Post Revolutionary Democratic Socialism

Folks
Firstly please don't confuse this thread with earlier ones on Social Democratic methods or social democratic parties,I'm not advocating humanising capitlaism.

A model of socialism difficult to define I know,but how do people feel about Democractic Socialism being in place post Revolution?.Personally I'm in favour of it with as this becuse along with workers (in the form of the revolutionary party) being in control of the means of production and the government there is a danger of dictatorship setting in.Retaing a democratic system of a sort and in the UKs model,the lower house of parliment being made up of elected individuals from each part of the nation and industry taking part in decision making and taking up positions in government.Also with direct democracy being introduced the same model could be seen at every level even as low as street or farm.

The only caveat to all this of course is a new constitution type document defending social justice and national freedom.

Ill finish this post with a quote from a historical British socialist Fenner Brockway.Ive chosen this quote simply becuse it shows the example of my radical ancestors in a Deomocratic Socialist context.

The Levellers were pioneers of political democracy and the sovereignty of the people; the Agitators were the pioneers of participatory control by the ranks at their workplace; and the Diggers were pioneers of communal ownership, cooperation and egalitarianism. All three equate to democratic socialism.

Discuss

A model of socialism difficult to define I know,but how do people feel about Democractic Socialism being in place post Revolution?

Democracy is a fundamental and a MUST of Socialism. Socialism after all is people/worker power.

Retaing a democratic system of a sort and in the UKs model,the lower house of parliment being made up of elected individuals

I stand for Soviet democracy. Basically workers electing individuals to represent them in the government. I think electing higher bodies such as ministers should be left to the government through the use of Democratic Centralism, as representatives are acting on your behalf anyway.

In terms of Direct Democracy, I think it could be used for some forms of law making. On a smaller scale, I think democracy should also be used in workplaces to serve purposes such as electing workplace managers (managers, not bosses).

We discussed this yesterday at a Marxist Day School organised by the CPB in Exeter (which was an excellent event).
On our table we felt a transitional period was definitely necessary prior to revolutionary socialism being introduced. However this has to vary from country to country.

Modgardener wrote:We discussed this yesterday at a Marxist Day School organised by the CPB in Exeter (which was an excellent event).
On our table we felt a transitional period was definitely necessary prior to revolutionary socialism being introduced. However this has to vary from country to country.

Yea ill concur with that as long as victory has been archived through National revolution otherwise your going down the social democracy route and the world looks like a copy of "A Very British Coup".But yes some sort of transitional period would actually help socialism in the long run,assuming the bourgeois haven't conducted a scorched earth policy,becuse that's what I'd do come the revolution.On the plus side if they did do the latter we wouldn't need a transition period

The Bolsheviks suppressed the Social Revolutionaires.

Thankfully Stalin triumphed over Trotsky (was a a technocratic psychopath when he was in Russia) and Stalin did actually try to bring more democracy to the USSR, but it was to little to late and after his death we all know what happened.