and at one point being the same as democracy.[175] Some argue that socialism implies democracy[176] and thatdemocratic socialism is a redundant term.[177] However, others, such asMichael Harrington, argue that the termdemocratic socialism is necessary to distinguish it from that of the Soviet Union and other self-declared socialist states. For Harrington, the primary reason for this was the perspective that viewed theStalinist-era Soviet Union as having succeeded in usurping the legacy of Marxism and distorting it in propaganda to justify its politics.[178] Both Leninism and Marxism–Leninism have emphasised democracy,[179] endorsing some form of democratic organisation of society and the economy whilst supportingdemocratic centralism, with Marxist–Leninists and others arguing that socialist states such as the Soviet Union were democratic.[180] Marxist–Leninists also tended to distinguishsocialist democracy fromdemocratic socialism, which they associated pejoratively with "reformism" and "social democracy."[181] Ultimately, they are considered outside the democratic socialist tradition.[182] On the other hand,anarchism (especially within itssocial anarchist tradition) and other ultra-left tendencies have been discussed within the democratic socialist tradition for their opposition to Marxism–Leninism and their support for more decentralised, direct forms of democracy.[183]
While both anarchists and ultra-left tendencies have rejected the label as they tend to associate it with reformist and statist forms of democratic socialism, they are considered revolutionary-democratic forms of socialism, and some anarchists have referred todemocratic socialism.[184] Some Trotskyist organisations such as the AustralianSocialist Alliance,Socialist Alternative andVictorian Socialists or the FrenchNew Anticapitalist Party,Revolutionary Communist League andSocialism from below have described their form of socialism as democratic and have emphasised democracy in their revolutionary development of socialism.[185] Similarly, several Trotskyists have emphasisedLeon Trotsky's revolutionary-democratic socialism.[186] Some such asHal Draper spoke of "revolutionary-democratic socialism."[187] Thosethird camp revolutionary-democratic socialists advocated a socialistpolitical revolution to establish or re-establish socialist democracy indeformed ordegenerated workers' states.[188] Draper also compared social democracy and Stalinism as two forms ofsocialism from above, contraposed to his socialism from below as being the purer, more Marxist version of socialism.[187]
As a related ideology, classicalsocial democracy is a form of democratic socialism.[199] Social democracy underwent various major forms throughout its history and is distinguished between the early trend[200] that supportedrevolutionary socialism,[201] mainly related to Marx and Engels,[202] as well as other notable social-democratic politicians and orthodox Marxist thinkers such as Bernstein,[195] Kautsky,[193] Luxemburg[194] and Lenin,[203] including more democratic and libertarian interpretations ofLeninism;[204] therevisionist trend adopted by Bernstein and other reformist socialist leaders between the 1890s and 1940s;[205] the post-war trend[200] that adopted or endorsedKeynesianwelfare capitalism[206] as part of a compromise between capitalism and socialism;[207] and those opposed to theThird Way.[23]
Views on the compatibility of democracy and socialism
One of the foremost scholars who have argued that socialism and democracy are compatible is the Austrian-born American economistJoseph Schumpeter, who was hostile to socialism.[208] In his bookCapitalism, Socialism and Democracy (1942), Schumpeter emphasised that "political democracy was thoroughly compatible with socialism in its fullest sense".[209] However, it has been noted that he did not believe that democracy was a sound political system and advocated republican values.[32]
Political historianTheodore Draper wrote: "I know of no political group which has resisted totalitarianism in all its guises more steadfastly than democratic socialists."[32]
Historian and economistRobert Heilbroner argued that "[t]here is, of course, no conflict between such a socialism and freedom as we have described it; indeed, this conception of socialism is the very epitome of these freedoms", referring to open association of individuals in political and social life; the democratization and humanization of work; and the cultivation of personal talents and creativity.[32]
Bayard Rustin, a long-time member of theSocialist Party of America and National Chairman of theSocial Democrats, USA, wrote: "For me, socialism has meaning only if it is democratic. Of the many claimants to socialism only one has a valid title—that socialism which views democracy as valuable per se, which stands for democracy unequivocally, and which continually modifies socialist ideas and programs in the light of democratic experience. This is the socialism of the labor, social-democratic, and socialist parties of Western Europe."[32]
Economist and political theoristKenneth Arrow argued: "We cannot be sure that the principles of democracy and socialism are compatible until we can observe a viable society following both principles. But there is no convincing evidence or reasoning which would argue that a democratic-socialist movement is inherently self-contradictory. Nor need we fear that gradual moves in the direction of increasing government intervention will lead to an irreversible move to 'serfdom.'"[32]
JournalistWilliam Pfaff wrote: "It might be argued that socialism ineluctably breeds state bureaucracy, which then imposes its own kinds of restrictions upon individual liberties. This is what the Scandinavians complain about. But Italy's champion bureaucracy owes nothing to socialism. American bureaucracy grows as luxuriantly and behaves as officiously as any other."[32]
Economic anthropologistJason Hickel and his colleague Dylan Sullivan argue that in order to transcend the problems associated with the persistent underdevelopment in the contemporary "imperialist world economy", where "continued capital accumulation may create pressures for cheapening labour" which "works against the goals of human development," and also the top-downauthoritarian socialism as experienced in the Soviet Union and Maoist China, which they argue is "at odds with the socialist goals of workers’ self-management and democratic control over production," it will be necessary to adopt a "socialist strategy in the twenty-first century that is radically democratic, extending democracy to production itself."[211]
Marxist theorist and revolutionaryLeon Trotsky wrote that: "Socialism needs democracy like the human body needs oxygen".[212] In particular, he believed that central planners in the Soviet Union, regardless of their intellectual capacity, operated without the input and participation of the millions of people who participate in the economy and so they would be unable to respond to local conditions quickly enough to effectively coordinate all economic activity.[213] In theTransitional Program, which was drafted in 1938 during the founding congress of theFourth International, Trotsky called for the legalization of theSoviet parties andworker's control of production.[214]
Some anti-socialist politicians, economists, and theorists have argued that socialism and democracy are incompatible. According to them, history is full of instances ofself-declared socialist states that at one point were committed to the values ofpersonal liberty,freedom of speech,freedom of the press andfreedom of association but then found themselves clamping down on such freedoms as they end up being viewed as inconvenient or contrary towards their political or economic goals.[32]Chicago School economistMilton Friedman argued that a "society which is socialist cannot also be democratic" in the sense of "guaranteeing individual freedom."[32] SociologistRobert Nisbet, a philosophical conservative who began his career as a leftist, argued in 1978 that there is "not a single free socialism to be found anywhere in the world."[32]
NeoconservativeIrving Kristol argued: "Democratic socialism turns out to be an inherently unstable compound, a contradiction in terms. Every social democratic party, once in power, soon finds itself choosing, at one point after another, between the socialist society it aspires to and the liberal society that lathered it." Kristol added that "socialist movements end up [in] a society where liberty is the property of the state, and is (or is not) doled out to its citizens along with other contingent 'benefits'."[32]
Similarly,anti-communist academicRichard Pipes argued: "The merger of political and economic power implicit in socialism greatly strengthens the ability of the state and its bureaucracy to control the population. Theoretically, this capacity need not be exercised and need not lead to growing domination of the population by the state. In practice, such a tendency is virtually inevitable. For one thing, the socialization of the economy must lead to a numerical growth of the bureaucracy required to administer it, and this process cannot fail to augment the power of the state. For another, socialism leads to a tug of war between the state, bent on enforcing its economic monopoly, and the ordinary citizen, equally determined to evade it; the result is repression and the creation of specialized repressive organs."[32]
^Tsakalotos 2001, p. 26: "...most left-wing approaches (social democratic, democratic socialist, and so on) to how the market economy works.");Brandal, Bratberg & Thorsen 2013, Introduction: "In Scandinavia, as in the rest of the world, 'social democracy' and 'democratic socialism' have often been used interchangeably to define the part of the left pursuing gradual reform through democratic means."
^Malycha, Andreas (2000).Die SED: Geschichte ihrer Stalinisierung 1946–1953 [The SED: The History of its Stalinization] (in German). Schöningh.ISBN978-3-506-75331-1.
^Kharkevich, Aleksandr Aleksandrovich (1973).Theory of information. The identification of the images. Selected works in three volumes. Volume 3. Information and technology: Moscow: Publishing House "Nauka", 1973. – Academy of Sciences of the USSR. Institute of information transmission problems. p. 524.
^Hodgson, G. M. (1998). "Socialism against markets? A critique of two recent proposals".Economy and Society.27 (4):407–433.doi:10.1080/03085149800000027.
^Yunker, James A. (1995). "Post-Lange Market Socialism: An Evaluation of Profit-Oriented Proposals".Journal of Economic Issues.29 (3):683–717.doi:10.1080/00213624.1995.11505705.JSTOR4226984.
^"The far left is becoming the principal challenge to mainstream social democratic parties, in large part because its main parties are no longer extreme, but present themselves as defending the values and policies that social democrats have allegedly abandoned."[21]
^Social democratic proponents of the Third Way were more concerned about challenging theNew Right to win back government power.[22] This has resulted in analysts and critics arguing that they endorsed capitalism, even if it was due to recognising that outspokenanti-capitalism in these circumstances was politically nonviable, or that it was not only anti-socialist andneoliberal but anti-social democratic in practice.[23] Some observers maintain this was the result of their type ofreformism that caused them to administer the system according to capitalist logic,[24] while others saw it as a modern liberal form of democratic socialism within the context of market socialism, and distinguish it from classical democratic socialism.[25]
^"Democratic Marxism is authentic Marxism — the Marxism which emphasizes the necessity for revolutionary action. Loyalty to the movement, not loyalty to any particular doctrine, is characteristic of the orthodox democratic Marxist."[167] "There is considerable controversy among scholars regarding Marx's own attitude toward democracy, but two lines of thought developed from Marx: one emphasizing democracy and one, the dominant line, rejecting it."[47]
Azcárate, Manuel (1978). "What Is Eurocommunism?". In Urban, George (ed.).Eurocommunism. Maurice Temple Smith.ISBN9780851171548.
Bailey, David J. (2009).The Political Economy of European Social Democracy: A Critical Realist Approach.Routledge.ISBN9780415604253.
Barker, J. Ellis (2019) [1908]. "Chapter V. The Aims and Policy of the Socialists".British Socialism: An Examination of Its Doctrines, Policy, Aims and Practical Proposals. Good Press.
Barrientos, Armando; Powell, Martin (2004). "The Route Map of the Third Way". In Hale, Sarah; Leggett, Will; Martell, Luke (eds.).The Third Way and Beyond: Criticisms, Futures and Alternatives.Manchester University Press. pp. 9–26.ISBN9780719065989.
Benn, Tony; Mullin, Chris (1979).Arguments for Socialism. J. Cape.
Berberoglu, Berch (2018).The Palgrave Handbook of Social Movements, Revolution, and Social Transformation. Springer.ISBN9783319923543.
Berman, Sheri (2006).The Primacy of Politics: Social Democracy and the Making of Europe's Twentieth Century. Cambridge University Press.ISBN9780521817998.
Calossi, Enrico (2016).Anti-Austerity Left Parties in the European Union. Competition, Coordination, Integration. Pisa:Pisa University Press.ISBN9788867416653.
Cammack, Paul (2004). "Giddens's Way with Words". In Hale, Sarah; Leggett, Will; Martell, Luke (eds.).The Third Way and Beyond: Criticisms, Futures and Alternatives. Manchester University Press.ISBN97807190-65989.
Campbell, John (2009).The Iron Lady: Margaret Thatcher from Grocer's Daughter to Prime Minister. Penguin Books.ISBN9780099540038.
Carson, Kevin (2008).Organization Theory: A Libertarian Perspective. Charleston, South Carolina: BookSurge.
Carson, Kevin (2010).The Homebrew Industrial Revolution: A Low-Overhead Manifesto. Charleston, South Carolina: BookSurge.
Casier, Marlies; Jongerden, Joost (2010).Nationalisms and Politics in Turkey: Political Islam, Kemalism and the Kurdish Issue.Taylor & Francis.ISBN9780203847060.
Chartier, Gary; Johnson, Charles W. (2011).Markets Not Capitalism: Individualist Anarchism Against Bosses, Inequality, Corporate Power, and Structural Poverty (1st ed.). Brooklyn, New York: Minor Compositions/Autonomedia.
Clarke, Peter (1981).Liberals and Social Democrats. Cambridge University Press.ISBN9780521286510.
Cockshott, W. Paul; Cottrell, Allin (1993).Towards a New Socialism. Nottingham, England: Spokesman.ISBN9780851245454.
Cole, Mike (2017). "Social Class, Marxism and Socialism".Education, Equality and Human Rights: Issues of Gender, 'Race', Sexuality, Disability and Social Class (4th ed.). Routledge.ISBN9781351804141.
Considère-Charondu, Marie-Claire (2010). "Irish MEPS in an Enlarged Europe". In Gillissen, Christophe (ed.).Ireland: Looking East. Peter Lang.ISBN9789052016528.
Corfe, Robert (2010).The Future of Politics: With the Demise of the Left/Right Confrontational System. Bury St Edmunds, England: Arena Books.ISBN9781906791469.
Dolack, Peter (2016).It's Not Over: Learning from the Socialist Experiment (paperback ed.). Ropley: Zero Books.ISBN9781785350498.
Dongyoun, Hwang (2016).Anarchism in Korea: Independence, Transnationalism, and the Question of National Development, 1919–1984.SUNY Press.ISBN9781438461670.
Döring, Daniel (2007).Is 'Third Way' Social Democracy Still a Form of Social Democracy?. Norderstedt, Germany: GRIN Publishing.ISBN9783638868327.
Egle, Christoph; Henkes, Christian; Merkel, Wolfgang; Petring, Alexander (2008).Social Democracy in Power: The Capacity to Reform. Routledge Research in Comparative Politics. London:Routledge.ISBN9780415438209.
Ellman, Michael (2007). "The Rise and Fall of Socialist Planning". In Estrin, Saul; Kołodko, Grzegorz W.; Uvalić, Milica (eds.).Transition and Beyond: Essays in Honour of Mario Nuti. New York:Palgrave Macmillan.ISBN9780230546974.
Gillis, William (2011). "The Freed Market". In Chartier, Gary; Johnson, Charles W. (eds.).Markets Not Capitalism. Brooklyn, New York: Minor Compositions/Autonomedia.
Gilk, Paul (2008).Green Politics Is Eutopian: Essays in Anticipation of the Daughter. Wipf and Stock Publishers.ISBN9781621893936.
Godson, Roy; Haseler, Stephen (1978).'Eurocommunism': Implications for East and West. Springer.ISBN9781349159345.
Gregory, Paul; Stuart, Robert (2003).Comparing Economic Systems in the Twenty-First. South-Western College Pub.ISBN0618261818.
Griffiths, Tom G.; Millei, Zsuzsa (2012).Logics of Socialist Education: Engaging with Crisis, Insecurity and Uncertainty. Springer Science & Business Media.ISBN9789400747289.
Harvey, David (2005).A Brief History of Neoliberalism. Oxford University Press.ISBN9780199283279.
Hattersley, Roy (1987).Choose Freedom: The Future of Democratic Socialism. Harmondsworth, England: Penguin.ISBN9780140104943.
Heywood, Andrew (2012).Political Ideologies: An Introduction (5th ed.). Basingstoke, England: Palgrave Macmillan.ISBN9780230367258.
Hinchman, Lewis P.; Meyer, Thomas (2007).The Theory of Social Democracy. Cambridge, England: Polity Press.ISBN9780745641133.
Hinnfors, Jonas (2006).Reinterpreting Social Democracy: A History of Stability in the British Labour Party and Swedish Social Democratic Party. Critical Labour Movement Studies. Manchester University Press.ISBN9780719073625.
Honneth, Axel (1995). "The Limits of Liberalism: On the Political-Ethical Discussion Concerning Communitarianism". In Honneth, Axel (ed.).The Fragmented World of the Social. Albany: State University of New York Press.ISBN079142300X.
Horwitz, Morton J. (1994).The Transformation of American Law, 1870–1960: The Crisis of Legal Orthodoxy: The Crisis of Legal Orthodoxy. New York City, New York: Oxford University Press.ISBN9780195092592.
Humphrys, Elizabeth (2018).How Labour Built Neoliberalism: Australia's Accord, the Labour Movement and the Neoliberal Project. Brill Academic Publishers.ISBN9789004383463.
Isakhan, Benjamin (2015).Edinburgh Companion to the History of Democracy. Edinburgh University Press.ISBN9781474400145.
Johari, J. C. (1987).Contemporary Political Theory: New Dimensions, Basic Concepts and Major Trends. Sterling Publishers.ISBN9788120707184.
Katseli, Louka T.; Milios, John; Pelagidis, Theodore, eds. (2018).Welfare State and Democracy in Crisis: Reforming the European Model. Routledge.ISBN9781351788397.
Kendall, Diana (2011).Sociology in Our Time: The Essentials. Cengage Learning.ISBN9781111305505.
Kindersley, Richard, ed. (2016).In Search of Eurocommunism. Springer.ISBN9781349165810.
Kwok, Pui-lan; Rieger, Joerg (2013).Occupy Religion: Theology of the Multitude. Rowman & Littlefield.ISBN9781442217928.
LeBlanc, Paul (2014).Marx, Lenin, and the Revolutionary Experience: Studies of Communism and Radicalism in an Age of Globalization. Routledge.ISBN9781317793526.
Lewis, Jane; Surender, Rebecca, eds. (2004).Welfare State Change: Towards a Third Way?. Oxford University Press.ISBN9780199266722.
Li, He (2015).Political Thought and China's Transformation: Ideas Shaping Reform in Post-Mao China. Springer.ISBN9781137427816.
Lipset, Seymour Martin; Marks, Gary (2000).It Didn't Happen Here: Why Socialism Failed in the United States (paperback ed.). New York: W. W. Norton & Company.ISBN9780393322545.
Long, Roderick T. (2000).Reason and Value: Aristotle versus Rand. Washington, D.C.: Objectivist Center.
Long, Roderick T. (2012). "Anarchism". In D'Agostino, Fred; Gaus, Gerald F. (eds.).The Routledge Companion to Social and Political Philosophy.Routledge.
Lowe, Rodney (2004) [1993].The Welfare State in Britain Since 1945 (3rd, illustrated ed.). Macmillan Education UK.ISBN9781403911933.
Ludlam, Steve; Smith, Martin J., eds. (7 October 2017).Governing as New Labour: Policy and Politics Under Blair. Macmillan International Higher Education.ISBN9781403906786.
Prychitko, David L. (2002).Markets, Planning, and Democracy: Essays After the Collapse of Communism. Edward Elgar Publishing.ISBN9781840645194.
Ramnath, Maia (2019). "Non-Western Anarchisms and Postcolonialism". In Levy, Carl; Adams, Matthew S. (eds.).The Palgrave Handbook of Anarchism. Springer.ISBN9783319756202.
Ratner, Carl (2019). "The Neolberal Political Economy".Neoliberal Psychology. Springer.ISBN9783030029821.
Raza, Syed Ali (2012).Social Democratic System. Global Peace Trust.ISBN9789699757006.
Romano, Flavio (2006).Clinton and Blair: The Political Economy of the Third Way. Routledge Frontiers of Political Economy. Vol. 75. London:Routledge.ISBN9780415378581.
Romano, Flavio (7 May 2007).Clinton and Blair: The Political Economy of the Third Way. Routledge Frontiers of Political Economy. Vol. 75. London:Routledge.ISBN9781134182527.
Meyer, Henning; Rutherford, Jonathan, eds. (2011).The Future of European Social Democracy: Building the Good Society. Springer.ISBN9780230355040.
Sears, Kathleen (2019).Socialism 101: From the Bolsheviks and Karl Marx to Universal Healthcare and the Democratic Socialists, Everything You Need to Know about Socialism.Simon & Schuster.ISBN9781507211366.
Sinclair, Upton (1918).Upton Sinclair's: A Monthly Magazine: for Social Justice, by Peaceful Means If Possible.
Sloan, Pat (1937).Soviet Democracy. London: Left Book Club.
Steele, David Ramsay (1992).From Marx to Mises: Post-Capitalist Society and the Challenge of Economic Calculation. Open Court Publishing Company.ISBN9780875484495.
Steger, Manfred B. (1997).The Quest for Evolutionary Socialism: Eduard Bernstein and Social Democracy. Cambridge, United Kingdom; New York City, United States; Melbourne, Australia:Cambridge University Press.ISBN9780521582001.
Taylor, Andrew J. (2013). "Trade Unions and the Politics of Social Democratic Renewal". InGillespie, Richard; Paterson, William E. (eds.).Rethinking Social Democracy in Western Europe.Routledge.ISBN9781135236182.
Ticktin, Hillel (1998). "The Problem is Market Socialism". InOllman, Bertell (ed.).Market Socialism: The Debate Among Socialists. New York:Routledge.ISBN9780415919661.
Tucker, Benjamin (1972).State Socialism and Anarchism and Other Essays: Including the Attitude of Anarchism Toward Industrial Combinations and Why I Am an Anarchist (1st ed.). Ralph Myles Pub.ISBN9780879260156.
Wainwright, Hilary (1987).Labour: A Tale of Two Parties. Hogarth Press.ISBN9780701207786.
Walters, William (2001). "Governing Unemployment: Transforming "the Social"?". In Pavlich, George; Wickham, Gary (eds.).Rethinking Law, Society and Governance: Foucault's Bequest. Hart Publishing.ISBN9781841132938.
Weisskopf, Thomas E. (1994). "Challenges to Market Socialism: A Response to Critics". In Roosevelt, Frank; Belkin, David (eds.).Why Market Socialism? Voices from Dissent. Armonk, New York: M. E. Sharpe. pp. 297–318.ISBN9781563244650.
Whyman, Philip (2005). "Socialism".Third Way Economics: Theory and Evaluation. Springer.ISBN9780230514652.
Wright, Anthony (1999). "Social Democracy and Democratic Socialism". InEatwell, Roger; Wright, Anthony (eds.).Contemporary Political Ideologies (2nd ed.). London:Continuum. pp. 80–103.ISBN9781855676053.
Lamb, Peter (2015). "Social democracy".Historical Dictionary of Socialism. Historical Dictionaries of Religions, Philosophies, and Movements (3rd ed.).Rowman & Littlefield.ISBN9781442258266.
Miller, David (1998). "Social Democracy". In Craig, Edward (ed.).Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Vol. 8.Routledge. p. 827.ISBN9780415187138.
Panfilov, E. G. (1979). "Democratic Socialism".The Great Soviet Encyclopedia (3rd ed.).
Tsakalotos, Euclid (2001). "European Employment Policies: A New Social Democratic Model for Europe". In Arestis, Philip; Sawyer, Malcolm C. (eds.).The Economics of the Third Way: Experiences from Around the World. Edward Elgar Publishing. pp. 26–45.ISBN9781843762836.
Volle, Adam (6 October 2022)."Democratic socialism".Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved2 February 2023.
Bilgrami, S. Jafar Raza (1965). "Problems of Democratic Socialism".Indian Journal of Political Science.26 (4):26–31.JSTOR41854084.
Blombäck, Sofie; Demker, Marie; Hagevi, Magnus; Hinnfors, Jonas; Loxbo, Karl (2019). "The Decline of Western European Social Democracy: Exploring the Transformed Link Between Welfare State Generosity and the Electoral Strength of Social Democratic Parties, 1975–2014".Party Politics.27 (3):1–12.doi:10.1177/1354068819861339.ISSN1354-0688.S2CID199148173.
Lih, Lars T. (2003). "How a Founding Document Was Found, or One Hundred Years of Lenin's What is to Be Done?".Kritika: Explorations in Russian and Eurasian History.4 (1):5–49.doi:10.1353/kri.2003.0008.S2CID162307936.
Ludlam, Steve (1 June 2000). "New Labour: What's Published Is What Counts".British Journal of Politics and International Relations.2 (2):264–276.doi:10.1111/1467-856X.00037.S2CID144902773.
Timmermann, Heinz (October 1977). "Eurocommunism: Moscow's Reaction and the Implications for Eastern Europe".The World Today.33 (10). Royal Institute of International Affairs:376–385.JSTOR40394953.
Welch, Levin (Autumn 2012). "Neoliberalism, Economic Crisis, and the 2008 Financial Meltdown in the United States".International Review of Modern Sociology.38 (2). International Journals:221–257.JSTOR43499898.
Wilhelm, John Howard (1985). "The Soviet Union Has an Administered, Not a Planned, Economy".Europe-Asia Studies.37 (1):118–130.doi:10.1080/09668138508411571.
Heilbroner, Robert L. (Winter 1991)."From Sweden to Socialism: A Small Symposium on Big Questions".Dissident. Barkan, Joanne; Brand, Horst; Cohen, Mitchell; Coser, Lewis; Denitch, Bogdan; Fehèr, Ferenc; Heller, Agnès; Horvat, Branko; Tyler, Gus. pp. 96–110. Retrieved10 April 2020.
Chartier, Gary (13 April 2010).Free-Market Anti-Capitalism? (Speech). Cæsar's Palace, Las Vegas: Association of Private Enterprise Education.
Esteva, Gustavo (October 2013).Liberty According to the Zapatistas (Speech). Lecture at the Bridgeport Free Skool. Bridgeport, Connecticut.
Thomas, Norman (2 February 1936).Is the New Deal Socialism? (Speech). Chicago Democratic Socialists of America. Archived fromthe original on 12 July 2010. Retrieved28 January 2016.
Chartier, Gary (September 2009)."Socialist Ends, Market Means: Five Essays"(PDF).Center for a Stateless Society. Tulsa Alliance of the Libertarian Left. Retrieved8 February 2020.
Democratic Socialists of America."About us". Democratic Socialists of America. Retrieved17 May 2019.
Democratic Socialists of America."What is Democratic Socialism?"(PDF). Democratic Socialists of America. Archived fromthe original on 1 July 2009. Retrieved5 December 2017.
Dionne, E. J.; Galtson, William (13 May 2019)."Socialism: A Short Primer". Brookings Institution. Retrieved10 April 2020.
Duignan, Brian; Kalsang Bhutia, Thinley; Mahajan, Deepti (21 January 2009)."Social democracy".Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved29 February 2020.
Duignan, Brian; Kalsang Bhutia, Thinley; Mahajan, Deepti (20 December 2016)."Social democracy".Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved29 February 2020.
Schweickart, David (24 March 2006)."Democratic Socialism". Loyola University Chicago. Archived fromthe original(PDF) on 17 June 2012. Retrieved6 August 2020.
Starke, Helmut Dietmar (11 January 2020)."Rosa Luxemburg".Encyclopædia Britannica Online. Retrieved29 February 2020.Luxemburg developed a humanitarian theory of Marxism, stressing democracy and revolutionary mass action to achieve international socialism.
Reisman, Reidsman, ed. (1996).Democratic Socialism in Britain: Classic Texts in Economic and Political Thought, 1825–1952. Chatto and Pickering.ISBN9781851962853.
