r/SocialDemocracy • u/StateYellingChampion • 6h ago
Effortpost How social democracy and democratic socialism have been linked for over a hundred years
So lately on the subreddit I've noticed a kind of aggressive anti-socialism taking root. A lot of the American social democrats on this sub seem to think that contemporary social democracy has nothing at all to do with socialism and is resolutely pro-capitalist. I think part of the issue is that many people on this subreddit seem to regard social democracy only as an abstract model to be implemented, not a living and complex political tradition. To be clear, my point here is not that social democrats who favor stopping at a mixed economy are somehow not real social democrats. That absolutely is a valid and established perspective in the social democratic movement. I just wanted to make this post to encourage a more ecumenical attitude about ideological diversity within social democracy. To that end, I thought it would be helpful to broadly chart the ideological evolution of the social democratic movement. That evolution definitely shifted away from many traditional socialist commitments over time, I'm not denying that. But there have also been persistent continuities that refute the idea that social democratic parties completely abandoned socialism. Let's take a look.
When social democracy began it was rooted in the socialist and labor movements. This was around the 1880s with the formation of the Second International, an international organization of social democratic parties. The term "social democracy" was virtually synonymous with the term socialism. The largest and most influential party of the Second International was the German SPD. It was also the most Marxist influenced of all the parties, it's 1891 Erfurt Program laid out an essentially Marxist analysis of the flaws of capitalism and the means to overcome it. The Erfurt Program became a major influence on many of the parties of the Second International. Marxism was part of the common tongue of every social democrat.
World War 1 was a major turning point. The German SPD voted to approve war funding despite previously committing to vote down funding if war erupted. This led to a schism between the radical and more moderate factions in the social democratic movement. The radicals largely exited the mainstream social democratic parties and followed Lenin's lead into the Communist movement. But even with that being the case, social democratic parties retained their commitment to socialism as a goal.
One of the reasons social democratic labor parties became so popular with the working class is that they were champions of free and universal suffrage. Up until the early 20th century, most European countries had property restrictions on the franchise that excluded working class voters. English workers didn't fully get to vote until after 1917! Social democrats were essential in democratizing Europe and winning the vote for all workers.
But once they did that, something became clear: The organized, industrial working class base of the social democratic parties wasn't sufficient in numbers to win a majority in parliament. So many of the social democratic parties pragmatically adapted to the new electoral landscape. One example is in Sweden where the social democrats formed a class alliance with farmers in the 1930s. The social democrats agreed to implement state price supports and regulations to protect Swedish agriculture. In exchange, the farmers supported the social democrats' large public works programs and active government intervention to fight unemployment. Similar stories played out with other social democratic parties. Although still primarily rooted in the socialist trade union movement, social democratic parties broadened their appeal and became "People's parties." Again though, social democratic parties still broadly conceived of themselves as being socialists with an end goal of common ownership of the means of production. Even the British Labour Party, probably the least Marxist influenced of any the of social democratic labor parties, was making calls for socialization as late as their 1945 party program:
The Labour Party is a Socialist Party, and proud of it. Its ultimate purpose at home is the establishment of the Socialist Commonwealth of Great Britain - free, democratic, efficient, progressive, public-spirited, its material resources organised in the service of the British people.
But Socialism cannot come overnight, as the product of a week-end revolution. The members of the Labour Party, like the British people, are practical-minded men and women.
There are basic industries ripe and over-ripe for public ownership and management in the direct service of the nation. There are many smaller businesses rendering good service which can be left to go on with their useful work.
The Attlee government elected after this manifesto was published went on to establish the National Health Service and expand social security. They also nationalized key industries like coal, gas, electricity, railways, and steel. The fight for expanding the welfare state and other reforms was not seen as being in opposition to the broader and longer term fight for democratic socialism.
The postwar period was the time when the outlines of the social democratic compromise crystalized. Most of the parties converged on a practical program of expanding the welfare state and increasing the power of unions. The Cold War put additional pressure on the parties to distance themselves from full scale socialization. The country where this was the most pronounced was probably West Germany. The Social Democrats there produced the 1959 Godesberg Program, which downplayed the importance of nationalization as a socialist goal and committed the party to broadly supporting market competition between firms. But even in this case, it's not accurate to say the party decisively rejected socialism as a goal. From the opening of the platform:
Democratic Socialism, which in Europe is rooted in Christian ethics, humanism and classical philosophy, does not proclaim ultimate truths – not because of any lack of understanding for or indifference to philosophical or religious truths, but out of respect for the individual’s choice in these matters of conscience in which neither the state nor any political party should be allowed to interfere.
The Social Democratic Party is the party of freedom of thought. It is a community of men holding different beliefs and ideas. Their agreement is based on the moral principles and political aims they have in common. The Social Democratic Party strives for a way of life in accordance with these principles. Socialism is a constant task – to fight for freedom and justice, to preserve them and to live up to them.
So here you can see that they retained the goal of socialism, albeit in a more ethical form. Willy Brandt, the popular German social democratic chancellor who governed most in line with the with the more market friendly Godesberg Program once said, "Social Democracy and Democratic Socialism are one and the same."
Finally, we come to the onset of neoliberalism and the emergence of the Third Way starting in the late seventies/early eighties. Across the developed world, there was a kind of crisis of the classical Keynesian model that had dominated across the Western liberal democracies to greater or lesser extents in the postwar era. In the US it manifested in things like the stagflation. What was needed was a new growth model. Economic growth had to be restored so many social democratic parties embraced greater levels of marketization in order to secure more capitalist investment. This was a real low period for the left wing of social democracy. An emblematic example is in 1995 when the Labour Party under Tony Blair substantially altered Clause IV of the Labour Party member handbook. The version that had existed for 77 years had read that the purpose of the Labour Party was:
To secure for the workers by hand or by brain the full fruits of their industry and the most equitable distribution thereof that may be possible upon the basis of the common ownership of the means of production, distribution and exchange, and the best obtainable system of popular administration and control of each industry or service.
The revised version stated:
The Labour Party is a democratic socialist party. It believes that by the strength of our common endeavour we achieve more than we achieve alone, so as to create for each of us the means to realise our true potential and for all of us a community in which power, wealth and opportunity are in the hands of the many, not the few, where the rights we enjoy reflect the duties we owe, and where we live together, freely, in a spirit of solidarity, tolerance and respect.
The change reflected a major shift away from traditional socialism to a much more market friendly stance. But nonetheless, traditional socialist Labour Party members still remained within the party. Tony Benn, one of the most eloquent expositors of democratic socialism, remained a party MP until 2001. He had a following and was influential on figures on the Left of the party, like Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell.
What this all shows is that there is a strong and enduring link between democratic socialism and social democracy. The idea that socialism is just a relic of the very distant past and has had no influence on contemporary social democratic parties is mistaken. As I sketched out, there undeniably has been a broad shift away from traditional socialism over a hundred plus years. But it was by no means as decisive or final as some might think. My flair on this subreddit is democratic socialist but I'd just as happily answer to radical or left-wing social democrat. It's a real, living tradition that continues up to this day. My hope is that more moderate social democrats and radical social democrats in the US can work together in service of our shared goals, just as members of the most successful social democratic parties have done. Because if you can't work with people who agree with you ninety percent of the issues, who can you work with?
