This is a Dengist community in favor of Bashar al-Assad with no information that can lead to the arrest of Hillary Clinton, our fellow liberal and queen. This community is not ironic. We are Marxists-Leninists.
See this GitHub page for a collection of sources about socialism, imperialism, and other relevant topics.
This community is for posts about Marxism and geopolitics (including shitposts to some extent). Serious posts can be posted here or in /c/GenZhou. Reactionary or ultra-leftist cringe posts belong in /c/shitreactionariessay or /c/shitultrassay respectively.
We have a Matrix homeserver and a Matrix space. See this thread for more information. If you believe the server may be down, check the status on status.elara.ws.
Rules:
Welcome again to everybody. Make yourself at home. In the time-honoured tradition of our group, here is the weekly discussion thread.
☭ Matrix homeserver and space
☭ Theory discussion group on /c/theory@lemmygrad.ml
☭ Find theory on ProleWiki, marxists.org, Anna's Archive
ooof. this is a line from a c/thingsutrassay post. Venezuela is a Revolutionary Socialist nation.
Democratic socialism is when a capitalist dictatorship uses electoral politics to divert a percentage of the profits from imperialism to social spending in order to stave off proletarian revolution. It is a canard to tell people real socialism is on the way you just have to keep your head down and keep voting.
Isn't that more of a socdem thing though? Also, I don't think Bolivarian Revolution will be effective as long as they let ghouls like Guaido and Machado loose.
Fuck I got them mixed up again didn't I?
It is very easy to confuse the two when the separation line is too blurred. But my take is socdems are center-right and what you write before, while demsocs are center-left and believe they can topple the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie by partaking in bourgeois democracy—Chile under the Allende government was a good example.
I know the lines can be a bit blurry on these definitions, but I've always understood democratic socialism as bringing about and constructing socialism through bourgeois elections and democratic reforms to the system. This is what's happening in Venezuela. It's not an ultra position to criticize the limitations of this, but it would be to dismiss it entirely as not real socialism.
The Bolivarian Revolution was violent. There were multiple coup attempts and lots of fighting before Chavez was elected President. They made a new constitution. It was not "reform." Yes he won a election in the bourgeois system but his mandate was to break he system not fix it.
Its not full throated civil war like other socialist revolutions were but calling it "demsoc" is not correct.
I agree that calling it "demsoc" by your definition is incorrect, but my argument is that your definition of democratic socialism is not correct.
Whether violence occurred is not relevant to the question. Many countries write new constitutions each time a new ruling party comes to power. These do not signify that a socialist revolution has occurred.
The primary question we should be asking is "has the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie been overthrown and replaced by a dictatorship of the proletariat?" In the case of Venezuela, the answer is "no". Because of this, the capitalist class still weilds significant political power in Venezuela.
Both Marx and Lenin argued that it is not enough for the vanguard to simply take hold of the bourgeois state, but that they must "break up and smash the ready-made state machinery" and replace it with "the proletariat organized as the ruling class".
"Democratic socialism" is a marketing term just like "Nationalist Socialism." Its a concept that has no basis in material reality. You cannot vote your way to socialism so "Democratic socialism" is just a name for something that is not indicative of what it really is. Like "Pineapple" they are nothing like an apple and don't grow on a Pine tree.
The ruling class of Venezuela is the working class. If the bourgeoisie had a dictatorship in Venezuela they would be in government but they are not so they have been overthrown. The bourgeoisie still have significant power inside China too but in both cases the Vanguard of the working class keep them subservient. In Venezuela the Vanguard Party has decided to not implement dictatorship. That does not mean they are democratic socialists they are doing Socialism with Bolivarian Characteristics. It is something different to democratic socialism.
Lenin said "smash the machinery" but he was talking about a totally different state apparatus.
Marx said the working class "cannot just take hold of the existing machinery." The state apparatus of the constitution of 1999 is drastically different from the system under the republic. they did not just "take hold" they built a new system with a few concepts that are similar to the old system. While it isn't as big a change as Russia or China they were changing from (semi) feudal government systems to socialist systems where Venezuela was transition from a republic to a socialist system.