|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Social democracy article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
|Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5|
|This article is written in British English with Oxford spelling (colour, realize, organization, analyse; note that -ize is used instead of -ise). Some terms used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.|
|Social democracy has been listed as a level-4 vital article in Society. If you can improve it, please do. This article has been rated as C-Class.|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
|This talk page is automatically archived by MiszaBot I. Any threads with no replies in 3 months may be automatically moved. Sections without timestamps are not archived.|
There is no citation for Bernie Sanders as a notable social democrat. As a self-identifed democratic socialist, he shouldn't be put under both the article for "democratic socialism", and "Social democracy" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Greggeezy (talk • contribs) 01:40, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
Is there a citation for Nelson Mandela on this list? I was under the impression he was more democratic-socialist (or even left of that). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 18:05, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
- well, there is not always a totally clear line between social democrats and democratic socialists 13:36, 4 August 2015 (UTC)~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk)
As I am not certain, the edit has not been made but would it not be fair to argue that, on the basis of policy, Harold Wilson should be included in the category of social democrat. From Ben Pimlott's Political Biography of Harold Wilson, the assertion is often made that he never legislated with the intention of replacing capitalism and 'talked left to steer the party centre' in the same way that his predecessor, Harold Macmillan had talked right to steer his party centre. Also incured the wrath of Bevanites later, and of Tony Benn. Evidence suggests that he was not a democratic socialist and so should be included in the list of notables. — Preceding unsigned comment added by YorkshireCricket (talk • contribs) 13:22, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
Possible errors: the article makes a point of describing the differences between democratic socialism and social democracy, but then goes on to list a number of social democrats (erroneously labelled democratic socialists), by the article's own metric, as democratic socialists.
Furthermore, these social democrats (such as Bernie Sanders) aren't listed in the social democracy page either. - bluntpencil2001 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bluntpencil2001 (talk • contribs) 18:04, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 3 April 2016
|This edit request has been answered. Set the
In the section "Notable social democrats" there is not the name of Greek Social democrat ex prime minister of Greece "Andreas Papandreou".The leader and the founder of PASOK the Greek social democratic party of Greece StathisPanagiotopoulos (talk) 05:05, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
- Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Terra ❤ 02:54, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 22 June 2016
|This edit request has been answered. Set the
In the section "Notable Social Democrats" I would suggest to add the Austrian chancellor Bruno Kreisky, who was one of the most influential European social democrats during his tenure and was a leading figure of the Socialist International. Also many of his contemporaries and friends such as Olof Palme and Willy Brandt are already listed.
- Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Amortias (T)(C) 08:31, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
UK section in "Decline (2010-Present)"
I don't believe it's fair to say that the decline of Scottish Labour signifies a decreasing popularity of social democracy; there are two key points to be made about this.
First is that Scottish Labour's lack of popularity comes from the view that they are incompetent at standing up for Scotland, and that they colluded with the Scottish Conservatives in the Better Together Campaign, not because of its policy of social democracy (which arguably it doesn't hold).
Second is that Scottish Labour's popularity has essentially been replaced by the Scottish National Party - a social democratic party in itself.
Thus Scottish electoral results do not suggest a lack of popularity for social democracy, and even if they do, the example given (that of Scottish Labour) is irrelevant to the article and should be removed.
- Agree. Also, the whole section is original research. As Socialist parties have abandoned "social democratic" policies, Left parties have filled their ideological space. TFD (talk) 19:50, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
In the criticism section to this social democracy article, there is no right wing criticism of social democracy . Why? Wikipedia is supposed to be written for the benefit of everyone and free of any political bias.
To say that social democracy as such is not socialist enough is nothing but just one kind of possible flaw: the kind of flaw that a socialist would think of those political views of the world that aren't socialist enough.
Many people doesn't like, nor agrees with, social democracy, let alone socialism. Therefore, other kinds of criticism on the subject at hand need to be sought.
For example, and apart from the most obvious criticism (that social democracy isn't capitalist enough), you can mention one of the most common criticism to such political systems: that they lead to these so-called 'Nany States'. The flaws inherent to such kind of arrangements of society are many and evident. For starters, you cannot babysit an entire country and expect not to suffer the consequences of it. Just as idolatry leads to emptiness, nany-states will lead to: (1) weakened standards in general: the upsurge and idolization of mediocrity as an end in itself (excellence, discipline, responsability and all of the highest virtues: all of them down the toilet in the long run); (2) the softening of moral principles, and inescapable, widespread moral decadence (recalcitrant corruption, ever more higher levels of criminality, etc, etc, conform the pot of gold at the end of the social democratic "rainbow"); (3) an ever growing dependence on state benefits, and the subsequent economic ruin; etc, etc.
You can say that, in the long run, social democracies foster an unhealthy, parasitic view and attitude towards life and people in general. It is already a sign of decadence from a society when it wishes for the arrival of some political system like communism, socialism or social democracy... Unwishful Thinker (talk) 11:58, 11 June 2017 (UTC)