[meyer]

Democratic Socialism is the same thing as Communism, achieved by a different path.

Tyranny of the majority.

[rightwingcrazy]

“Democratic Socialism is the same thing as Communism, achieved by a different path.”

Terms like “free enterprise” and “capitalism” don’t need the modifier “democratic”, because it’s automatically assumed. Putting “Democratic” and “Socialist” together defines a paradox, or an oxymoron, or a brief period in the descent to absolute slavery.

[Olog-hai]

Correct. And the notion of “many paths to socialism” goes further back than Khrushchev and others who said it.

Will it be possible for private property to be abolished at one stroke?

No, no more than existing forces of production can at one stroke be multiplied to the extent necessary for the creation of a communal society.

In all probability, the proletarian revolution will transform existing society gradually and will be able to abolish private property only when the means of production are available in sufficient quantity. …

— The Principles of Communism

Funny enough, back then there were so-called “democratic socialists, which TPOC describes thus:

(T)he third category (of socialists) consists of democratic socialists who favor some of the same measures the communists advocate, as described in Question 18; not as part of the transition to communism, however, but as measures which they believe will be sufficient to abolish the misery and evils of present-day society.

These democratic socialists are either proletarians who are not yet sufficiently clear about the conditions of the liberation of their class, or they are representatives of the petty bourgeoisie, a class which, prior to the achievement of democracy and the socialist measures to which it gives rise, has many interests in common with the proletariat.

It follows that, in moments of action, the communists will have to come to an understanding with these democratic socialists, and in general to follow as far as possible a common policy with them — provided that these socialists do not enter into the service of the ruling bourgeoisie and attack the communists.

It is clear that this form of cooperation in action does not exclude the discussion of differences. …

In reality, of course, there is still no difference between the so-called democratic socialist and the Marxist because the endgame is socialism, rather than the undefined state of “communism” that presumes the nonexistence of the state and universal worldwide family-less, property-less, religion-less and nation-less communal living.