As I define things, democratic socialism and national socialism are in different dimensions:
Democratic socialism is distinct from undemocratic socialism. Democratic socialism is where the people vote themselves one another's money. Undemocratic socialism is where the worst get on top, the people are disarmed, and elections are cancelled.
National socialism is distinct from purely economic socialism. The difference between them is who the public wants to be killed. Under national socialism, the public wants people of other races or nationalities to be killed (e.g., German Nazism). Under purely economic socialism, the public wants people of certain classes to be killed—like entrepreneurs, the rich or intellectuals (e.g., Soviet Communism).
Interesting. Thank you.
I wonder if Dazi is an appropriate term?
“Democratic socialism is distinct from undemocratic socialism. Democratic socialism is where the people vote themselves one another’s money. Undemocratic socialism is where the worst get on top, the people are disarmed, and elections are cancelled.”
Democratic socialism may have a short period before it becomes indistinguishable from undemocratic socialism. Max 50-100 years—it was much shorter than that in Venezuela. Eventually the jackboot has to be wielded to keep the donor classes in line. Whoever is on top then may as well be an undemocratic socialist—even if they are voted in.