https://theloop.ecpr.eu/for-pluralist-democratic-socialism/

Luke Martell argues that socialism can stifle freedom and diversity. This was clearly the case in, for example, totalitarian impositions of communism in Russia (which relied on socialist theories to develop its scurrilous, murderous, policies under Lenin and Stalin especially).

Following Anne Norton, I would argue that the same argument can be made about democracy. After all, a "people", however that group is composed, could decide to be authoritarian, racist, sexist, xenophobic, punitively collectivist, and so forth. Indeed, there are many examples of this both historically and presently.

In this light, neither socialism nor democracy are, from the outset, guaranteed "good things". They are, rather, a means to achieve whatever end(s) its participants (or their rulers, which, as we know, is oxymoronic) are seeking. These ends can be "good" or "bad" or both depending on your standpoint.

As John Dunn pointed out years ago in his book "Breaking Democracy's Spell", there is danger in thinking that democracy or socialism are immediately good. We need to think a step beyond and ask:

(1) who is doing democracy or socialism and to what ends?

and

(2) Are those ends good from our perspective?

We can then use our own approach(es) to democracy or socialism to intervene or support the movement we've just analysed.

What's your take on this?

https://theloop.ecpr.eu/for-pluralist-democratic-socialism/