i support some of what marx stood for but i don't agree with all of it. I believe in democracy and working through problems with a parliamentarian approach, the change should and can come by democratic means.
So what you're telling me is...
You're not a socialist?
Good, that's settled
jesus christ man, what i'm saying is that marx said that the proletariat must overthrow the bourgeoisie, many have interpreted this as revolution (typically violent). The emphasis on "democratic" socialism is that we must obtain socialism through "democratic" means of election as opposed to violent revolution. I know that this is not what democratic socialism technically means but it's important to make that distinction because we should not be hypocrites. Why overthrow the government and install a democracy if we have a democracy, why not instead achieve socialism within the democracy we have? I know this is probably contrary to what you believe and i know you could easily make the argument of "US is not a democracy" but i'm saying in general if there is a democracy in place, there is no need for a violent overthrow, rather a political movement of the left as we are seeing now.
Understand that i am in no way an ideologue of socialism or marxism, i do not know that this is the right way to go and i constantly question the things that i learn, the things i was taught, especially marxism and socialism. I know that you're trying to say that i am not a socialist but in fact i am. Earlier you defined socialism as this,
"a political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole"
This is exactly what i believe in as the end goal, the primary objective, i am by your own definition, a socialist. We are more debating how to achieve socialism not who is a socialist.
Poll