Search for LIMS content across all our Wiki Knowledge Bases.
Type a search term to find related articles by LIMS subject matter experts gathered from the most trusted and dynamic collaboration tools in the laboratory informatics industry.
This article is about socialism emphasising democracy. For the form of democracy emphasising socialism, see Socialist democracy. For the ideology focusing on the gradual transition to socialism by democratic processes, see Social democracy.
The history of democratic socialism can be traced back to 19th-century socialist thinkers across Europe and the Chartist movement in Britain, which somewhat differed in their goals but shared a common demand for democratic decision-making and public ownership of the means of production and viewed these as fundamental characteristics of the society they advocated for. From the late 19th to the early 20th century, democratic socialism was heavily influenced by the gradualist form of socialism promoted by the British Fabian Society and Eduard Bernstein's evolutionary socialism in Germany.[9]
Democratic socialism is contrasted with Marxism–Leninism, whose opponents often perceive as being authoritarian, bureaucratic, and undemocratic in practice.[18] Democratic socialists oppose the Stalinist political system and the Marxist–Leninist economic planning system, rejecting as their form of governance the administrative-command model formed in the Soviet Union and other Marxist–Leninist states during the 20th century.[19] Democratic socialism is also distinguished from Third Way social democracy[20][nb 1] because democratic socialists are committed to the systemic transformation of the economy from capitalism to socialism,[nb 2] while social democrats use capitalism to create a strong welfare state, leaving many businesses under private ownership.[26] However, many democratic socialists also advocate for state regulations and welfare programs in order to reduce the perceived harms of capitalism and slowly transform the economic system.[26]
While having socialism as a long-term goal,[27] some moderate democratic socialists are more concerned about curbing capitalism's excesses and are supportive of progressive reforms to humanise it in the present day.[28] In contrast, other democratic socialists believe that economic interventionism and similar policy reforms aimed at addressing social inequalities and suppressing capitalism's economic contradictions can simply exacerbate them[29] or cause them to emerge under a different guise.[30] Those democratic socialists believe that the fundamental issues with capitalism can only be resolved by revolutionary means of replacing the capitalist mode of production with the socialist mode of production through a replacement of private ownership with collective ownership of the means of production and extending democracy to the economic sphere in the form of workplace democracy or industrial democracy.[31] The main criticism of democratic socialism from the perspective of liberal democrats is focused on the compatibility of democracy and socialism,[32] while Marxist–Leninist criticisms are focused on the feasibility of achieving a socialist or communist society through democratic means or without suppressing counter-revolutionary forces.[33] Several academics, political commentators, and scholars have noted that some Western countries, such as France, Sweden and the United Kingdom, have been governed by socialist parties or have social democraticmixed economies sometimes referred to as "democratic socialist".[34][35] However, some have argued that following the end of the Cold War, many of these countries have moved away from socialism as a neoliberal consensus replaced the social democratic consensus in the advanced capitalist world.[35][36][37][38][disputed (for: Socialist parties still routinely come in and out of power in these countries.) – discuss]
Capitalism is a system designed by the owning class to exploit the rest of us for their own profit. We must replace it with democratic socialism, a system where ordinary people have a real voice in our workplaces, neighborhoods, and society.
We believe there are many avenues that feed into [democratic socialism]. Our vision pushes further than historic social democracy and leaves behind authoritarian visions of socialism in the dustbin of history.
Tony Benn, a prominent left-wing Labour Party politician,[53] described democratic socialism as socialism that is "open, libertarian, pluralistic, humane and democratic; nothing whatever in common with the harsh, centralised, dictatorial and mechanistic images which are purposely presented by our opponents and a tiny group of people who control the mass media in Britain."[54]
Some uses of the term democratic socialism represent social democratic policies within capitalism instead of an ideology that aims to transcend and replace capitalism, although this is not always the case. Robert M. Page, a reader in Democratic Socialism and Social Policy at the University of Birmingham, wrote about transformative democratic socialism to refer to the politics of Labour Party Prime MinisterClement Attlee and its government (fiscal redistribution, some degree of public ownership and a strong welfare state) and revisionist democratic socialism as developed by Labour Party politician Anthony Crosland and Labour Party Prime Minister Harold Wilson, arguing:
The most influential revisionist Labour thinker, Anthony Crosland, contended that a more "benevolent" form of capitalism had emerged since the Second World War. ... According to Crosland, it was now possible to achieve greater equality in society without the need for "fundamental" economic transformation. For Crosland, a more meaningful form of equality could be achieved if the growth dividend derived from effective management of the economy was invested in "pro-poor" public services rather than through fiscal redistribution.[60]
The political scientist Lyman Tower Sargent offers a similar definition based on the practice of social democracy in Europe:
Democratic socialism can be characterised as follows:
Much property held by the public through a democratically elected government, including most major industries, utilities, and transportation systems
A limit on the accumulation of private property
Governmental regulation of the economy
Extensive publicly financed assistance and pension programs
Social costs and the provision of services added to purely financial considerations as the measure of efficiency
Publicly held property is limited to productive property and significant infrastructure; it does not extend to personal property, homes, and small businesses. And in practice in many democratic socialist countries [sic], it has not extended to many large corporations.[61]
Democratic socialism and social democracy
Social democracy prior to the displacement of Keynesianism by neoliberalism and monetarism, which caused many social-democratic parties to adopt the Third Way ideology, accepting capitalism as the current status quo and powers that be, redefining socialism in a way that it maintained the capitalist structure intact,[23] has been occasionally described as a form of democratic socialism. The new version of Clause IV of the British Labour Party's constitution, first adopted by former party leader Tony Blair, uses democratic socialism to describe a modernised form of social democracy.[62] While affirming a commitment to democratic socialism,[63] it no longer commits the party to public ownership of industry and, in its place, advocates "the enterprise of the market and the rigour of competition" along with "high quality public services ... either owned by the public or accountable to them."[63] Donald F. Busky's Democratic Socialism: A Global Survey describes social democracy as a form of democratic socialism that follows a gradual, reformist or evolutionary path to socialism rather than a revolutionary one.[64] This tendency is captured in the statement of Labour revisionistAnthony Crosland, who argued that the socialism of the pre-war world was now becoming increasingly irrelevant.[65] This tendency has been evoked in works such as Roy Hattersley's Choose Freedom: The Future of Democratic Socialism,[66] Malcolm Hamilton's Democratic Socialism in Britain and Sweden,[67] and Jim Tomlinson's Democratic Socialism and Economic Policy: The Attlee Years, 1945–1951[68] A variant of this set of definitions is Joseph Schumpeter's argument in Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy (1942)[69] that liberal democracies were evolving from liberal capitalism into democratic socialism with the growth of industrial democracy, regulatory institutions and self-management.[70]
A key difference is that social democrats are mainly concerned with practical reforms within capitalism, with socialism either relegated to the indefinite future or perceived to have abandoned it in the case of the Third Way.[71] More radical democratic socialists want to go beyond mere meliorist reforms and advocate the systemic transformation of the mode of production from capitalism to socialism.[72]
While the Third Way has been described as a new social democracy[73] or neo-social democracy,[74] standing for a modernised social democracy[75] and competitive socialism,[76] the form of social democracy that remained committed to the gradual abolition of capitalism and social democrats opposed to the Third Way merged into democratic socialism.[77] During the late 20th century and early 21st century, these labels were embraced, contested and rejected due to the development within the European left of Eurocommunism between the 1970s and 1980s,[78] the rise of neoliberalism in the mid to late 1970s,[79] the fall of the Soviet Union in December 1991 and of Marxist–Leninist governments between 1989 and 1992,[80] the rise and fall of the Third Way[23] between the 1970s[81] and 2010s[82] and the simultaneous rise of anti-austerity,[83]green,[84]left-wing populist[85] and Occupy[86] movements in the late 2000s and early 2010s due to the global financial crisis of 2007–2008 and the Great Recession,[87] the causes of which have been widely attributed to the neoliberal shift[88] and deregulation economic policies.[89] This latest development contributed to the rise of politicians that represent a return to the post-war consensus social democracy, such as Jeremy Corbyn in the United Kingdom and Bernie Sanders in the United States,[90] who assumed the democratic socialist label to describe their rejection of centrist politicians that supported triangulation within the Labour and Democratic parties such as with New Labour and the New Democrats, respectively.[91]
Social democracy originated as a revolutionary socialist or communist movement.[92] One distinction to separate the modern versions of democratic socialism and social democracy is that the former can include revolutionary means.[93] In contrast, the latter asserts that the only acceptable constitutional form of government is representative democracy under the rule of law, which is to implement social change via reformism.[94] Many social democrats "refer to themselves as socialists or democratic socialists", and some "use or have used these terms interchangeably."[95] Others argue that "there are clear differences between the three terms, and preferred to describe their own political beliefs by using the term 'social democracy' only."[96] In political science, democratic socialism and social democracy are occasionally seen as synonymous or otherwise not mutually exclusive,[97] while they are usually sharply distinguished in journalistic use.[98] While social democrats continue to call and describe themselves as democratic socialists or simply socialists,[95] the meaning of democratic socialism and social democracy effectively reversed.[99]Democratic socialism originally represented socialism achieved by democratic means and usually resulted in reformism, whereas social democracy included reformist and revolutionary wings.[100] With the association of social democracy as a policy regime[101] and the development of the Third Way,[23]social democracy became almost exclusively associated with capitalist welfare states,[102] while democratic socialism came to refer to anti-capitalist tendencies, including communism, revolutionary socialism, and reformist socialism.[103]
Political party
While most social-democratic parties describe themselves as democratic socialists, with democratic socialism representing the theory and social democracy the practice and vice versa, political scientists distinguish between the two. Social democratic is used for centre-left political parties,[104] "whose aim is the gradual amelioration of poverty and exploitation within a liberal capitalist society."[105] On the other hand, democratic socialist is used for left-wing socialist parties, including left-wing populist parties such as The Left, Podemos and Syriza.[106] This is reflected at the European party level, where the centre-left social democratic parties are within the Party of European Socialists and the Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats, while left-wing democratic socialist parties are within the Party of the European Left and the European United Left–Nordic Green Left.[107] These democratic socialist groups often include communist tendencies, in contrast to social democratic groups which exclude anti-capitalist tendencies.[108]
According to Steve Ludlam, "the arrival of New Labour signalled an unprecedented and possibly final assault on the [British] Labour Party's democratic socialist tradition, that is to say the tradition of those seeking the transformation of capitalism into socialism by overwhelmingly legislative means. ... It would be a while before some of the party's social democrats—those whose aim is the gradual amelioration of poverty and exploitation within a liberal capitalist society—began to fear the same threat to Labour's egalitarian tradition as the left recognised to its socialist tradition."[105] This was reflected similarly in Labour: A Tale of Two Parties by Hilary Wainwright.[109]
According to Andrew Mathers, Hilary Wainwright's 1987 work Labour: A Tale of Two Parties provided "a different reading which contrasted the 'ameliorative, pragmatic' social democratic tradition expressed principally in the Parliamentary Labour Party with a 'transformative, visionary' democratic socialist tradition associated mainly with the grassroots members engaged closely with extra-parliamentary struggles."[110]
A democratically planned economy has been proposed as a basis for socialism and variously advocated by some democratic socialists who simultaneously reject market socialism and Soviet-type economic planning.[114] Democratic economic planning implies some process of democratic or participatory decision-making within the economy and firms in the form of industrial democracy. Supporters of democratic economic planning often reject market socialism on the basis that it fails to broadly coordinate information and resources according to social needs, and reject the Soviet model-based administrative-command system due to inefficient or undemocratic operation.
On the other hand, democratic socialist proponents of centralised planning argue that it is better equipped to carry out economy-wide coordination and strengthen the collective power of the working class.[119][120]David McNally, a professor at the University of Houston, has argued in the Marxist tradition that the logic of the market inherently produces social inequality and leads to unequal exchanges, writing that Adam Smith's moral intent and moral philosophy espousing equal exchange were undermined by the practice of the free market he championed as the development of the market economy involved coercion, exploitation and violence that Smith's moral philosophy could not counteract. McNally criticises market socialists for believing in the possibility of fair markets based on equal exchanges to be achieved by purging parasitical elements from the market economy, such as private ownership of the means of production, arguing that market socialism is an oxymoron when socialism is defined as an end to wage labour.[121][118]
Various computer scientists and radical economists have also proposed computer-based forms of democratic economic planning and coordination between economic enterprises, based on either centralised or decentralised models.[122] Chile explored computerised central planning from 1971 to 1973 with Project Cybersyn.[122][123][124] In 1993, computer scientist Paul Cockshott and economics professor Allin Cottrell proposed in Towards a New Socialism a computerised central planning model based on direct democracy and modern technological advances.[117]
Market socialism
Some proponents of market socialism see it as an economic system compatible with the political ideology of democratic socialism.[125] Democratic socialist advocates of market socialism often support the development of worker cooperatives, and sometimes market-based sovereign wealth funds.
Advocates of market socialism, such as Jaroslav Vaněk, argue that genuinely free markets are impossible under private ownership of productive property. Vaněk contends that the class differences and unequal distribution of income and economic power that result from private ownership of industry enable the interests of the dominant class to skew the market in their favour, either in the form of monopoly and market power or by utilising their wealth and resources to legislate government policies that benefit their specific business interests. Additionally, Vaněk states that workers in a socialist economy based on worker-owned cooperatives have more substantial incentives to maximise productivity because they would receive a share of the profits based on the overall performance of their enterprise, plus their fixed wage or salary.[126]
The Lange–Lerner model is a model first proposed by Oskar R. Lange in 1936 in response to the socialist calculation debate and later expanded by Abba P. Lerner in 1938, which is based on public ownership of the means of production with simultaneous market-based allocation of consumer goods. While this model is typically considered a type of centrally planned economy, Lange and Lerner referred to it as a market socialist model.[127][128]
Sometimes referred to as left-wing market anarchists,[141] proponents of this approach strongly affirm the classical liberal ideas of self-ownership and free markets while maintaining that taken to their logical conclusions, these ideas support anti-capitalist, anti-corporatist, anti-hierarchical and pro-labour positions in economics, anti-imperialism in foreign policy and radically progressive views regarding sociocultural issues such as gender, sexuality and race.[142] Echoing the language of these market socialists, they maintain that radical market anarchism should be seen by its proponents and by others as part of the socialist tradition because of its heritage, emancipatory goals and potential and that market anarchists can and should call themselves socialists.[143] Critics of the free market and laissez-faire, as commonly understood, argue that socialism is fully compatible with a market economy and that a genuinely free-market or laissez-faire system would be anti-capitalist and socialist.[130]
According to its supporters, this would result in the society advocated by democratic socialists, when socialism is not understood as state socialism and conflated with self-described socialist states.[144] The free market and laissez-faire are free from all economic privilege, monopolies and artificial scarcities.[131] This is consistent with the classical economics view that economic rents, i.e. profits generated from a lack of perfect competition, must be reduced or eliminated as much as possible through free competition rather than free from regulation.[145]
When nationalisation of large industries was relatively widespread during the Keynesianpost-war consensus, it was not uncommon for some political commentators to describe several European countries as democratic socialist states seeking to move their countries towards a socialist economy.[155] In 1956, leading British Labour Party politician Anthony Crosland claimed that capitalism had been abolished in Britain. However, others, such as Welshman Aneurin Bevan, Minister of Health in the first post-war Labour government and the architect of the National Health Service, disputed the claim that Britain was a socialist state.[156] For Crosland and others who supported his views, Britain was a socialist state. According to Bevan, Britain had a socialist National Health Service, which opposed the hedonism of Britain's capitalist society.[157] Although the laws of capitalism still operated entirely as in the rest of Europe and private enterprise dominated the economy,[158] several political commentators claimed that during the post-war period, when socialist parties were in power, countries such as Britain and France were democratic socialist states. The same claim is now applied to Nordic countries with the Nordic model.[159] In the 1980s, the government of President François Mitterrand aimed to expand dirigisme by attempting to nationalise all French banks, but this attempt faced opposition from the European Economic Community, which demanded a capitalist free-market economy among its members.[160] Nevertheless, public ownership in France and the United Kingdom during the height of nationalisation in the 1960s and 1970s never accounted for more than 15–20% of capital formation.[158]
The form of socialism practised by parties such as the Singaporean People's Action Party during its first few decades in power was pragmatic, as it its rejection of mass nationalisation characterised it. The party still claimed to be socialist, pointing out its extensive regulation of the private sector, activist intervention in the economy and social welfare policies as evidence of this claim.[161] Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew stated that he had been influenced by the democratic socialist factions of the British Labour Party.[162]
Philosophy
Karl Marx, whose thought influenced the development of democratic socialism, with some endorsing it and others rejecting it[nb 3]
Democratic socialism involves the majority of the population controlling the economy through some democratic system, with the idea that the means of production are owned and managed by the working class.[3] The interrelationship between democracy and socialism extends far back into the socialist movement to The Communist Manifesto's emphasis on winning as a first step the "battle of democracy",[164] with Karl Marx writing that democracy is "the road to socialism."[165] Socialist thinkers such as Eduard Bernstein, Karl Kautsky, Vladimir Lenin and Rosa Luxemburg[166] wrote that democracy is indispensable to realising socialism.[167] Philosophical support for democratic socialism can be found in the works of political philosophers such as Axel Honneth and Charles Taylor. Honneth has put forward the view that political and economic ideologies have a social basis, meaning they originate from intersubjective communication between members of society. Honneth criticises the liberal state and ideology because it assumes that principles of individual liberty and private property are ahistorical and abstract when they evolved from a specific social discourse on human activity. In contrast to liberal individualism, Honneth has emphasised the intersubjective dependence between humans, namely that human well-being depends on recognising others and being recognised by them. With an emphasis on community and solidarity, democratic socialism can be seen as a way of safeguarding this dependency.[168]
We are not among those communists who are out to destroy personal liberty, who wish to turn the world into one huge barrack or into a gigantic workhouse. There certainly are some communists who, with an easy conscience, refuse to countenance personal liberty and would like to shuffle it out of the world because they consider that it is a hindrance to complete harmony. But we have no desire to exchange freedom for equality. We are convinced that in no social order will freedom be assured as in a society based upon communal ownership.[170]
Theoretically and philosophically, socialism itself is democratic, seen as the highest democratic form by its proponents and at one point being the same as democracy.[171] Some argue that socialism implies democracy[172] and that democratic socialism is a redundant term.[173] However, others, such as Michael Harrington, argue that the term democratic socialism is necessary to distinguish it from that of the Soviet Union and other self-declared socialist states. For Harrington, the primary reason for this was the perspective that viewed the Stalinist-era Soviet Union as having succeeded in usurping the legacy of Marxism and distorting it in propaganda to justify its politics.[174] Both Leninism and Marxism–Leninism have emphasised democracy,[175] endorsing some form of democratic organisation of society and the economy whilst supporting democratic centralism, with Marxist–Leninists and others arguing that socialist states such as the Soviet Union were democratic.[176] Marxist–Leninists also tended to distinguish socialist democracy from democratic socialism, which they associated pejoratively with "reformism" and "social democracy."[177] Ultimately, they are considered outside the democratic socialist tradition.[178] On the other hand, anarchism (especially within its social anarchist tradition) and other ultra-left tendencies have been discussed within the democratic socialist tradition for their opposition to Marxism–Leninism and their support for more decentralised, direct forms of democracy.[179]
While both anarchists and ultra-left tendencies have rejected the label as they tend to associate it with reformist and statist forms of democratic socialism, they are considered revolutionary-democratic forms of socialism, and some anarchists have referred to democratic socialism.[180] Some Trotskyist organisations such as the Australian Socialist Alliance, Socialist Alternative and Victorian Socialists or the French New Anticapitalist Party, Revolutionary Communist League and Socialism from below have described their form of socialism as democratic and have emphasised democracy in their revolutionary development of socialism.[181] Similarly, several Trotskyists have emphasised Leon Trotsky's revolutionary-democratic socialism.[182] Some such as Hal Draper spoke of "revolutionary-democratic socialism."[183] Those third camp revolutionary-democratic socialists advocated a socialist political revolution to establish or re-establish socialist democracy in deformed or degenerated workers' states.[184] Draper also compared social democracy and Stalinism as two forms of socialism from above, contraposed to his socialism from below as being the purer, more Marxist version of socialism.[183]
As a related ideology, classical social democracy is a form of democratic socialism.[195] Social democracy underwent various major forms throughout its history and is distinguished between the early trend[196] that supported revolutionary socialism,[197] mainly related to Marx and Engels,[198] as well as other notable social-democratic politicians and orthodox Marxist thinkers such as Bernstein,[191] Kautsky,[189] Luxemburg[190] and Lenin,[199] including more democratic and libertarian interpretations of Leninism;[200] the revisionist trend adopted by Bernstein and other reformist socialist leaders between the 1890s and 1940s;[201] the post-war trend[196] that adopted or endorsed Keynesianwelfare capitalism[202] as part of a compromise between capitalism and socialism;[203] and those opposed to the Third Way.[23]
Views on the compatibility of democracy and socialism
Support
One of the foremost scholars who have argued that socialism and democracy are compatible is the Austrian-born American economist Joseph Schumpeter, who was hostile to socialism.[204] In his book Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy (1942), Schumpeter emphasised that "political democracy was thoroughly compatible with socialism in its fullest sense".[205] However, it has been noted that he did not believe that democracy was a sound political system and advocated republican values.[32]
Political historian Theodore Draper wrote: "I know of no political group which has resisted totalitarianism in all its guises more steadfastly than democratic socialists."[32]
Historian and economist Robert Heilbroner argued that "[t]here is, of course, no conflict between such a socialism and freedom as we have described it; indeed, this conception of socialism is the very epitome of these freedoms", referring to open association of individuals in political and social life; the democratization and humanization of work; and the cultivation of personal talents and creativity.[32]
Bayard Rustin, a long-time member of the Socialist Party of America and National Chairman of the Social Democrats, USA, wrote: "For me, socialism has meaning only if it is democratic. Of the many claimants to socialism only one has a valid title—that socialism which views democracy as valuable per se, which stands for democracy unequivocally, and which continually modifies socialist ideas and programs in the light of democratic experience. This is the socialism of the labor, social-democratic, and socialist parties of Western Europe."[32]
Economist and political theorist Kenneth Arrow argued: "We cannot be sure that the principles of democracy and socialism are compatible until we can observe a viable society following both principles. But there is no convincing evidence or reasoning which would argue that a democratic-socialist movement is inherently self-contradictory. Nor need we fear that gradual moves in the direction of increasing government intervention will lead to an irreversible move to 'serfdom.'"[32]
Journalist William Pfaff wrote: "It might be argued that socialism ineluctably breeds state bureaucracy, which then imposes its own kinds of restrictions upon individual liberties. This is what the Scandinavians complain about. But Italy's champion bureaucracy owes nothing to socialism. American bureaucracy grows as luxuriantly and behaves as officiously as any other."[32]
Economic anthropologistJason Hickel and his colleague Dylan Sullivan argue that in order to transcend the problems associated with the persistent underdevelopment in the contemporary "imperialist world economy", where "continued capital accumulation may create pressures for cheapening labour" which "works against the goals of human development," and also the top-down authoritarian socialism as experienced in the Soviet Union and Maoist China, which they argue is "at odds with the socialist goals of workers’ self-management and democratic control over production," it will be necessary to adopt a "socialist strategy in the twenty-first century that is radically democratic, extending democracy to production itself."[207]
Marxist theorist and revolutionary Leon Trotsky wrote that: "Socialism needs democracy like the human body needs oxygen".[208] In particular, he believed that central planners in the Soviet Union, regardless of their intellectual capacity, operated without the input and participation of the millions of people who participate in the economy and so they would be unable to respond to local conditions quickly enough to effectively coordinate all economic activity.[209] In the Transitional Program, which was drafted in 1938 during the founding congress of the Fourth International, Trotsky called for the legalization of the Soviet parties and worker's control of production.[210]
Opposition
Some anti-socialist politicians, economists, and theorists have argued that socialism and democracy are incompatible. According to them, history is full of instances of self-declared socialist states that at one point were committed to the values of personal liberty, freedom of speech, freedom of the press and freedom of association but then found themselves clamping down on such freedoms as they end up being viewed as inconvenient or contrary towards their political or economic goals.[32]Chicago School economist Milton Friedman argued that a "society which is socialist cannot also be democratic" in the sense of "guaranteeing individual freedom."[32] Sociologist Robert Nisbet, a philosophical conservative who began his career as a leftist, argued in 1978 that there is "not a single free socialism to be found anywhere in the world."[32]
NeoconservativeIrving Kristol argued: "Democratic socialism turns out to be an inherently unstable compound, a contradiction in terms. Every social democratic party, once in power, soon finds itself choosing, at one point after another, between the socialist society it aspires to and the liberal society that lathered it." Kristol added that "socialist movements end up [in] a society where liberty is the property of the state, and is (or is not) doled out to its citizens along with other contingent 'benefits'."[32]
Similarly, anti-communist academic Richard Pipes argued: "The merger of political and economic power implicit in socialism greatly strengthens the ability of the state and its bureaucracy to control the population. Theoretically, this capacity need not be exercised and need not lead to growing domination of the population by the state. In practice, such a tendency is virtually inevitable. For one thing, the socialization of the economy must lead to a numerical growth of the bureaucracy required to administer it, and this process cannot fail to augment the power of the state. For another, socialism leads to a tug of war between the state, bent on enforcing its economic monopoly, and the ordinary citizen, equally determined to evade it; the result is repression and the creation of specialized repressive organs."[32]
^Tsakalotos 2001, p. 26: "...most left-wing approaches (social democratic, democratic socialist, and so on) to how the market economy works."); Brandal, Bratberg & Thorsen 2013, Introduction: "In Scandinavia, as in the rest of the world, 'social democracy' and 'democratic socialism' have often been used interchangeably to define the part of the left pursuing gradual reform through democratic means."
^Malycha, Andreas (2000). Die SED: Geschichte ihrer Stalinisierung 1946–1953 [The SED: The History of its Stalinization] (in German). Schöningh. ISBN 978-3-506-75331-1.
^Kharkevich, Aleksandr Aleksandrovich (1973). Theory of information. The identification of the images. Selected works in three volumes. Volume 3. Information and technology: Moscow: Publishing House "Nauka", 1973. – Academy of Sciences of the USSR. Institute of information transmission problems. p. 524.
^Hodgson, G. M. (1998). "Socialism against markets? A critique of two recent proposals". Economy and Society. 27 (4): 407–433. doi:10.1080/03085149800000027.
^Yunker, James A. (1995). "Post-Lange Market Socialism: An Evaluation of Profit-Oriented Proposals". Journal of Economic Issues. 29 (3): 683–717. doi:10.1080/00213624.1995.11505705. JSTOR4226984.
^Woods, Alan; Trotsky, Leon; Engels, Friedrich; Lenin, V. I.; Plekhanov, G. V. (12 November 2018). Marxism and Anarchism. Wellred Books. pp. 1–372. ISBN 978-1-900007-88-7.
^"The far left is becoming the principal challenge to mainstream social democratic parties, in large part because its main parties are no longer extreme, but present themselves as defending the values and policies that social democrats have allegedly abandoned."[21]
^Social democratic proponents of the Third Way were more concerned about challenging the New Right to win back government power.[22] This has resulted in analysts and critics arguing that they endorsed capitalism, even if it was due to recognising that outspoken anti-capitalism in these circumstances was politically nonviable, or that it was not only anti-socialist and neoliberal but anti-social democratic in practice.[23] Some observers maintain this was the result of their type of reformism that caused them to administer the system according to capitalist logic,[24] while others saw it as a modern liberal form of democratic socialism within the context of market socialism, and distinguish it from classical democratic socialism.[25]
^"Democratic Marxism is authentic Marxism — the Marxism which emphasizes the necessity for revolutionary action. Loyalty to the movement, not loyalty to any particular doctrine, is characteristic of the orthodox democratic Marxist."[163] "There is considerable controversy among scholars regarding Marx's own attitude toward democracy, but two lines of thought developed from Marx: one emphasizing democracy and one, the dominant line, rejecting it."[47]
Sources
Books
Abjorensen, Norman (15 June 2019). Historical Dictionary of Democracy. Rowman & Littlefield. ISBN 9781538120743.
Adams, Ian (1998). Ideology and Politics in Britain Today. Politics Today (illustrated, reprint ed.). Manchester, England: Manchester University Press. ISBN 9780719050565.
Adams, Ian (1999). "Social democracy to New Labour". Political Ideology Today. Politics Today. Manchester University Press. ISBN 9780719050565.
Agustín, Óscar García (2020). Left-Wing Populism: The Politics of the People. Emerald Group Publishing. ISBN 9781839092039.
Arora, N. D. (2017). Political Science for Civil Services Mains Examination. McGraw-Hill Education. ISBN 9789385965890.
Azcárate, Manuel (1978). "What Is Eurocommunism?". In Urban, George (ed.). Eurocommunism. Maurice Temple Smith. ISBN 9780851171548.
Bailey, David J. (2009). The Political Economy of European Social Democracy: A Critical Realist Approach. Routledge. ISBN 9780415604253.
Barker, J. Ellis (2019) [1908]. "Chapter V. The Aims and Policy of the Socialists". British Socialism: An Examination of Its Doctrines, Policy, Aims and Practical Proposals. Good Press.
Barrientos, Armando; Powell, Martin (2004). "The Route Map of the Third Way". In Hale, Sarah; Leggett, Will; Martell, Luke (eds.). The Third Way and Beyond: Criticisms, Futures and Alternatives. Manchester University Press. pp. 9–26. ISBN 9780719065989.
Benn, Tony; Mullin, Chris (1979). Arguments for Socialism. J. Cape.
Berberoglu, Berch (2018). The Palgrave Handbook of Social Movements, Revolution, and Social Transformation. Springer. ISBN 9783319923543.
Bracke, Maud (2013). Which Socialism, Whose Détente?: West European Communism and the Czechoslovak Crisis of 1968. Central European University Press. ISBN 9786155211263.
Brandal, Nik; Bratberg, Øivind; Thorsen, Dag Einar (21 February 2013). The Nordic Model of Social Democracy. Springer. ISBN 9781137013279.
Braudel, Fernand (1979). The Wheels of Commerce: Civilization and Capitalism 15th–18th Century. Harper & Row.
Brown, Archie, ed. (2004). The Demise of Marxism-Leninism in Russia. Springer. ISBN 9780333651247.
Brown, Susan Love (1997). "The Free Market as Salvation from Government". Meanings of the Market: The Free Market in Western Culture. Berg Publishers.
Cahill, Damien; Cooper, Melinda; Konings, Martijn; Primrose, David, eds. (2018). The SAGE Handbook of Neoliberalism. SAGE Publications. ISBN 9781526415974.
Calossi, Enrico (2016). Anti-Austerity Left Parties in the European Union. Competition, Coordination, Integration. Pisa: Pisa University Press. ISBN 9788867416653.
Cammack, Paul (2004). "Giddens's Way with Words". In Hale, Sarah; Leggett, Will; Martell, Luke (eds.). The Third Way and Beyond: Criticisms, Futures and Alternatives. Manchester University Press. ISBN 97807190-65989.
Campbell, John (2009). The Iron Lady: Margaret Thatcher from Grocer's Daughter to Prime Minister. Penguin Books. ISBN 9780099540038.
Carson, Kevin (2008). Organization Theory: A Libertarian Perspective. Charleston, South Carolina: BookSurge.
Carson, Kevin (2010). The Homebrew Industrial Revolution: A Low-Overhead Manifesto. Charleston, South Carolina: BookSurge.
Casier, Marlies; Jongerden, Joost (2010). Nationalisms and Politics in Turkey: Political Islam, Kemalism and the Kurdish Issue. Taylor & Francis. ISBN 9780203847060.
Chartier, Gary; Johnson, Charles W. (2011). Markets Not Capitalism: Individualist Anarchism Against Bosses, Inequality, Corporate Power, and Structural Poverty (1st ed.). Brooklyn, New York: Minor Compositions/Autonomedia.
Clarke, Peter (1981). Liberals and Social Democrats. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 9780521286510.
Cockshott, W. Paul; Cottrell, Allin (1993). Towards a New Socialism. Nottingham, England: Spokesman. ISBN 9780851245454.
Cole, Mike (2017). "Social Class, Marxism and Socialism". Education, Equality and Human Rights: Issues of Gender, 'Race', Sexuality, Disability and Social Class (4th ed.). Routledge. ISBN 9781351804141.
Considère-Charondu, Marie-Claire (2010). "Irish MEPS in an Enlarged Europe". In Gillissen, Christophe (ed.). Ireland: Looking East. Peter Lang. ISBN 9789052016528.
Corfe, Robert (2010). The Future of Politics: With the Demise of the Left/Right Confrontational System. Bury St Edmunds, England: Arena Books. ISBN 9781906791469.
Dongyoun, Hwang (2016). Anarchism in Korea: Independence, Transnationalism, and the Question of National Development, 1919–1984. SUNY Press. ISBN 9781438461670.
Döring, Daniel (2007). Is 'Third Way' Social Democracy Still a Form of Social Democracy?. Norderstedt, Germany: GRIN Publishing. ISBN 9783638868327.
Egle, Christoph; Henkes, Christian; Merkel, Wolfgang; Petring, Alexander (2008). Social Democracy in Power: The Capacity to Reform. Routledge Research in Comparative Politics. London: Routledge. ISBN 9780415438209.
Ellman, Michael (2007). "The Rise and Fall of Socialist Planning". In Estrin, Saul; Kołodko, Grzegorz W.; Uvalić, Milica (eds.). Transition and Beyond: Essays in Honour of Mario Nuti. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. ISBN 9780230546974.
Fitzpatrick, Tony (2003). After the New Social Democracy: Social Welfare for the Twenty-First Century. Manchester University Press. ISBN 9780719064777.
Gaus, Gerald F.; Kukathas, Chandran, eds. (2004). Handbook of Political Theory. SAGE Publications. ISBN 9780761967873.
Getzler, Israel (2002) [1982]. Kronstadt 1917–1921: The Fate of a Soviet Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 9780521894425.
Gillis, William (2011). "The Freed Market". In Chartier, Gary; Johnson, Charles W. (eds.). Markets Not Capitalism. Brooklyn, New York: Minor Compositions/Autonomedia.
Gilk, Paul (2008). Green Politics Is Eutopian: Essays in Anticipation of the Daughter. Wipf and Stock Publishers. ISBN 9781621893936.
Godson, Roy; Haseler, Stephen (1978). 'Eurocommunism': Implications for East and West. Springer. ISBN 9781349159345.
Gregory, Paul; Stuart, Robert (2003). Comparing Economic Systems in the Twenty-First. South-Western College Pub. ISBN 0618261818.
Griffiths, Tom G.; Millei, Zsuzsa (2012). Logics of Socialist Education: Engaging with Crisis, Insecurity and Uncertainty. Springer Science & Business Media. ISBN 9789400747289.
Harvey, David (2005). A Brief History of Neoliberalism. Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780199283279.
Hattersley, Roy (1987). Choose Freedom: The Future of Democratic Socialism. Harmondsworth, England: Penguin. ISBN 9780140104943.
Heywood, Andrew (2012). Political Ideologies: An Introduction (5th ed.). Basingstoke, England: Palgrave Macmillan. ISBN 9780230367258.
Hinchman, Lewis P.; Meyer, Thomas (2007). The Theory of Social Democracy. Cambridge, England: Polity Press. ISBN 9780745641133.
Hinnfors, Jonas (2006). Reinterpreting Social Democracy: A History of Stability in the British Labour Party and Swedish Social Democratic Party. Critical Labour Movement Studies. Manchester University Press. ISBN 9780719073625.
Honneth, Axel (1995). "The Limits of Liberalism: On the Political-Ethical Discussion Concerning Communitarianism". In Honneth, Axel (ed.). The Fragmented World of the Social. Albany: State University of New York Press. ISBN 079142300X.
Horwitz, Morton J. (1994). The Transformation of American Law, 1870–1960: The Crisis of Legal Orthodoxy: The Crisis of Legal Orthodoxy. New York City, New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780195092592.
Humphrys, Elizabeth (2018). How Labour Built Neoliberalism: Australia's Accord, the Labour Movement and the Neoliberal Project. Brill Academic Publishers. ISBN 9789004383463.
Isakhan, Benjamin (2015). Edinburgh Companion to the History of Democracy. Edinburgh University Press. ISBN 9781474400145.
Johari, J. C. (1987). Contemporary Political Theory: New Dimensions, Basic Concepts and Major Trends. Sterling Publishers. ISBN 9788120707184.
Johnston, Deborah A.; Saad-Filho, Alfredo, eds. (2005). Neoliberalism: A Critical Reader. Pluto Press. ISBN 9780745322995.
Katseli, Louka T.; Milios, John; Pelagidis, Theodore, eds. (2018). Welfare State and Democracy in Crisis: Reforming the European Model. Routledge. ISBN 9781351788397.
Kendall, Diana (2011). Sociology in Our Time: The Essentials. Cengage Learning. ISBN 9781111305505.
Kindersley, Richard, ed. (2016). In Search of Eurocommunism. Springer. ISBN 9781349165810.
Kwok, Pui-lan; Rieger, Joerg (2013). Occupy Religion: Theology of the Multitude. Rowman & Littlefield. ISBN 9781442217928.
Lafontaine, Oskar (2009). Left Parties Everywhere?. Socialist Renewal. Nottingham, England: Spokesman Books. ISBN 9780851247649.
LeBlanc, Paul (2014). Marx, Lenin, and the Revolutionary Experience: Studies of Communism and Radicalism in an Age of Globalization. Routledge. ISBN 9781317793526.
Lewis, Jane; Surender, Rebecca, eds. (2004). Welfare State Change: Towards a Third Way?. Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780199266722.
Li, He (2015). Political Thought and China's Transformation: Ideas Shaping Reform in Post-Mao China. Springer. ISBN 9781137427816.
Lih, Lars T. (2005). Lenin Rediscovered: What Is to Be Done? in Context. Brill Academic Publishers. ISBN 9789004131200.
Link, Arthur S., ed. (1968). The Papers of Woodrow Wilson. Vol. 5 (1st ed.). Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press. ISBN 9780691045870.
Lipow, Arthur (1991). Authoritarian Socialism in America: Edward Bellamy and the Nationalist Movement. University of California Press. ISBN 9780520075436.
Long, Roderick T. (2000). Reason and Value: Aristotle versus Rand. Washington, D.C.: Objectivist Center.
Long, Roderick T. (2012). "Anarchism". In D'Agostino, Fred; Gaus, Gerald F. (eds.). The Routledge Companion to Social and Political Philosophy. Routledge.
Lowe, Rodney (2004) [1993]. The Welfare State in Britain Since 1945 (3rd, illustrated ed.). Macmillan Education UK. ISBN 9781403911933.
Ludlam, Steve; Smith, Martin J., eds. (7 October 2017). Governing as New Labour: Policy and Politics Under Blair. Macmillan International Higher Education. ISBN 9781403906786.
Palley, Thomas I. (2005). From Keynesianism to Neoliberalism: Shifting Paradigms in Economics. Pluto Press.
Palley, Thomas I. (2013). From Financial Crisis to Stagnation: The Destruction of Shared Prosperity and the Role of Economics. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 9781107612464.
Patsouras, Louis (2005). Marx in Context.
Pestritto, Ronald J., ed. (2005). Woodrow Wilson: The Essential Political Writing. Lexington Books. ISBN 9780691045870.
Prychitko, David L. (2002). Markets, Planning, and Democracy: Essays After the Collapse of Communism. Edward Elgar Publishing. ISBN 9781840645194.
Ramnath, Maia (2019). "Non-Western Anarchisms and Postcolonialism". In Levy, Carl; Adams, Matthew S. (eds.). The Palgrave Handbook of Anarchism. Springer. ISBN 9783319756202.
Ratner, Carl (2019). "The Neolberal Political Economy". Neoliberal Psychology. Springer. ISBN 9783030029821.
Raza, Syed Ali (2012). Social Democratic System. Global Peace Trust. ISBN 9789699757006.
Roemer, John E. (1994). "The long term and the short term". A Future for Socialism. Harvard University Press. ISBN 9780674339460.
Romano, Flavio (2006). Clinton and Blair: The Political Economy of the Third Way. Routledge Frontiers of Political Economy. Vol. 75. London: Routledge. ISBN 9780415378581.
Romano, Flavio (7 May 2007). Clinton and Blair: The Political Economy of the Third Way. Routledge Frontiers of Political Economy. Vol. 75. London: Routledge. ISBN 9781134182527.
Meyer, Henning; Rutherford, Jonathan, eds. (2011). The Future of European Social Democracy: Building the Good Society. Springer. ISBN 9780230355040.
Sears, Kathleen (2019). Socialism 101: From the Bolsheviks and Karl Marx to Universal Healthcare and the Democratic Socialists, Everything You Need to Know about Socialism. Simon & Schuster. ISBN 9781507211366.
Sinclair, Upton (1918). Upton Sinclair's: A Monthly Magazine: for Social Justice, by Peaceful Means If Possible.
Sloan, Pat (1937). Soviet Democracy. London: Left Book Club.
Staab, Andreas (2011). The European Union Explained: Institutions, Actors, Global Impact (2nd ed.). Indiana University Press. ISBN 9780253001641.
Steele, David Ramsay (1992). From Marx to Mises: Post-Capitalist Society and the Challenge of Economic Calculation. Open Court Publishing Company. ISBN 9780875484495.
Steger, Manfred B. (1997). The Quest for Evolutionary Socialism: Eduard Bernstein and Social Democracy. Cambridge, United Kingdom; New York City, United States; Melbourne, Australia: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 9780521582001.
Taylor, Andrew J. (2013). "Trade Unions and the Politics of Social Democratic Renewal". In Gillespie, Richard; Paterson, William E. (eds.). Rethinking Social Democracy in Western Europe. Routledge. ISBN 9781135236182.
Ticktin, Hillel (1998). "The Problem is Market Socialism". In Ollman, Bertell (ed.). Market Socialism: The Debate Among Socialists. New York: Routledge. ISBN 9780415919661.
Tomlinson, Jim (1997). Democratic Socialism and Economic Policy: The Attlee Years, 1945–1951. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 9780521550956.
Trechsel, Alexander H. (2013). Towards a Federal Europe. Taylor & Francis. ISBN 9781317998181.
Tucker, Benjamin (1972). State Socialism and Anarchism and Other Essays: Including the Attitude of Anarchism Toward Industrial Combinations and Why I Am an Anarchist (1st ed.). Ralph Myles Pub. ISBN 9780879260156.
Wainwright, Hilary (1987). Labour: A Tale of Two Parties. Hogarth Press. ISBN 9780701207786.
Walters, William (2001). "Governing Unemployment: Transforming "the Social"?". In Pavlich, George; Wickham, Gary (eds.). Rethinking Law, Society and Governance: Foucault's Bequest. Hart Publishing. ISBN 9781841132938.
Weisskopf, Thomas E. (1994). "Challenges to Market Socialism: A Response to Critics". In Roosevelt, Frank; Belkin, David (eds.). Why Market Socialism? Voices from Dissent. Armonk, New York: M. E. Sharpe. pp. 297–318. ISBN 9781563244650.
Whyman, Philip (2005). "Socialism". Third Way Economics: Theory and Evaluation. Springer. ISBN 9780230514652.
Wright, Anthony (1999). "Social Democracy and Democratic Socialism". In Eatwell, Roger; Wright, Anthony (eds.). Contemporary Political Ideologies (2nd ed.). London: Continuum. pp. 80–103. ISBN 9781855676053.
Lamb, Peter (2015). "Social democracy". Historical Dictionary of Socialism. Historical Dictionaries of Religions, Philosophies, and Movements (3rd ed.). Rowman & Littlefield. ISBN 9781442258266.
Miller, David (1998). "Social Democracy". In Craig, Edward (ed.). Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Vol. 8. Routledge. p. 827. ISBN 9780415187138.
Panfilov, E. G. (1979). "Democratic Socialism". The Great Soviet Encyclopedia (3rd ed.).
Schweickart, David (2007). "Democratic Socialism". In Anderson, Gary L.; Herr, Kathryn G. (eds.). Encyclopedia of Activism and Social Justice. Vol. 1. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications. ISBN 9781412918121.
Tsakalotos, Euclid (2001). "European Employment Policies: A New Social Democratic Model for Europe". In Arestis, Philip; Sawyer, Malcolm C. (eds.). The Economics of the Third Way: Experiences from Around the World. Edward Elgar Publishing. pp. 26–45. ISBN 9781843762836.
Volle, Adam (6 October 2022). "Democratic socialism". Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved 2 February 2023.
Bilgrami, S. Jafar Raza (1965). "Problems of Democratic Socialism". Indian Journal of Political Science. 26 (4): 26–31. JSTOR41854084.
Blombäck, Sofie; Demker, Marie; Hagevi, Magnus; Hinnfors, Jonas; Loxbo, Karl (2019). "The Decline of Western European Social Democracy: Exploring the Transformed Link Between Welfare State Generosity and the Electoral Strength of Social Democratic Parties, 1975–2014". Party Politics. 27 (3): 1–12. doi:10.1177/1354068819861339. ISSN1354-0688. S2CID199148173.
Farber, Samuel (1992). "Before Stalinism: The Rise and Fall of Soviet Democracy". Studies in Soviet Thought. 44 (3): 229–230.
Goldenberg, Sheldon; Wekerle, Gerda R. (September 1972). "From utopia to total institution in a single generation: the kibbutz and Bruderhof". International Review of Modern Sociology. 2 (2): 224–232. JSTOR41420450.
Lih, Lars T. (2003). "How a Founding Document Was Found, or One Hundred Years of Lenin's What is to Be Done?". Kritika: Explorations in Russian and Eurasian History. 4 (1): 5–49. doi:10.1353/kri.2003.0008. S2CID162307936.
Ludlam, Steve (1 June 2000). "New Labour: What's Published Is What Counts". British Journal of Politics and International Relations. 2 (2): 264–276. doi:10.1111/1467-856X.00037. S2CID144902773.
Timmermann, Heinz (October 1977). "Eurocommunism: Moscow's Reaction and the Implications for Eastern Europe". The World Today. 33 (10). Royal Institute of International Affairs: 376–385. JSTOR40394953.
Welch, Levin (Autumn 2012). "Neoliberalism, Economic Crisis, and the 2008 Financial Meltdown in the United States". International Review of Modern Sociology. 38 (2). International Journals: 221–257. JSTOR43499898.
Wilhelm, John Howard (1985). "The Soviet Union Has an Administered, Not a Planned, Economy". Europe-Asia Studies. 37 (1): 118–130. doi:10.1080/09668138508411571.
Heilbroner, Robert L. (Winter 1991). "From Sweden to Socialism: A Small Symposium on Big Questions". Dissident. Barkan, Joanne; Brand, Horst; Cohen, Mitchell; Coser, Lewis; Denitch, Bogdan; Fehèr, Ferenc; Heller, Agnès; Horvat, Branko; Tyler, Gus. pp. 96–110. Retrieved 10 April 2020.
Chartier, Gary (13 April 2010). Free-Market Anti-Capitalism? (Speech). Cæsar's Palace, Las Vegas: Association of Private Enterprise Education.
Esteva, Gustavo (October 2013). Liberty According to the Zapatistas (Speech). Lecture at the Bridgeport Free Skool. Bridgeport, Connecticut.
Thomas, Norman (2 February 1936). Is the New Deal Socialism? (Speech). Chicago Democratic Socialists of America. Archived from the original on 12 July 2010. Retrieved 28 January 2016.
Chartier, Gary (September 2009). "Socialist Ends, Market Means: Five Essays"(PDF). Center for a Stateless Society. Tulsa Alliance of the Libertarian Left. Retrieved 8 February 2020.
Democratic Socialists of America. "About us". Democratic Socialists of America. Retrieved 17 May 2019.
Democratic Socialists of America. "What is Democratic Socialism?"(PDF). Democratic Socialists of America. Archived from the original on 1 July 2009. Retrieved 5 December 2017.
Dionne, E. J.; Galtson, William (13 May 2019). "Socialism: A Short Primer". Brookings Institution. Retrieved 10 April 2020.
Duignan, Brian; Kalsang Bhutia, Thinley; Mahajan, Deepti (21 January 2009). "Social democracy". Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved 29 February 2020.
Duignan, Brian; Kalsang Bhutia, Thinley; Mahajan, Deepti (20 December 2016). "Social democracy". Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved 29 February 2020.
Schweickart, David (24 March 2006). "Democratic Socialism". Loyola University Chicago. Archived from the original(PDF) on 17 June 2012. Retrieved 6 August 2020.
Starke, Helmut Dietmar (11 January 2020). "Rosa Luxemburg". Encyclopædia Britannica Online. Retrieved 29 February 2020. Luxemburg developed a humanitarian theory of Marxism, stressing democracy and revolutionary mass action to achieve international socialism.
Dorrien, Gary (2019). Social Democracy in the Making: The Political and Religious Roots of European Socialism. Yale University Press. ISBN 9780300236026.
Hatterlsey, Roy (1987). Choose Freedom: The Future of Democratic Socialism. Penguin Books. ISBN 0140104941.
Doherty, James C.; Lamb, Peter (2006). Historical Dictionary of Socialism (2nd ed.). The Scarecrow Press. ISBN 9780810855601.
Miliband, Ralph (1994). Socialism for a Sceptical Age. London, United Kingdom: Polity Press. ISBN 9780745614274.
Reisman, Reidsman, ed. (1996). Democratic Socialism in Britain: Classic Texts in Economic and Political Thought, 1825–1952. Chatto and Pickering. ISBN 9781851962853.
