Social democracy



Social democracy is a political ideology of the Left on the classic political spectrum. Historically, social democracy was a form of evolutionary reformist socialism.[1] The Frankfurt Declaration of the Socialist International in 1951, attended by many social democratic parties from across the world, committed the adherents to the replacement of capitalism with socialism and committed adherents to oppose Bolshevik communism and Stalinism.[2] And the differentiation between "Social Democracy" and "Democratic Socialism" had yet to fully develop. The chief goal of modern social democracy is to reform capitalism to align it with the ethical ideals of social justice while maintaining the capitalist mode of production, rather than creating an alternative socialist economic system.[3]

Social democracy, as practiced in Europe in 1951, was a socialist movement supporting gradualism; the belief that gradual democratic reforms to capitalist economies will eventually succeed in creating a socialist economy,[4] rejecting forcible imposition of socialism through revolutionary means.[4] This gradualism has resulted in various far left groups, including communists, of accusing social democracy of accepting the values of capitalist society and therefore not a genuine form of socialism[4] and instead a concession made to the capitalist class. Social democracy promotes the creation of economic democracy as a means to secure workers' rights.[1] Social democracy rejects the Marxian principle of dictatorship of the proletariat, claiming that gradualist democratic reforms will improve the rights of the working class.[5]

Since the rise in popularity of the New Right and neoliberalism, a number of prominent social democratic parties have abandoned the goal of the gradual evolution of capitalism to socialism and instead support welfare state capitalism.[6] Social democracy as such has arisen as a distinct ideology from democratic socialism. In many countries, social democrats continue to exist alongside democratic socialists, who stand to the left of them on the political spectrum. The two movements sometimes operate within the same political party, such as the Brazilian Workers' Party[7] and the Socialist Party of France. In recent years, several social democratic parties (in particular, the British Labour Party) have embraced more centrist, Third Way policy positions. This development has generated considerable controversy.

Historically, classic social democracy was a socialist movement that advocated the establishment of a socialist economy in the strict sense through political reforms, which were to be achieved by class struggle. In the early 20th century, however, a number of socialist parties rejected revolution and other traditional ideas of Marxism such as class struggle, and went on to take more moderate positions. These moderate positions included a belief that reformism was a desirable way to achieve socialism.

The Socialist International (SI) is the main international organization of social democratic and moderate socialist parties. It affirms the following principles: first, freedom—not only individual liberties, but also freedom from discrimination and freedom from dependence on either the owners of the means of production or the holders of abusive political power; second, equality and social justice—not only before the law but also economic and socio-cultural equality as well, and equal opportunities for all including those with physical, mental, or social disabilities; and, third, solidarity—unity and a sense of compassion for the victims of injustice and inequality. These ideals are described in further detail in the SI's Declaration of Principles.[8] {| class="toc" id="toc"

Contents
[hide]*1 History
 * 1.1 Original social democracy
 * 1.2 Contemporary social democracy
 * 1.3 Post-World War II
 * 1.4 Present
 * 2 Ideology
 * 3 Political parties
 * 4 Criticism
 * 5 Notable social democrats
 * 6 See also
 * 7 References
 * 8 External links
 * 8.1 International organizations
 * 8.2 Social democratic literature
 * 8.3 Criticism of social democracy
 * }

Original social democracy
In the 19th Century, the term "Social Democrat" was used as a broad catch-all for international socialists owing their basic ideological allegiance to Karl Marx or Ferdinand Lassalle, in contrast to those advocating various forms of utopian socialism. In one of the first scholarly works on European socialism written for an American audience, Richard T. Ely's 1883 book, French and German Socialism in Modern Times, Social Democrats were characterized as "the extreme wing of the socialists" who were "inclined to lay so much stress on equality of enjoyment, regardless of the value of one's labor, that they might, perhaps, more properly be called communists."[9] Ely continued: "They have two distinguishing characteristics. The vast majority of them are laborers, and, as a rule, they expect the violent overthrow of existing institutions by revolution to precede the introduction of the socialistic state. I would not, by any means, say that they are all revolutionists, but the most of them undoubtedly are. * * *

"The most general demands of the social democrats are the following: The state should exist exclusively for the laborers; land and capital must become collective property, and production be carried on unitedly. Private competition, in the ordinary sense of the term, is to cease."[10] Many parties in this era described themselves as "social democratic," including the General German Workers' Association and the Social Democratic Workers' Party of Germany (which merged to form the Social Democratic Party of Germany), the British Social Democratic Federation, and the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party. The term "social democracy" continued to be used in this context up to the time of the Bolshevik Revolution of November 1917, at which time the term "communist" came into vogue for individuals and organizations espousing a revolutionary road to socialism.

Contemporary social democracy
A red rose is often used as a symbol of social democracy, mostly adopted in the period after World War II.[11] The contemporary social democratic movement came into being through a break within the socialist movement in the early years of the twentieth century. Speaking broadly, this break can be described as a parting of ways between those who insisted upon political revolution as a precondition for the achievement of socialist goals and those who maintained that a gradual or evolutionary path to socialism was both possible and desirable.[12] Many related movements, including pacifism, anarchism, and syndicalism, arose at the same time; these ideologies were often promulgated by individuals who split from the preexisting socialist movement, and held a variety of quite different objections to Marxism. Eduard Bernstein, 1895.One of the key founders of contemporary social democracy was Eduard Bernstein, a proponent of reformist socialism and a revisionist of Marxism. Bernstein had originally been a Marxist and had held close association to Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, but he saw flaws in Marxian thinking and began such criticism when he investigated and challenged the Marxian materialist theory of history.[13] Bernstein criticized Marxism's concept of "irreconciliable class conflicts" and Marxism's hostility to liberalism.<sup class="reference" id="cite_ref-Steger.2C_Manfred_B._1997._Pp._133_13-0">[14] Bernstein refuted Marx's position on liberalism by claiming that liberal democrats and social democrats held common grounds that he claimed could be utilized to create a "socialist republic".<sup class="reference" id="cite_ref-Steger.2C_Manfred_B._1997._Pp._133_13-1">[14]

On the issue of class conflict, Bernstein believed that economic class disparities between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat would gradually be eliminated through legal reforms and economic redistribution programs.<sup class="reference" id="cite_ref-Steger.2C_Manfred_B._1997._Pp._133_13-2">[14] Bernstein reject the Marxian principle of dictatorship of the proletariat, claiming that gradualist democratic reforms will improve the rights of the working class.<sup class="reference" id="cite_ref-Steger.2C_Manfred_B._1997._Pp._141_4-1">[5] Furthermore, he believed that class cooperation was a preferable course to achieve socialism, rather than class conflict.<sup class="reference" id="cite_ref-14">[15] On the issue of class conflict and responding to the Marxian principle of dictatorship of the proletariat, Bernstein said: "No one thinks of destroying civil society as a community ordered in a civilized war. Quite to the contrary, Social Democracy does not want to break up civil society and make all its members proletarians together; rather, it ceaselessly labors to raise the worker from the social position of a proletarian to that of a citizen and thus make citizenship universal. It does not want to replace civil society with a proletarian society but a capitalist order of society with a socialist one." Eduard Bernstein<sup class="reference" id="cite_ref-15">[16] Bernstein urged social democrats to be committed to a long-term agenda of transforming the capitalist economy to a socialist economy rather than a sudden upheaval of capitalism, saying: "Social democracy should neither expect nor desire the imminent collapse of the existing economic system … What social democracy should be doing, and doing for a long time to come, is organize the working class politically, train it for democracy, and fight for any and all reforms in the state which are designed to raise the working class and make the state more democratic." Eduard Bernstein<sup class="reference" id="cite_ref-16">[17] The social democrats, who had created the largest socialist organizations of that era, did not reject Marxism (and in fact claimed to uphold it), but a number of key individuals wanted to reform Marx's arguments in order to promulgate a less hostile criticism of capitalism. They argued that socialism should be achieved through evolution of society rather than revolution. Such views were strongly opposed by the revolutionary socialists, who argued that any attempt to reform capitalism was doomed to fail, for the reformers would be gradually corrupted and eventually turn into capitalists themselves.

Despite their differences, the reformist and revolutionary branches of socialism remained united through the Second International until the outbreak of World War I. A differing view on the legitimacy of the war proved to be the final straw for this tenuous union. The reformist socialists supported their respective national governments in the war, a fact that was seen by the revolutionary socialists as outright treason against the working class; in other words, the revolutionary socialists believed that this stance betrayed the principle that the workers of all nations should unite in overthrowing capitalism, and decried the fact that usually the lowest classes are the ones sent into the war to fight and die.

Bitter arguments ensued within socialist parties, as for example between Eduard Bernstein, the leading reformist socialist, and Rosa Luxemburg, one of the leading revolutionary socialists within the SPD in Germany. Eventually, after the Russian Revolution of 1917, most of the world's socialist parties fractured. The reformist socialists kept the name social democrats, while many revolutionary socialists began calling themselves communists, and they soon formed the modern Communist movement. These communist parties soon formed an exclusive Third Internationale known globally as the Comintern.

By the 1920s, the doctrinal differences between social democrats and communists of all factions (be they Orthodox Marxists, Bolsheviks, or Mensheviks) had solidified.