Essay:Against Democratic "Socialism"

Against Democratic Socialism

Democratic socialism, often characterized by its advocacy for achieving socialism through gradual, parliamentary reform and within the structures of liberal democracy, stands in stark contradiction to the core tenets of Marxism-Leninism. While cloaked in socialist rhetoric, democratic socialism ultimately undermines revolutionary potential and preserves the foundations of capitalist rule.

1. The Bourgeois State Cannot Be Used to Abolish Itself

Marxist-Leninists maintain that the capitalist state is not a neutral apparatus that can serve either class equally. Instead, it is an instrument of class domination. As Lenin emphasized in The State and Revolution (1917):

"The working class cannot simply lay hold of the ready-made state machinery, and wield it for its own purposes."

Hoxha wrote in “Imperialism and the Revolution” (1978):

“The so-called peaceful road to socialism is a revisionist and opportunist theory which disarms the working class, strengthens bourgeois power and prevents revolution.”

Democratic socialists often argue that socialism can be achieved through elections and legislative reform. However, this presumes that the capitalist state can be turned into an organ of proletarian rule without revolution. Lenin categorically rejected this illusion, emphasizing that the bourgeois state must be smashed and replaced with a proletarian dictatorship:

“To decide once every few years which members of the ruling class is to repress and crush the people through parliament—such is the real essence of bourgeois parliamentarism.”

Hence, to attempt socialism through parliamentarism is to abandon the revolutionary path and become entangled in the mechanisms designed to perpetuate bourgeois rule.

2. Reformism Delays Revolution

Reformism—the idea that capitalism can be gradually reformed into socialism—has consistently proven to be a roadblock to revolutionary momentum. In practice, reforms often serve to pacify the working class and preserve capitalist relations by alleviating the worst excesses of the system without altering its exploitative foundations.

As Stalin remarked in *Foundations of Leninism*:

"Reformism is the main instrument for the bourgeoisie to divert the workers from the revolutionary path."

Democratic socialism, which seeks to implement reforms within capitalism rather than destroy it, ends up maintaining the very structures it claims to oppose. Social democratic governments in Western Europe—such as those of the SPD in Germany or the Labour Party in Britain—have repeatedly served imperialist interests and suppressed revolutionary movements at home and abroad. The SPD’s support for World War I, its suppression of the Spartacist uprising, and the murder of Rosa Luxemburg and Karl Liebknecht in 1919 stand as bloody evidence of the reformist betrayal. These social-democrats have no difference with the modern democratic socialists, as in germany, the democratic socialist politician Gregor Gysi states that he whould rather allie with the liberals then with the Marxist-Leninists, which shows the democratic socialist opposition to real change.

3. Historical Failures of Democratic Socialism

The failures of democratic socialism are not merely theoretical—they are borne out in history. In Chile, the government of Salvador Allende (1970–1973) sought a peaceful road to socialism through constitutional means. However, without dismantling the bourgeois state apparatus or neutralizing the capitalist class, his government was overthrown in a brutal CIA-backed coup led by the fascist General Pinochet.

The Allende example illustrates a critical Marxist-Leninist lesson: the ruling class will not relinquish its power peacefully. When threatened, it will abandon democratic norms and resort to violence, as it did in Chile, Indonesia (1965), and countless other instances. As Mao Zedong was quoted in an Albanian Party of Labour document from the 1960s:

“Some people say that the contradiction between socialism and capitalism can be resolved peacefully. That is revisionism.”

In Venezuela, the Bolivarian process, while initially radical and popular, has been hampered by its continued reliance on parliamentary structures and capitalist economic mechanisms. Despite leftist rhetoric, the inability to fully socialize the means of production and dismantle bourgeois power has led to a prolonged crisis and internal contradictions, providing a cautionary tale for those who believe socialism can be built without a decisive break from capitalism.

4. Democratic Socialism as Gatekeeper of Capitalism

Democratic socialism ultimately functions as a buffer between the ruling class and the revolutionary potential of the working class. By promoting illusions in the possibility of "humanizing" capitalism or creating a "mixed economy," it disarms the proletariat ideologically and organizationally. As Lenin warned:

“Opportunism is our principal enemy. Opportunism in the upper ranks of the working-class movement is not accidental; it is inevitable in capitalist society.”

Today's democratic socialists often participate in imperialist parties (e.g., the Democratic Party in the U.S.) or govern in coalition with capitalists (as seen in European social democratic governments), making them complicit in the maintenance of imperialism and neoliberalism. Their platform may include progressive demands, but they lack the will—or the means—to challenge capitalist property relations at their root. Enver Hoxha stated in “Eurocommunism is Anti-Communism” (1979):

“The theory of democratic socialism is a reactionary theory which deceives the masses with illusions about the ‘humanization’ of capitalism.”

5. The Necessity of the Dictatorship of the Proletariat

Marxism-Leninism asserts that the transition to socialism necessitates the dictatorship of the proletariat—a state form in which the working class suppresses the resistance of the bourgeoisie and begins building the foundations of a classless society. Lenin wrote:

"The dictatorship of the proletariat is a persistent struggle—bloody and bloodless, violent and peaceful, military and economic, educational and administrative—against the forces and traditions of the old society."

Democratic socialism, by contrast, denies the necessity of such a dictatorship, seeking instead to harmonize class interests—a theoretical impossibility under capitalism. The absence of proletarian dictatorship leads not to peace and democracy, but to capitalist restoration, as seen in the USSR after the rise of Khrushchev and the abandonment of Marxist-Leninist principles.

Conclusion: Revolution, Not Reform

Democratic socialism may appeal to those who fear confrontation and seek a gentler path to socialism. However, history and Marxist-Leninist theory show that no real socialism can be achieved without revolution, without the dismantling of the capitalist state, and without the dictatorship of the proletariat.

Far from being an ally of socialism, democratic socialism is a roadblock to liberation—a tool of class collaboration and a barrier to revolutionary change. Only through the revolutionary leadership of a vanguard party and the establishment of a workers’ state can capitalism be overthrown and socialism truly built.

As Mao Zedong in “Report on an Investigation of the Peasant Movement in Hunan” (1927) told:

“A revolution is not a dinner party… A revolution is an insurrection, an act of violence by which one class overthrows another.”