The Parliamentary Socialist, and Glenn Beck has a point?

I am currently reading Trotsky's Terrorism and Communism, which is an extolment of a revolutionary, one party state over a parliamentary democracy. The piece was written in 1920, right after the end of the Russian Civil War. In it, Trotsky points out the negatives of attempting socialism through democracy. I thought after last blog's rather controversial point, I should clarify a bit on my opinion on democracy.

A political theory is the most relevant to the time it was created in, given certain circumstances. The situation in Russia during the early twentieth century, or China during the 1940's called for a true revolution. The possibility of realizing socialism through a democratic establishment was slim to none. The leaders of these revolutions were dealing with an unlearned, feudalistic populace. Obviously, here in America, such a unilateral undemocratic revolution would not be supported, and should not be attempted. The way to achieve socialism in the "First World" is through democratic elections. So while I support Trotsky and co. in theory, given their time in history, applying their teachings to our present society is not a good idea.

On another topic, I was watching Glenn Beck last night, and he was arguing the usual conservative mantra of cutting taxes and spending being the key to fixing the economy. I realized that I agree with him. Cutting taxes and spending is probably the most effective way of rebounding the economy, and returning to the same system of deregulated, rat -ace capitalism that got us into this mess to begin with. Our government should not be searching for ways to return the economy to the status quo, but to improve its practices to ensure another catastrophe like this never happens again.