Still working to recover. Please don't edit quite yet.

social-democracy

From Anarchopedia
Revision as of 16:51, 15 December 2004 by Live and let Troll (Talk | contribs) (merging additions from Wikipedia following Wikinfo's import)

Jump to: navigation, search

Social democracy, also vaguely identified as centre leftism, moderate socialism, democratic socialism is a political ideology emerging in the late 19th and early 20th centuries from supporters of Marxism who believed that the transition to a socialist society could be achieved through democratic evolutionary rather than revolutionary means. During the early and mid-20th century, social democrats were in favor of stronger labor laws, nationalization of major industries, and a strong welfare state. Over the course of the 20th century, most social democrats gradually distanced themselves from Marxism and class struggle. As of 2004, social democrats generally do not see a conflict between a capitalist market economy and their definition of a socialist society, and support reforming capitalism in an attempt to make it more equitable through the creation and maintenance of a welfare state (see also the more extreme ideology of welfarism). Most social democratic parties are members of the Socialist International, which is a successor to the Second International.

Often, the term socialism is used to denote social democrats, although in many countries socialism is a broader concept including democratic socialists, Marxists, communists, libertarian socialists and sometimes anarchists.

In the past, social democrats were often described as reformist socialists (since they advocated the implementation of socialism through gradual reforms). They were contrasted with the revolutionary socialists, who advocated the implementation of socialism through a workers' revolution. Today, however, the democratic socialists carry on the legacy of reformist socialism and seek to bring about a fully socialist system through electoral means, while most of the social democrats only wish to make capitalism more equitable (and see the abolition of capitalism as unnecessary).

Social democratic parties are among the largest parties in most countries in Europe, as well as in the majority of European-influenced parts of the world (with the notable exception of the United States). Social democrats are seen as centre left in orientation. Globally, some studies claim, more people share the basic ideals of social democracy than of any other political movement.

History

The modern social democratic current came into being through a break within the socialist movement in the early 20th century, between two groups holding different views on the ideas of Karl Marx. Many related movements, including pacifism, anarchism, and syndicalism, arose at the same time (often by splitting from the main socialist movement) and had various quite different objections to the "class war" concept espoused by most Marxists. The social democrats, who were the majority of socialists at this time, did not reject Marxism (and in fact claimed to uphold it), but wanted to reform it in certain ways and tone down their criticism of capitalism. They argued that socialism should be achieved through evolution rather than revolution. Such views were strongly opposed by the revolutionary socialists, who argued that any attempt to reform capitalism was doomed to fail, because the reformers would be gradually corrupted and eventually turn into capitalists themselves.

Historians claim that several key figures were important in this shift: the Russian Prince Kropotkin, César de Paepe of the Belgian International Working Men's Association, and Jean Jaures (who led the French Socialist Party until his assassination on July 31, 1914, one day before the general mobilization of forces that began World War I).

Despite their differences, the reformist and revolutionary branches of socialism remained united until the outbreak of World War I. The war proved to be the final straw that pushed the tensions between them to breaking point. 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 (since it betrayed the principle that the workers of all nations should unite in overthrowing capitalism). Bitter arguments ensued within socialist parties, as for example between Eduard Bernstein (reformist socialist) and Rosa Luxemburg (revolutionary socialist) within the SPD in Germany. Eventually, after the Russian Revolution, most of the world's socialist parties fractured. The reformist socialists kept the name social democrats, while the revolutionary socialists began calling themselves communists, and soon formed the modern communist movement. (see also: Comintern)

According to historian Barbara Tuchman, a slow shift of European public opinion from 1880-1914, especially in Germany, had aligned nationalist and capitalist forces politically in favor of confrontation and war, and generally silenced pacifism and discredited revolutionary anarchism. Moderate syndicalist and socialist views of such leaders as César de Paepe and Jean Juares were gradually marginalized by concessions to the labor movement, especially in Germany, which from 1900-1914 instituted the shortest working week, longest vacations, and best fringe benefit programs in Europe - all while arming for the conflict that most European powers expected.

Following the split between social democrats and communists, another split developed within social democracy, between those who still believed it was necessary to abolish capitalism (without revolution) and replace it with a socialist system through democratic parliamentary means, and those who believed that the capitalist system could be retained but simply needed adjustements and improvements such as the nationalization of large businesses, the implementation of social programs (public education, universal healthcare, etc.) and the (partial) redistribution of wealth through a welfare state, in order to make capitalism more humane. Eventually, most social democratic parties have come to be dominated by the latter position and, in the Cold War era, abandoned any commitment to abolish capitalism. For instance, in 1959, the Social Democratic Party of Germany adopted the Godesberg Program which rejected class struggle and Marxism.

In general, those social democrats who merely want to improve capitalism have kept the name social democrats (by virtue of their majority position), while those who want to gradually abolish capitalism through democratic means are called democratic socialists.

Although social democrats had been influential in this period, and a moderate breed of Euro-Communism had developed, in general nationalist, fundamentalist and capitalist forces were seen as allies of the United States, and there was some suspicion of Social Democrats as potentially "soft on Communism" and seeking to implement something like Stalinism in Western Europe. During the 1960s and culminating in the signal year 1968, these concerns were dispelled, and the countries that would later join in the European Union generally followed a path set by (Christian or Secular) social democrats, who differed little on core policies.

Since the 1920s, differences between social democrats and communists have been constantly growing (although it should be noted that the communists themselves have split into a few branches which strongly oppose each other, such as the stalinists and the trotskyists).

In modern times (to be more exact, since the late 1980s), most social democratic parties have adopted the "Third Way" either formally or in practice. Modern social democrats are in favor of a mixed economy, which should be mainly capitalistic but with a strong welfare state and adequate social services. Many social democratic parties have shifted emphasis from their traditional goals of social justice to human rights and environmental issues. In this, they are facing increasing challenge from Greens, who view ecology as fundamental to peace, and require reform of money supply and safe trade measures to ensure ecological integrity. In Germany in particular, Greens, Social Democrats, and other socialist parties have cooperated in so-called Red-Green Alliances.

A number of the policies advocated by social democrats have become permanent in the countries where they have been implemented, in the sense that they are now supported by all mainstream political parties. Such policies include the progressive income tax and publicly funded medicine. Other measures, however, (such as tuition-free university education) have largely been overturned, often by social democratic governments themselves. Social democrats have, for the most part, also abandoned the concept of nationalization and have instead fully or partly privatised state owned industry and services. The Labour Party in Britain is especially enthusiastic about implementing Public-Private Partnerships to deliver public services, has introduced tuition fees for post secondary education and has cut back on social programs.

In general, these reversals in policy are supported more by the party leadership and far less (or not at all) by the average members of social democratic parties and their voter base. Many have claimed that the present leadership of the social democratic movement is corrupt and has abandoned social democracy in practice.

Some argue that the protectionist policies followed by social democrats to protect fragile national economies during growth or rebuilding, are exactly the policies that developing nations are today prevented from following by the IMF.

Most would agree that late-20th-century Europe, culminating in the 1992 formation of the European Union, demonstrates that developed nations can cooperate under the general policies of social democrats to achieve a lasting peace. Whether similar policies can work elsewhere is a matter of much debate, especially in the anti-globalization movement, where advocates on both sides argue about the degree to which regulation has fostered growth and tolerance. Some argue that the protectionist policies followed by social democrats to protect fragile national economies during growth or rebuilding, are exactly the policies that developing nations are today prevented from following by the IMF. Beyond that, as in the early 20th century, there is substantial difference of opinion depending on general views of capitalism.

It is an interesting phenomena that social democrats often succeed in their aims to the point of political irrelevance - then spending some time out of favor with voters who turn to more conservative parties, e.g. Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan who inherited moribunded economies with the strong educational and infrastructural foundations favored by social democrats.

However, these parties too are often perceived as going too far for comfort, particularly in foreign policy, trade, and warfare, so social democrats may never disappear, even if the entire original program of socialism has been accomplished. Through the 20th century, few of the benefits instituted by any social democratic government have been successfully repealed by successors: an income tax, universal medical insurance, free university education, are seemingly permanent features of most European nations. The services may vary in quality but never seem to be withdrawn completely - the gains made by social democrats politically are seemingly seen by the public as public goods.

See also: History of Socialism

Basic assumptions of social democracy

The modern Social Democrat or Liberal Democrat or Green Parties or Labour Parties are all adherents of some tenets of social democracy, though the latter three have specific differences with its major doctrines.

Some consider social democracy itself to be a debate between left-wing politics and green politics about how best to achieve human development. Others dismiss social democracy as right-wing politics masquerading as left-wing politics. Rather than a doctrine, it is more a set of constraints, like human rights and gender equality, that democracy is forbidden to override or overrule. Social democracy differs from libertarian views or the ideal republic in that the rights and guarantees are quite extensive. They are however guaranteed by the same mechanism: legal codes and the violent enforcement of same against resisters by the state and its police.

In general social democracy assumes:

  • Representative democracy is at least a first step to any more genuine or effective democracy - those who would change society must participate in it and become effective at persuasion and achieving change within its limits - in contrast to the views of most anarchist or communist.
  • Human rights and other international treaty-based agreements on rights between nation-states are at least a first step to any deeper or more effective method of achieving human development and gender equality - in contrast to libertarian or nationalist assumptions that generally hold that abstract top-down "rights" exist only on paper, and must be backed by effective force to work, as human rights laws simply aren't.
  • Courts are effective means of making law work at least in the short term - though long term social and attitude changes are the only long term way to achieve social justice - in contrast to anarchist and syndicalist views which emphasize direct action as much more effective.

Views of modern Social Democrat parties

In general, contemporary Social Democrat parties support:

  • Private enterprise, but strongly regulated to protect the interests of workers, consumers and small enterprise - in stark contrast to libertarian and green approaches, e.g. Natural Capitalism which minimizes regulation.
  • An extensive system of social security, although not to the extent advocated by democratic socialists or communists (see welfare state), notably to counteract the effects of poverty and to insure the citizens against loss of income following illness or unemployment.
  • Ensuring good education, health care, child care, etc. for all citizens through government funding.
  • Higher taxes (necessary to pay for the former), especially for higher income groups.
  • Extensive social laws (minimum wages, working conditions, protection against arbitrary firing).
  • Environmental protection laws (although not to the extent advocated by Greens).
  • Generally support anti-xenophobic legislations (pro-choice, anti-racist, anti-homophobic, some environmental laws specifically opposing monoculture), although not to the extent of anarchists.
  • A foreign policy supporting multilateralism and international institutions such as the United Nations.

Criticism of social democracy

Obviously, most criticism against social democracy comes from their main political opponents, the right wing. Right-wingers typically argue that social democratic systems are too restrictive on their version of individual rights, particularly the rights of wealthy businessmen, and that individual choice is not as great in systems that provide state-run schools, health care, child care and other services. Social democrats usually retort by arguing that their policies are in fact enhancing individual rights, by raising the standard of living of the vast majority of the population and eliminating the threat of extreme poverty.

Economic conservatives and classic liberals argue that social democracy interferes with market mechanisms and hurts the economy by encouraging large budget deficits and restricting the ability of entrepreneurs to invest as they see fit. In response, social democrats point to the principles of Keynesian economics, which supports the validity of social democratic economic practices, and, indeed, encourages them.

Critics of the welfare state argue that it is unaffordable, particularly as the population ages, thus putting more demands on pensions and health care provisions. Social democrats reply that many different sources of funding exist, and in any case it can never be considered "too costly" to save people's lives.

There is also criticism against social democracy coming from the Left. Democratic socialists and revolutionary socialists criticise social democrats for being so dependent on the capitalist system that they become indistinguishable from modern liberals. Many social democrats explicitly renounce the label "socialist" and the goal of achieving a socialist state. This willingness to work within the capitalist system rather than trying to modify or overturn it leads many on the left to accuse modern social democratic parties of being corrupt and betraying their principles. Left critics allege that some professed social democrats, such as Tony Blair and Gerhard Schröder, end up doing the work of the capitalists by implementing tax cuts, cuts in social programs, privatisations, industrial deregulation, and a rolling back of the welfare state rather than extending it. In response to this particular criticism, some British social democrats point out that since Blair became Prime Minister, overall tax as a percentage of GDP has risen in the UK, spending on health and education has been increased, the government has announced its intention to abolish child poverty, and a legally enforceable national minimum wage has been introduced for the first time in British history. However, there are also many critics of Blair and Schröder among the social democrats themselves.

Social Democratic Parties

This is a short list of the main parties in the world who call themselves social democratic. Note that, in some cases, this label may be disputed.

See Socialist International for a list of members of that body.

See Social Democratic Party for a list of all political parties named that way.

Social Democratic Parties in the United States

There have been many socialist and social democratic parties in American history, most notably the Socialist Party of America whose best known leaders were Eugene V. Debs and Norman Thomas and the Socialist Labor Party of America led by Daniel DeLeon, but they have been less successful than their European counterparts. In the 1970s the Socialist Party of America split into three factions, the Democratic Socialists of America led by Michael Harrington, the Social Democrats USA and the Socialist Party USA.

Today, the United States Green Party, with 2 to 4 percent of the vote in presidential elections, might be seen as the largest non-capitalist party and has the support of many American socialists. With the 2000 Ralph Nader campaign arguably having cost the Democrats the election, the Democratic Party, which has moved away from welfare state policies under Bill Clinton and Al Gore, is under pressure to adopt some social democratic measures in its platform (such as universal health care). Howard Dean and Dennis Kucinich are particularly strong advocates of such a revision of the Democratic position.

List of notable Social Democrats

Credits

Retrieved from "http://eng.anarchopedia.org/index.php?title=social-democracy&oldid=7956"