Refining the theoretical basis for the study of social democratic parties

Abstract

Political Science uses to interpret social democracy as moderateness, adhesion to capitalism and only residual differences relatively to market liberalism. This paper advocates for another definition based on the ideas from Kautsky and Bernstein, containing two key elements: the core importance of representative and parliamentary democracy and the acknowledgement that there are constraints to the advancement of social transformation. The gradual reformism which results is the way social democratic parties use to pursue the improvement of the workers’ and excluded people’s lives. I discuss the internal dynamics of the social democratic parties, whose tension between “Bernsteinian” pragmatism and “Kautskyan” purism avoids that social democracy moves to one of the two extremes and loses its traits. I debate the meaning of moderateness in social democracy, which shall advance as far as possible and fight to transform the constraints. If that is happening it is what researchers shall investigate.