In contemporary left-leaning American politics, a divide has emerged between liberals and socialists. The rise of the Democratic Socialists of America (or the DSA) has coincided with what the Economist calls “The Rise of Millennial Socialism”. Here at Exponents, we fall squarely in the liberal camp. Thus, the rise of this latest iteration of socialism should give us pause. However, this new socialism differs in many ways from the socialism of the USSR, or even Chavez-style socialism. In fact, over the years, the left has become much more liberal in many ways.

First, A History Lesson…

In order to understand this change, one first has to look at the history of socialism. In the “early days”, socialism was much more ideologically diverse than it is today. This was true to such an extent that a thinker such as the American anarchist Benjamin Tucker, an intellectual precursor to libertarianism and anarcho-capitalism, called himself a socialist.

However, with the arrival of the Soviets, socialism collapsed down to strains which embraced central planning, vanguardism, and dictatorship. Also, due to the relative success of the Soviets, this form of illiberal leftism became the dominant form of global leftist politics. For proof of this one need only look at the ostracization of Emma Goldman from “the movement” after her denouncement of Lenin’s government.

Unfortunately, the illiberal nature of the USSR was not at all conducive to strong equitable growth or the advancement of human rights. This created a level of dysfunction so high that the “republic”, after having endured multiple famines and later political unrest, ended in total collapse. Communist socialism, with its opposition to the market economy and democracy, was dead. This meant that when socialism made its comeback on the (American) political scene, it had to be different. It had to change.

Democratic Socialism or Social Democracy?

This is where we return to the DSA. The DSA is decidedly not a liberal organization. If you read their mission statement you’ll see an opposition to capitalism, private property, and profit. However, in practice, the DSA acts much more like social democrats than socialists. One reason for this is a deep commitment to democracy- it’s in their name! And while they would never admit it, this is an unmistakably liberal position.

Working within the realm of (lowercase d ) democratic politics is something the old socialists would scoff at. The working classes, and all citizens in general, were considered to be blinded by “false consciousness”, and so could not be trusted with acting in their own best interests. The DSA, on the other hand, seeks to enact change from within the established system of liberal democracy and in doing so ends up acting a lot more like us liberals than they would care to acknowledge. This is a sign of socialism having conceded the validity of the liberal critique of vanguardism⁠—people know what’s best for themselves and they deserve a voice in government. Pressing forward, democracy is also at the core of another way in which the DSA has taken a more liberal position than the socialists of yesteryear: economic planning.

While American socialism’s turn towards democracy is a liberal move, organizations like the DSA have a much more expansive vision for democracy than most liberals. This includes advocacy for worker-run companies/cooperatives, or at the very least some other form of economic democracy.

To start, it is not at all clear that something like worker cooperatives is incompatible with liberalism. Instead, it seems entirely consistent with the liberal emphasis on the value of decentralization of power – economic and political.

Furthermore, the DSA is explicit in its rejection of central planning, one of the defining characteristics of old-school socialism! Here it can be seen that socialists have conceded the main thrust of the liberal, or perhaps even neoliberal, Hayekian arguments that the state can’t possibly centrally plan the economy, and that competitive markets are by far the best method for organizing economic activity. Now, democratic socialists clearly see a much greater role for government regulation and intervention into the market economy than do liberals, however, the overall structure of the economy would still be market-based.

Another way to see the more liberal bent of the new socialists is to notice which societies and countries they idolize and seek to emulate. These aren’t the USSR or Venezuela, as many right-wing “intellectuals” claim in their fear-mongering rants. Rather, the public faces of democratic socialism, such as Bernie Sanders or Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, frequently reference places like Sweden, Norway, or Denmark. Contrary to popular opinion, these places are not socialist paradises, but instead capitalist liberal democracies. These countries utilize free and open markets combined with strong social safety nets to generate widespread prosperity. Sound familiar?

The socialists idolize neoliberal countries!

A Liberal Triumph

A socialism that operates within democratic processes, and ultimately accepts the need for the market economy is much less dangerous than what came before. Liberals, while continuing to argue against this new socialism and while presenting an alternative positive vision of society, should recognize this and celebrate their success in changing the contours of the political left. Liberalism is powerful and persuasive. Liberal societies and institutions have radically transformed the world and made it a better place. A more liberal left is a sign of such progress.