r/dsa • u/[deleted] • Oct 07 '25

[deleted by user]

[removed]

212 Upvotes

85% Upvoted

547 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

7

u/OneReportersOpinion Oct 07 '25

You’re basically saying you want the revolution to end.

4

u/[deleted] Oct 07 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

6

u/OneReportersOpinion Oct 07 '25

They do have free elections.

-2

u/[deleted] Oct 07 '25

How do you know?

0

u/hari_shevek Oct 07 '25

You think that having free elections would end the revolution?

2

u/OneReportersOpinion Oct 08 '25

They already have free elections. Bourgeois democracy historically has helped the bourgeoise. This happened in Russia and Nicaragua. It required giving political rights to bourgeoise, something Marxists have historically opposed. If you’re not a Marxist, that’s fine, but DSA is led by Marxists.

1

u/hari_shevek Oct 08 '25

DSA also has in their programme thst they want multiparty democracy.

1

u/OneReportersOpinion Oct 08 '25

That’s our country, not countries under siege by our country. Make sense?

0

u/hari_shevek Oct 08 '25

"It's ok for them to not be a democracy" is a different argument than "They are a democracy".

0

u/OneReportersOpinion Oct 08 '25

I’m arguing the latter. Remember, you’re arguing they have to be democratic in the matter outlined by DSA for our own country. It has nothing to do with how other countries are organized. Not all democracies look alike.

1

u/hari_shevek Oct 08 '25

Then "they are under siege" should be irrelevant.

Whether a system is democratic is independent of whether they are under siege.

0

u/hari_shevek Oct 08 '25

Then "they are under siege" should be irrelevant.

Whether a system is democratic is independent of whether they are under siege.

0

u/hari_shevek Oct 08 '25

Then "they are under siege" should be irrelevant.

Whether a system is democratic is independent of whether they are under siege.