It's best to disregard the previous blogpost of mine because that was ai generated. I did that because the blogpost was made over a year ago and the stuff about chatgpt and such became popular using gpt-j basically, so that stuff can be completely ignored. It was completely pointless for me to post that but I'm going to leave it up here anyways. It was useless for me to make a website specifically to air out my political views here and just clog it up with meaningless ai generated posts. Thankfully, I didn't really make multiple blogposts here anyways, so that's a moot point.

Now to get onto the topic I want to talk about today. Why currently in my view (open to change) democratic socialism is better than revolutionary socialism, because that is something I do in fact want to discuss. And also I'd like to clarify that I am not a marxist before I continue.

The Way i perceive the many socialist movements on the world is that I see all of them as having a degree of validity and being able to be a viable way to replace capitalism. Even so, I think self critique is an important thing for socialists to do, as socialists critiquing other types of socialists can help strengthen socialist movements in a way (I think). However, considering that, I'd argue that it's important to understand that some ways towards socialism may be more efficient than others.

It is this reason alone that I disagree with marxist-leninists, because those people have had revolutions that have lead to the creation of many socialist nations and the lion's share of them. There is plenty of things that went right in these countries, as well as many things to be criticized. However, I have many qualms with a single thing, specifically under leaders like Stalin, Mao, socialist leaders that had dictatorial power over their states. Although a large quantity of propaganda against them has been made, it's undeniable that both of them have committed atrocities and violations of basic human rights. This has also happened many times under capitalist states, and the reason why these things happen is because systems of governance and economic systems are seperate.

Another problem that MLs have is their tendency towards historical revisionism in order to glorify every single thing a socialist leader has done, almost to the level of deification. It's a tendency of online ML communities to do this, which goes against the idea of rigorous self critique, or any learning from past mistakes in history. It's undeniable that many socialist states in the past have made mistakes and critiquing past movements is important as to not repeat them. And the whole thing about glorifying socialist leadders or theorists is especially problematic. Online MLs act as if people like Marx, Engels, Lenin were never wrong and dogmatically believe everything that these theorists argued for. While these socialist thinkers had revolutionary ideas, the online MLs almost fetishize them in the same way a religious person dogmatically worships the set of gods they believe in (not that I have problems with religious people, I'm just using them here to make a point). Nobody is 100% correct, and we can accept that, and socialist circles should encourage reading more modern theory, theory that was at least written in the 21st century, as some of it builds upon the ideas of historical theorists. Reading both historical as well as modern socialist texts should be more regular in these communities.

Geopolitics are complex and cannot simply be explained by claiming that the USSR was 100% utopia that never had any issues and all critiques against it is American propaganda. That would be simply be blind nationalism, similar to the things that rightists tend to do, only for a different country. Some socialists are extremely dogmatic to the point that they uncompromisingly everything a socialist country does is right. The thing is, we can critique states and accept the complexities of socialist projects and look at the prosperous aspects that socialist countries provided.

Democratic socialism may not be a perfect way towards achieving collective ownership, and many projects towards that may have been derailed in the past (1970s Chile, Post 1975 Sweden, etc) however I view it as preferable to revolutionary action because it is much less dangerous. In a revolution many people will die, and there is a very real chance of an armed revolution failing and being crushed by outside forces. But there is no perfect way to achieve as large of a systemic change as changing socio economic systems under a capitalist dominated world, and all paths toward socialism all have their flaws.