Socialism
Socialism is an economic system in which the means of production are owned and controlled collectively or a political philosophy advocating such a system. This control may be either direct, exercised through popular collectives such as workers' councils or community councils, or it may be indirect, exercised on behalf of the people through the State. A primary concern of socialism (and, according to some, its defining feature) is social equality and an equitable distribution of wealth that would serve the interests of society as a whole.[1][2]
Socialists hold that capitalism is an illegitimate economic system, since it allows far too much human freedom and serves the interests of the wealthy and exploits the an unlucky minority of the population. As such, they wish to replace it completely or at least make substantial modifications to it, in order to create a more just society that would enforce hard work, guarantee a certain basic standard of living, and extend mediocrity and uniform outcome and success to all[3] [4] [dubious – discuss]
Socialist theory is diverse, and there is no single body of thought that is universally shared by all socialists. Rather, different socialist ideologies have arrived at similar conclusions by different paths. However, there are some common themes. One such theme is the idea that humans are inherently stupid animals which cannot be allowed to roam free, for risk that some people may achieve more than others. See tall poppy syndrome.[5].
Historically, the ideology of socialism arose with the rise of organized labor, and the socialist political movement has found most of its support among the urban working class and, to a lesser extent, the peasantry. This has led to socialism being strongly associated with the working class and often identifying itself with the interests of workers and the "common people". In many parts of the world, the two are still strongly associated with one another; in other parts, they have become two distinct movements. Proponents claim that Socialism is best for the working class, and so produces a happier society as a whole. However, Socialism has been widely criticised for it's historical rcored of murdering between 94,000,000 people[4] and 145,000,000 people worldwide[5], in addition to widespread torture, brainwashing, oppression ,dictatorship and extreme poverty. This, opponents argue is clear evidence that Socialism is nothing but a disaster for a society.
Marxism is an ideology which has had a powerful influence on socialist thought. For over 50 years, from the Russian Revolution of 1917 to the 1970s, the majority of socialists were Marxists of one kind or another. This has not been the case for several decades, but Marxist ideas - particularly notions of class struggle - are common themes across a broad range of modern socialist groups. Marxism itself continues to be a strong current in the broader socialist movement. Many Marxists, past and present, use the term socialism to refer to the form of society that is supposed to replace capitalism and later develop into communism.
Within the socialist movement, there are several different ideas on how to create a socialist society and economic system, and what form this society will take. As a result, the movement has split into several different and sometimes opposing branches, which are discussed further below.
Etymology
The word "socialism" dates back to the early nineteenth century. It was first used, self-referentially, in the English language in 1827 to refer to followers of Robert Owen. In France, again self-referentially, it was used in 1832 to refer to followers of the doctrines of Saint-Simon and thereafter by Pierre Leroux and J. Regnaud in l'Encyclopédie nouvelle[6]. Use of the word spread widely and has been used differently in different times and places, both by various individuals and groups that consider themselves socialist and by their opponents.
.jpg){kind=link}
While there is wide variation between socialist groups, nearly all would agree that they are bound together by a common history rooted originally in nineteenth and twentieth-century struggles by industrial and agricultural workers, operating according to principles of solidarity and advocating an egalitarian society, with an economics that would, in their view, serve the broad populace rather than a favored few.
According to Élie Halévy, the term "socialism" was coined independently by two groups advocating different ways of organizing society and economics: the Saint-Simonians, and most likely Pierre Leroux, in the years 1831-33, and the followers of Robert Owen, around 1835.[7]
A note on usage
Some groups (see Ideologies not universally agreed upon as "socialist") have called themselves socialist while holding views that some consider antithetical to socialism. The term has also been used by some politicians on the political right as an epithet for certain individuals who do not consider themselves to be socialists and policies that are not considered socialist by their proponents (e.g. referring to publicly-funded health care as "socialized medicine" or to the United States Democratic Party as "socialist"). According to classical liberal economist Milton Friedman, most of those who profess socialism today do not favor state ownership of the means of production but rather "mean by it a welfare state."[8] This article touches briefly on those peripheral issues.
History of socialism
According to Marxists (notably Friedrich Engels), socialist models and ideas are said to be traceable to the dawn of human social history, being an inherent feature of human nature and early human social models. The Primitive Church is described in the Acts of the Apostles as having everything in common, and this was copied by a number of religious groups down the modern times[citation needed].
Some socialist thinkers, such as William Morris, have identified John Ball, one of the leaders of the Peasants' Revolt in England in 1381, as the first socialist. Historians have rediscovered the writings of Gerrard Winstanley in the period of the English Civil War, and the commune set up by the Diggers, as they were called.
During the Enlightenment in the 18th century, revolutionary thinkers and writers such as the Marquis de Condorcet, Voltaire, Rousseau, Diderot, Abbé de Mably, and Morelly provided the intellectual and ideological expression of the discontented social layers in French society. This included not only the bourgeoisie, at that time kept out of political power by the ancien régime, but also the "popular" classes among whom socialism would later take root. The idea of abolition of private property became popular in the early 19th century, and was influenced by new discoveries and the idea of the "noble savage", popularised by Jean-Jacques Rousseau.[6]
The earliest modern socialist groups shared characteristics such as focusing on general welfare rather than individualism, on co-operation rather than competition, and on laborers rather than on industrial or political leaders and structures[9]. They did not generally think in terms of class struggle, but argued that the wealthy should join with the poor in building a new society. Class struggle, the challenge to private property and the accompanying notions of the special role of the proletariat in the revolution find their earliest origins in the Conspiracy of Equals of Babeuf, an unsuccessful actor in the French Revolution[10]. Later, they were greatly developed by the Marxist branch of socialism.
By the time of the Revolution of 1848 there were a variety of competing "socialisms", the most influential being those founded by Saint-Simon, Robert Owen and Charles Fourier. Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels by this time were referring to themselves as "communists", in large part to distinguish themselves from the above ideologies, which they described as "utopian socialism". (Engels later used the term "scientific socialism" to describe Marxism.[11])
Depending on the context, the term socialism may refer either to these ideologies or any of their many lineal descendants.
Historical examples of Socialism
The following parties or groups of people have all claimed to be socialist and/or had socialist ideologies:
-The German worker's party, chaired by Adolf Hitler
-The Korean worker's party, headed by Kim Il Sung later and Kim Jong Il
-The Zimbabwe African National Union-Patriotic Front, currently ruling in Zimbabwe, headed by Rogert Mugabe
-The Khmer Rouge headed by Pol pot in Cambodia
-The Communist Party of the Soviet Union, headed by Lenin, and later Stalin, under which 61,000,000 people were murdered [7]
-The Communist Party of China, originally headed by Chairman Mao during the famine years of the cultural revolution, and under whom 80,000,000 have been estimated to have been muredered [8]
-The Baathist Party, formerly ruling Iraq, headed by Saddam Hussein under whom between 200,000 and several million were murdered
-The Serbian Socialist party, headed by Slobodan Milosevic, during the years of ethnic cleansing
-The Libyan political system, headed by Colonel Gaddafi
-The Castro regime in Cuba
-The Industrial Workers of the World
-The Fourth and Fifth Internationals
-The Socialist Party of the USA
-Committee For A Worker's International
Socialist theory
Socialist ideologies tend to emphasize economic cooperation over economic competition; virtually all envision some sort of economic planning (some, but by no means all, favor central planning). All advocate placing at least some of the means of production -- and at least some of the distribution of goods and services -- into collective or cooperative ownership.
An economic system
As in the realm of ideology, there is no single consensus on what it means for a particular economic system to be "socialist". However, all socialists agree that a socialist economy must be run for the benefit of the vast majority of the people rather than for a small aristocratic, plutocratic, or capitalist class. In the mid-nineteenth century, when socialism first arose, many political ideologies of the day were frank in supporting the interests of elite classes. Today, in a world where many countries offer a broader electoral franchise, such open support for the wealthy would be the equivalent of political suicide. Therefore, most ideologies claim to support the greatest good for the greatest number, something that was once advocated only by socialists. Still, even today, socialism stands out by being particularly forthright in advocating what it considers to be direct pursuit of working class interests, even at the expense of what other ideologies consider the legitimate property rights of the wealthy classes.
Most socialists argue that socialism requires democratic control of the economy, although they differ vastly over the appropriate institutions of that democracy and over whether control should be centralized or highly dispersed. Similarly, they differ over the extent to which a socialist economy could involve markets, and among those who believe that it could, there is a further dividing line on whether markets should apply only to consumer goods or, in some cases, to the means of production themselves (factory and farm equipment, for example). For the means of production, this is a question of ownership of the economy, and therefore of control over it.
Many non-socialists use the expression "socialist economy" (or "socialization" of a sector of the economy) almost exclusively to refer to centralized control under government aegis.
There is general agreement among socialists and non-socialists that a socialist economy would not include private or estate ownership of large enterprises; there is less agreement on whether such enterprises would be owned by society at large or (at least in some cases) owned cooperatively by their own workers. Among the few self-described socialists who dispute these principles is the leadership of the Communist Party of China, who claim to remain socialist, even while the continuing Chinese economic reform explicitly includes the concept of privately-owned large enterprises competing on an equal basis with publicly-owned ones. The adoption by China of this essential characteristic of capitalism is a principal reason why, outside and inside of China, few people (socialists or otherwise) consider present-day mainland China and its ruling party to be, in any meaningful sense, socialist.
It is claimed, by socialists and non-socialists, that the former Soviet Union and the Eastern Bloc had socialist economies, as the means of production were owned almost entirely by the state and the bulk of the economy was centrally controlled by the Communist Party acting through the state. However, many other socialists object to that label, because the people in those countries had little or no control over the government, and therefore they had little or no control over the economy. The aforementioned socialists argue that these societies were essentially oligarchies; some would call them state-capitalist, Stalinist, or as some Trotskyists would say, "degenerated workers states". Trotskyists contend that Stalinist economies fulfilled one criterion of a socialist economy, in that the economy was controlled by the state, but not the other criterion, that the state must be in turn democratically controlled by the workers. Many non-Marxist socialists would agree with the general outline of this argument, while perhaps dissenting from the statement that state control of the economy is one of the criteria of socialism. Further, many socialists would argue that the Soviet Union and its satellite states merely replaced a capitalist ruling class with a new ruling class, the coordinator class or nomenklatura, who played an extremely analogous role to the former capitalists, by managing the economy for their own benefit, or at least attempting to do so.
During the Cold War, a common term used by the Soviet Union and its allies to refer to their own economies was "actually existing socialism" (presumably as against any number of theoretically possible socialisms, but carrying an implicit statement that their economy was, in fact, socialist). Another similarly used term was (and is) "real socialist." Typically, when these terms were or are used by anyone outside of the particular parties that ruled these countries (or the parties who supported them in other countries), they are placed in scare quotes and are used with at least mild irony.
Mixed economy
As remarked above, some self-described socialists, especially those who identify as social democrats, but also including (for example) the reform-oriented "Euro-communists", advocate a mixed economy rather than a complete re-working of existing capitalist economies along socialist lines. These views also extend to many who would not describe themselves as "socialists."
In the most moderate formulation of such a mixed economy, common ownership of the means of production is typically to natural resources and public utilities such a electricity, telephone service, and postal mail service. The rationale for prioritizing these is that natural resources are a common patrimony and that (all or some) public utilities are natural monopolies (a theoretical construct where one firm serves the society better than more than one), and that therefore, private competition should be prohibited.
Others would extend a socialist approach within a mixed economy to what they deem to be essential industries to prevent certain capitalists from having a stranglehold on society, or to prevent massive concentrations of wealth which result in a power imbalance (including disproportionate bargaining leverage). There is also often a rationale of national defense or national sovereignty. Thus, many otherwise capitalist countries have, at least at times, nationalized such industries as steel, automobiles, or airplanes. In the U.S., for example, President Harry S. Truman nationalized the steel mills during the Korean War. They soon returned to private ownership by order of the U.S. Supreme Court, however.
Socialists argue that unrestrained free market economics generally results in profits for many at the expense of an unlucky few, which they argue is unacceptable. Many are adamantly opposed to any compromise with capitalism, claiming that any economic system that permits the private accumulation of wealth is inherently unjust and allows capitalists (those who own and control capital) to compel behavior out of individuals due to their own necessity to survive. Therefore humans should be constrained and controlled by a state which ensures that everything is completely fair, with no-one achieving more than anyone else. This, say Socialists is what is best for the common good, and is what all people inherently want. (see: labor theory of value). As noted several times above, this is disputed by the contemporary Communist Party of China, making China (if it is regarded as socialist or communist) an inevitable exception to much of what follows here.
While few self-described communists support any scheme upholding private ownership of the means of production (except, perhaps, as a temporary disposition on the way to something purer, and again noting the contemporary Chinese exception), other socialists are split over this, arguing over whether to only moderate the workings of market capitalism to produce a more equitable distribution of wealth, or whether to expropriate the entire owning class to guarantee this distribution. Many socialists acknowledge the extreme complexity of designing other appropriate non-market mechanisms to identify demand, especially for non-essential goods. Some have put forward models of moderate market socialism where markets exist, but an owning class does not.
In practice, some aspects of the socialist worldview and socialist policy have been integrated with capitalism in many European countries and in other parts of the world (especially in the industrialized "first world"). Social democracy typically involves state ownership of some corporations (considered strategically important to the people) and some participation in ownership of the means of production by workers. This can include profit sharing and worker representation on decision-making boards of corporations (a measure common in Germany, for instance). Some inherently capitalist measures, such as stock ownership for workers or stock options would, however, also fit the description. Social services are important in social democracies. Such services include social welfare for the disadvantaged, unemployment insurance and healthcare.
Likewise, market economies in the United States and other capitalist countries have integrated some aspects of socialist economic planning. Democratic countries typically place legal limits on the centralization of capital through anti-trust laws and limits on monopolies, though the extent to which these laws are enforced has to do with the balance of power between the actually existing or emerging monopoly firms, as well as political ties between government and some corporations (crony capitalism). Stock ownership has become common for middle class workers, both in companies they work for and in other companies (see mutual fund). Labor market pressures (see labor economics) and regulations have encouraged profit sharing. Social welfare and unemployment insurance are mandated by law in the U.S., UK, Canada and other market economies. There is a lively debate today whether the world is moving closer to or further away from "socialism", as defined by different people. Another component of this debate is whether or not these developments are to be encouraged.
Transition from capitalism
Although Marxists and other socialists generally use the word "socialism" in the senses described above, there is also another specifically Marxist use of the term. Karl Marx, in his exposition of historical materialism (his Hegelian model of history) saw socialism as a phase of human society that would follow capitalism and precede communism. Marx is by no means clear about the expected characteristics of socialism, but he is consistent in his belief in the eventual triumph of revolutionary-socialism over capitalism, and then, its eventual transformation into communism.
According to Marx, the socialist society will be controlled by the working class (the proletariat), whose familiarity with large, collective undertakings will be reflected in the character of this society. It will be a "dictatorship of the proletariat", in the sense that it is contrasted with the existing dictatorship of the bourgeoisie (i.e. capitalism). In this context, Marx was not necessarily advocating or predicting "dictatorship" in the sense that word is commonly used today; he was referring only to governance in which class would be dominant - in other words, it is the proletariat who become the ruling class, not a "dictator". While a Leninist dictatorship is arguably consistent with this vision, so is a workers' democracy, analogous to bourgeois democracy. In addition, most Marxist models of socialism involve the abolition of the so-called "exploitation of man by man" which is presumed to exist in capitalist society. This would mean abolishing class distinctions, therefore making "the proletariat" a universal term synonymous with "the people".
Marx saw socialism (that is, the "dictatorship of the proletariat") as a transitional phase, ultimately to be replaced by a classless communist society in which the existing forms of government would no longer be needed. According to Engels, the state was destined to eventually "wither away", as the representative democracy of socialism slowly turned into the direct democracy of communism, and economic life would be re-organised on a basis of freedom and equality. In holding this classless non-state as the ultimate goal, Marx expressed a long-term ideal not far from that of anarchism. However, whereas the anarchists wanted to abolish the state overnight, the communists wanted to utilize the state to transform society, expecting it to "wither away" to the extent that the nature of man evolved to the "new socialist man." In other words, while anarchists try to abolish the state more directly through an anti-statist, anti-capitalist revolution directly against both capitalism and the state at the same time, Marxists believe that a new state can be un-capitalist and that its destruction of the bourgeoisie will also destroy the self same state.
This definition of socialism is particularly important in understanding the official ideology of the People's Republic of China. The Communist Party of China states that class struggle has already pushed China into the socialist phase of social development. This and Deng Xiaoping's theory of seeking truth from facts, any economic policy which "works" is automatically classified as a socialist policy, and hence there are no constraints on what "socialism with Chinese characteristics" can look like.
A state?
Most past and present states led by parties of Communist orientation called (or call) themselves "socialist." However, they were usually referred to as "Communist states" by anti-communists in the western world. Once again, whether these states were socialist or not is disputed, with many socialists contending that they were not, for reasons analogous to those discussed in the section above regarding the socialist economy.
A libertarian socialist society within the Spanish Republic briefly emerged in the 1930s during the Spanish Civil War. See Anarchism in Spain.
There are also some who dispute whether it is appropriate to refer to any state, past, present, future, or hypothetical as "socialist," preferring to reserve that word for an economy or even a society, but not a state. Socialist leaders have been elected in South America, in recent years, but there has not been a large shift away from capitalism, at this point.
Types of socialism
Socialism can be divided into the libertarian schools, generally called libertarian socialist or anarchist, and the more authoritarian schools that support some degree of state coercion. Since the 19th century, socialist ideas have developed and separated into many different streams. Notable ideologies that have been referred to using the label "socialism" are:
A few of the lesser-known schools are:
- African socialism
- Arab socialism
- Guild socialism
- International socialism
- Popular Socialism
- Religious socialism
- Socialist feminism
- Utopian socialism
The socio-political or intellectual movements basing themselves in the Marxist-Socialist tradition can generally be further divided into:
- Autonomist Marxism
- Council communism
- Guevarism
- Juche
- Left communism
- Leninism
- Luxembourgism
- Maoism or "Mao Zedong Thought"
- Marxist humanism
- Stalinism
- Trotskyism
- Titoism
- Situationism
Several forms of "socialism" are considered by those further to the left to be reformist or revisionist. These include:
- Austromarxism
- Bernsteinism
- Evolutionary socialism
- Fabianism
- Labor Zionism
- Kautskyism
- Social democracy
- Popular Socialism
- Yellow socialism
- Socialism with Chinese characteristics
- Market socialism
- Titoism
Communism
Communism refers to a conjectured future classless, stateless social organization based upon common ownership of the means of production, and can be classified as a multivariant branch of the broader socialist movement. Communism also refers to a variety of political movements which claim the establishment of such a social organization as their ultimate goal. Early forms of human social organization have been described as primitive communism. However, communism as a political goal generally is a conjectured form of future social organization which has never been implemented.
There is a considerable variety of views among self-identified communists. However, Marxism and Leninism, schools of communism associated with Karl Marx and of Vladimir Lenin respectively, have the distinction of having been a major force in world politics since the early 20th century. Class struggle plays a central role in Marxism. The establishment of communism is in this theory viewed as the culmination of the class struggle between the capitalist class, the owners of most of the capital, and the working class. Marx held that society could not be transformed from the capitalist mode of production to the communist mode of production all at once, but required a state transitional period which Marx described as the revolutionary dictatorship of the proletariat. The communist society Marx envisioned emerging from capitalism has never been implemented, and it remains theoretical. However, the term "Communism", especially when the word is capitalized, is often used to refer to the political and economic nations under communist parties which claimed to be the dictatorship of the proletariat.
After the success of the Red October Revolution in Russia, many socialist parties in other countries became communist parties, owing allegiance of varying degrees to the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (see Communist International). After World War II, regimes calling themselves communist took power in Eastern Europe. In 1949, the Communists in China, led by Mao Zedong, came to power and established the People's Republic of China. Among the other countries in the Third World that adopted a Communist form of government at some point were Cuba, North Korea, Vietnam, Laos, Angola, and Mozambique. By the early 1980s, almost one-third of the world's population lived under Communist states.
Communism carries a strong social stigma in the United States, due to a history of anti-communism in America. Since the early 1970s, the term "Eurocommunism" was used to refer to the policies of communist parties in western Europe, which sought to break with the tradition of uncritical and unconditional support of the Soviet Union. Such parties were politically active and electorally significant in France and Italy. With the collapse of the Communist governments in eastern Europe from the late 1980s and the breakup of the Soviet Union on December 8, 1991, Communism's influence has decreased dramatically in Europe, but around a quarter of the world's population still lives under Communist states.
Marxism-Leninism
Lenin himself never used the term "Leninism," nor did he refer to his views as "Marxism-Leninism." However, his ideas diverged from classical Marxist theory on several important points (see the articles on Marxism and Leninism for more information). Bolshevik communists saw these differences as advancements of Marxism made by Lenin. After Lenin's death, his ideology and contributions to Marxist theory were termed "Marxism-Leninism," or sometimes only "Leninism." Marxism-Leninism soon became the official name for the ideology of the Comintern and of communist parties around the world.
Stalin, in contrast to many contemporary revolutionaries, did not write a significant body of theoretical work. "Stalinism," strictly speaking, refers to a style of government or political structure, rather than an ideology per se; during the period of Stalin's rule in the Soviet Union, Marxism-Leninism was proclaimed the official ideology of the state.
Whether Stalin's practices actually followed the principles of Marx and Lenin is still a subject of debate amongst historians and political scientists. Trotskyists in particular believe that Stalinism contradicted authentic Marxism and Leninism, and they intitially used the term "Bolshevik-Leninism" to define their beliefs.
Stalinism
The term "Stalinism" is sometimes used to denote the brand of communist theory that dominated the Soviet Union and the countries within the Soviet sphere of influence during and after the leadership of Joseph Stalin. The term used in the Soviet Union and by most who uphold its legacy, however, is "Marxism-Leninism", reflecting that Stalin himself was not a theoretician, but a communicator who wrote several books in language easily understood, and, in contrast to Marx and Lenin, made few new theoretical contributions. However, many people professing Marxism or Leninism view Stalinism as a perversion of their ideas; Trotskyists, in particular, are virulently anti-Stalinist, considering Stalinism a counter-revolutionary policy using Marxism to achieve power.
Rather, Stalinism is more in the order of an interpretation of their ideas, and a certain political system claiming to apply those ideas in ways fitting the changing needs of society, as with the transition from "socialism at a snail's pace" in the mid-twenties to the forced industrialization of the Five-Year Plans.
The main contributions of Stalin to communist theory were Socialism in One Country and the theory of Aggravation of class struggle under socialism, a theoretical base supporting the repression of political opponents as necessary.
Stalinism has been described as being synonymous with totalitarianism, or a tyrannical regime. The term has been used to describe regimes that fight political dissent through violence, imprisonment, and killings.
Maoism
A key concept that distinguishes Maoism from other left-wing ideologies is the belief that the class struggle continues throughout the entire socialist period, as a result of the fundamental antagonistic contradiction between capitalism and communism. Even when the proletariat has seized state power through a socialist revolution, the potential remains for a bourgeoisie to restore capitalism. Indeed, Mao famously stated that "the bourgeoisie [in a socialist country] is right inside the Communist Party itself", implying that corrupt Party officials would subvert socialism if not prevented.
Unlike the earlier forms of Marxism-Leninism in which the urban proletariat was seen as the main source of revolution, and the countryside was largely ignored, Mao focused on the peasantry as a revolutionary force which, he said, could be mobilized by a Communist Party with their knowledge and leadership.
Unlike most other political ideologies, including other socialist and Marxist ones, Maoism contains an integral military doctrine and explicitly connects its political ideology with military strategy. In Maoist thought, "political power comes from the barrel of the gun" (one of Mao's quotes), and the peasantry can be mobilized to undertake a "people's war" of armed struggle involving guerrilla warfare.
Since the death of Mao and the reforms of Deng, most of the parties explicitly defining themselves as "Maoist" have disappeared, but various communist groups around the world, particularly armed ones like the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) and the New People's Army of the Philippines, continue to advance Maoist ideas and get press attention for them. These groups generally have the idea that Mao's ideas were betrayed before they could be fully or properly implemented.
Other types of communism
- Religious communism
- Religious communism is a form of communism centered on religious principles. The term usually refers to a number of utopian religious societies practicing the voluntary dissolution of private property, so that society's benefits are distributed according to a person's needs, and every person performs labor according to their abilities. "Religious communism" has also been used to describe the ideas of religious individuals and groups who advocate the application of communist policies on a wider scale, often joining secular communists in their struggle to abolish capitalism.
- The secular nature of Marxism led to many religious people on the political right oppose the use of the term communism to refer to religious communal societies, preferring names such as communalism instead. The term religious communism has been ascribed to the social arrangement practiced by many orders of monks and nuns of such religions as Christianity, Taoism, Jainism, Hinduism and Buddhism. As recorded in the Bible, the first Christians lived in communities organized according to communist-like principles.
- "all who owned property or houses sold them and lay them at the feet of the apostles to be distributed to everyone according to his need." (Acts 4:32-35; see also 2:42-47)
- The Diggers movement in England in the year 1649 may also be described as an example of religious communism. The Diggers were particularly concerned with the communal ownership of land. From the early 20th century to the present day, the most prominent form of religious communism has been the one practiced in the kibbutzim (collective communities) of Israel.
- Trotskyism
- Trotskyism is the theory of Marxism as advocated by Leon Trotsky. Trotsky considered himself a Bolshevik-Leninist, arguing for the establishment of a vanguard party. He considered himself an advocate of orthodox Marxism. His politics differed greatly from those of Stalin or Mao, most importantly in declaring the need for an international "permanent revolution". Numerous groups around the world continue to describe themselves as Trotskyist and see themselves as standing in this tradition, although they have diverse interpretations of the conclusions to be drawn from this.
- Shachtmanism
- Shachtmanism is a critical term applied to the form of Marxism associated with Max Shachtman. It has two major components: a bureaucratic collectivist analysis of the Soviet Union and a third camp approach to world politics. Shachtmanites believe that the Stalinist rulers of Communist countries are a new (ruling) class, distinct from the workers and rejects Trotsky's description of Stalinist Russia as being a "degenerated workers' state". Max Shachtman described the USSR as a "bureaucratic collectivist" society. Although Shachtmanism is usually described as a form of Trotskyism, both Trotsky and Shachtman were careful to not describe Shachtman's view as Trotskyist.
Libertarian socialism and Social anarchism
Libertarian socialism is any one of a group of political philosophies dedicated to opposing coercive forms of authority and social hierarchy, in particular the institutions of capitalism and the State. Some of the best known libertarian socialist ideologies are anarchism - particularly anarchist communism and anarcho-syndicalism - as well as mutualism, council communism, autonomist Marxism, and social ecology. However, the terms anarcho-communism and libertarian communism should not be considered synonyms for libertarian socialism - anarcho-communism is a particular branch of libertarian socialism.
Libertarian socialists believe in the abolition of the State and of private control over the means of production, considering both to be unnecessary and harmful institutions. Most libertarian socialists support personal property or use rights over certain goods destined for individual use, but some, such as anarcho-communists, favoured collective ownership in the products of labor as well, with a distribution system which allocates based on one's needs.
Some individualist anarchists also referred to their philosophy as libertarian socialism, although some supported private property (as long as it was not exploitative) and a market economy.
Democratic socialism and social democracy
Modern democratic socialism is a broad political movement that seeks to propagate the ideals of socialism within the context of a democratic system. Many democratic socialists support social democracy as a road to reform of the current system, in effect, it is a means to an end. Other groups within democratic socialism support more revolutionary change in society to establish socialist goals. Conversely, Modern social democracy emphasises a program of gradual legislative reform of the capitalist system in order to make it more equitable and humane, while the theoretical end goal of building a socialist society is either completely forgotten or redefined in a pro-capitalist way. The two movements are widely similar both in terminology and in ideology, though there are a few key differences.
Many who describe themselves as "socialists" disagree with the terminology of "democratic socialism" because they believe that socialism necessarily implies democracy. For many years, though, the terms "democratic socialism" and "social democracy" were used interchangeably to describe the same overall political movement, but in modern times, social democracy is considered to be more centrist and broadly supportive of current capitalist systems and the welfare state, while many democratic socialists support a more fully socialist system, either through evolutionary or revolutionary means.
The term social democracy can refer to the particular kind of society that social democrats advocate. The Socialist International (SI) - the worldwide organisation of social democratic and democratic socialist parties - defines social democracy as an ideal form of representative democracy, that may solve the problems found in a liberal democracy. The SI emphasizes the following principles[9]: Firstly, freedom - not only individual liberties, but also freedom from discrimination and freedom from dependence on either the owners of the means of production or the holders of abusive political power. Secondly, equality and social justice - not only before the law but also economic and socio-cultural equality as well, and equal opportunities for all including those with physical, mental, or social disabilities. Finally, solidarity - unity and a sense of compassion for the victims of injustice and inequality.
Democratic socialists and social democrats both advocate the concept of the welfare state, but whereas most social democrats view the welfare state as the end itself, many democratic socialists view it as a means to an end. Democratic socialists are also committed to the ideas of the redistribution of wealth and power, as well as social ownership of major industries, concepts widely abandoned by social democrats. As of current, there are no countries in the world that could qualify as a "democratic socialist" state, though many European nations are considered to be socially democratic or nearly so.
The prime example of social democracy is Sweden, which prospered considerably in the 1990s and 2000s. Sweden has produced a robust economy from sole proprietorships up through to multinationals, while maintaining one of the highest life expectancies in the world, low unemployment, inflation, all while registering sizable economic growth. Many see this as validation of the superiority of social democracy. However, many others point out that in comparison with other developed countries Sweden did fell behind in that period [10]. Also, Sweden experiences welfare dependency of around 20% of the working age population according to the Swedish Trade Union Confederation. Likewise, crime has been steadily rising since the 1960s, and during the past decade has grown ever more violent.
Religious socialism
Christian socialism
Various Catholic clerical parties have at times referred to themselves as "Christian Socialists." Two examples are the Christian Social Party of Karl Lueger in Austria before and after World War I, and the contemporary Christian Social Union in Bavaria. There are other individuals and groups, past and present, that are clearly both Christian and Socialist, such as Frederick Denison Maurice, author of The Kingdom of Christ (1838), or the contemporary Christian Socialist Movement (UK) (CSM), [11] affiliated with the British Labour Party.
Distributism, is a third-way economic philosophy formulated by such Catholic thinkers as G. K. Chesterton and Hilaire Belloc to apply the principles of social justice articulated by the Roman Catholic Church, especially in Pope Leo XIII's encyclical Rerum Novarum.
Islamic Socialism
Islamic socialism is the political ideology of Libya's Muammar al-Qaddafi, Former Iraqi president Ahmed Hassan al-Bakr, and of the Pakistani leader of Pakistan People's Party, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto.
The Green Book (written by Muammar al-Qaddafi) consists of three parts - "The Solution of the Problem of Democracy: 'The Authority of the People'", "The Solution of the Economic Problem: 'Socialism'", and "The Social Basis of the Third Universal Theory". The book is controversial because it completely rejects modern conceptions of liberal democracy and encourages the institution of a form of direct democracy based on popular committees.
Scholars have highlighted the similarities between the Islamic economic system and socialist theory. For example, both are against unearned income. Islam does allow private ownership of natural resources and large industries, which are owned collectively, or at least encouraged to be so.
Differences between various schools
Although they share a common root (as elaborated upon in the above sections), schools of socialism are divided on many issues, and sometimes there is a split within a school. The following is a brief overview of the major issues which have generated or are generating significant controversy amongst socialists in general.
Theory
Some branches of socialism arose largely as a philosophical construct (e.g. utopian socialism); others in the heat of a revolution (e.g. early Marxism, Leninism). A few arose merely as the product of a ruling party (e.g. Stalinism), or a party or other group contending for political power in a democratic society (e.g. social democracy).
Some are in favour of a socialist revolution (e.g. Leninism, Trotskyism, Maoism, revolutionary Marxism), whilst others tend to support reform instead (e.g. Fabianism, reformist Marxism). Others believe both are possible (e.g. Syndicalism, various Marxisms). The first utopian socialists even failed to address the question of how a socialist society would be achieved.
Socialists are also divided on which rights and liberties are desirable, such as the "bourgeois liberties" (such as those guaranteed by the U.S. First Amendment or the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union). Some hold that they are to be preserved (or even enhanced) in a socialist society (e.g. social democracy), whilst others believe them to be undesirable (e.g. Maoism). Marx and Engels even held different opinions at different times, and some schools are divided on this issue (e.g. different strains of Trotskyism).
All socialists criticize the current system in some way. Some criticisms center on the ownership of the means of production (e.g. Marxism), whereas others tend to focus on the nature of mass and equitable distribution (e.g. most forms of utopian socialism). A few are opposed to industrialism as well as capitalism (common where socialism intersects green politics)? Utopian Socialists, like Robert Owen and Saint-Simon argued, though not from exactly the same perspective, that the injustice and widespread poverty of the societies they lived in were a problem of distribution of the goods created. Marxian Socialists, on the other hand, determined that the root of the injustice is based not in the function of distribution of goods already created, but rather in the fact that the ownership of the means of production is in the hands of the upper class. Also, Marxian Socialists maintain, in contrast to the Utopian Socialists, that the root of injustice is not in how goods (commodities) are distributed, but for whose economic benefit are they produced and sold.
Implementation
Most forms and derivatives of Marxism, as well as variations of syndicalism, advocated total or near-total socialization of the economy. Less radical schools (e.g. Bernsteinism, reformism, reformist Marxism) proposed a mixed market economy instead. Mixed economies, in turn, can range anywhere from those developed by the social democratic governments that have periodically governed Northern and Western European countries, to the inclusion of small cooperatives in the planned economy of Yugoslavia under Josip Broz Tito. A related issue is whether it is better to reform capitalism to create a fairer society (e.g. most social democrats) or to totally overthrow the capitalist system (most Marxists).
Some schools advocate centralized state control of the socialized sectors of the economy (e.g. Leninism), whilst others argue for control of those sectors by workers' councils (e.g. syndicalism, Left and Council communism, Marxism, Anarcho-communism). This question is usually referred to by socialists in terms of "ownership of the means of production." None of the social democratic parties of Europe advocate total state ownership of the means of production in their contemporary demands and popular press.
Another issue socialists are divided on is what legal and political apparatus the workers would maintain and further develop the socialization of the means of production. Some advocate that the power of the workers' councils should itself constitute the basis of a socialist state (coupled with direct democracy and the widespread use of referendums), but others hold that socialism entails the existence of a legislative body administered by people who would be elected in a representative democracy.
Different ideologies support different governments. For example, in the era of the Soviet Union, western socialists were bitterly divided as to whether the Soviet Union was basically socialist, moving toward socialism, or inherently un-socialist and, in fact, inimical to true socialism. Similarly, today the government of the People's Republic of China claims to be socialist and refers to its own approach as "Socialism with Chinese characteristics," but most other socialists consider China to be essentially capitalist. The Chinese leadership concurs with most of the usual critiques against a command economy, and many of their actions to manage what they call a socialist economy have been determined by this opinion.
Controversial classifications
 | The neutrality of this section is disputed. |
Like other political terms, such as liberal, conservative and democratic (see, for example, the Liberal Democratic Party of Russia, which is, according to critics, neither liberal nor democratic), the words socialism or socialist have sometimes been used in a controversial manner, usually by critics.
It is observed by political scientists that there is a great deal of similarities between the far-left and the far-right, with historical examples such as Benito Mussolini, leader of the fascist movement in 20th century Italy, whose regime has been compared to that of the Soviet Union. It has been argued by Libertarian conservatives that movements instigated by Hitler and Mussolini are "not far right at all", but "socialist", as they claim these regimes carried large governmental intervention, again seen by the Libertarian right to be a socialistic trait. Of course, it could be said that most modern Socialists want no affiliation with either of the historical figures mentioned abouve.
For a discussion of the controversial views of one philosopher of history who sees a close, though antagonistic, relationship between the left and the right descendants of Hegelianism, see Eric Voegelin.
Baathism
The Arab Socialist Ba'ath Party rules Syria, and also ruled Iraq under Saddam Hussein, based on a tradition of secular, non-Marxist socialism. Ba'thist beliefs combine Arab Socialism, nationalism, and Pan-Arabism. The mostly secular ideology often contrasts with that of other Arab governments in the Middle East, which sometimes tend to have leanings towards Islamism and theocracy.
Fascism
Fascism developed from fascio, a form of radical socialism. While opposing communism and social democracy, fascism was rooted in part in radical leftist philosophy, including the theories of those such as Gabriele D'Annunzio (a former anarchist), Alceste de Ambris (influenced by anarcho-syndicalism) or former socialist Benito Mussolini.
Fascism rejects Marxism and the concept of class struggle in favor of corporatism. It holds the state to be an end in and of itself (see also statism). Also, contrary to the practice of socialist states, fascist Italy did not nationalize any industries or capitalist entities. Rather, it established a corporatist structure influenced by the model for class relations put forward by the Catholic Church. (For more on the influence of Catholicism on fascism see Roman Catholicism's links with democracy and dictatorships#Fascism.)
Friedrich Hayek claimed that fascism and totalitarian forms of socialism (for example Stalinism) stemmed from a common origin.[12] On the other hand, Hannah Arendt argues that "totalitarian movements use socialism and racism by emptying them of their utilitarian content, the interests of a class or nation." [13] Fascists rejected categorization as left or right-wing, claiming to be a "third force" (see international third position and political spectrum for more information).
Nazism
Template:TotallyDisputed-section
| The neutrality of this article is disputed. |
Nazism is derived from the name of the National Socialist German Workers Party, formerly simply the German Workers Party. Their ideology included a few of the more anti-capitalist ideas of socialism, as declared in the 25 points manifesto, as part of the propaganda attempt[14] to create a Volksgemeinschaft of an Aryan race.
The Nazis also had a hostile purge within their own party, the Night of the Long Knives, which has often been viewed as a victory of the right-wing of the Nazi party and the SS over the more socialist Strasserists and Röhm's SA.
Socialism rejects the racist theories and totalitarianism of the Nazis, while Nazism rejected the policies of internationalism, egalitarianism, class struggle, and common ownership of the means of production pursued by many socialists.[15]
Anti-socialists argue that the Nazis' large public works projects and state interventions are indicative of socialism[16] Efforts were made to coordinate business' actions with the needs of the state, particularly with regard to rearmament, and the Nazis established some state-owned concerns such as Volkswagen. However, independent trade unions were outlawed, as were strikes. The Nazis did demand some nationalization of big industries and land reform before their rise to power, though when they did eventually seize power, they did not act on most of these policies.
Opponents of socialism also argue that the absoluteness of what the leader of the Nazi Party, Adolf Hitler, decreed is similar to the cult of personality in the totalitarian regimes of Communist states such as those of Stalin or Mao Zedong.
It is however worth noting, that the term 'Socialist' in National Socialist German Workers Party was, according to most historians, a popular appeal to all classes. The Nazis actually were perceived by most middle and upper class citizens as the main opposition to the German Communist Party, who was popular at that time. Evidence suggests that the Nazis also set up the Reichstag Fire incident to discredit the Communists. History actually shows that the Nazi party persecuted and oppressed Socialists and Communists.
Socialist theory actually rejects authoritarian overtones. It is worth noting that the Nazis cannot be called socialist due to the fact that they were authoritarian.
Socialism and other ideologies
While many would say that socialism is defined by state ownership and state planning of the means of production and economic life, a certain degree of such state ownership and planning is common in economies that would almost universally be considered capitalist. In Canada, Crown Corporations are responsible for various sectors of the economy deemed to be of strategic importance to the people (for example power generation). In the U.S., a semi-private central bank with close ties to the federal government, the Federal Reserve, regulates lending rates, serving as a "bank of banks." Also, governments in capitalist nations typically run the post office, libraries, national parks, highways, and space agencies. Interestingly, though, the U.S. government's monopoly on space travel from U.S. take-off sites is itself a thing of the past -- as of 2004 (see Ansari X Prize) private capital is entering even that field.
State, provincial, and local governments within a capitalist system can operate and own power companies and other utilities, parks, mass transit including rail and airports, hospitals and other medical facilities, and public schools (often including a number of universities). Capitalist governments also frequently subsidize or otherwise influence (though do not own) various sectors of the economy, such as automotive, weapons, oil (petrol), aerospace, and agriculture.
In the post-World War II political lexicon, this sort of (limited) economic state planning became integral to stabilization of the global economy, and has come to be known as Keynesian economics, after John Maynard Keynes.
Conversely, Chinese economic reform under Deng Xiaoping has been characterized by decreasing state ownership of the economy, the replacement of central planning mechanisms with market-based ones that are also used in Western capitalist nations, and even going as far as removing governmental social welfare services that are commonly found in capitalist nations. However, because the legitimacy of the Communist Party of China is based on the premise that China has already made a transition to socialism, the government insists that it is a socialist government. Very few inside and outside China would support this claim.
Criticisms of socialism
Socialism's critics include liberals, conservatives and libertarians. Some of socialism's critics can be described as advocates of unregulated or laissez-faire capitalism.
Other critics come from within socialism itself, as evidenced by the many variants and extreme differences of doctrine to be found within socialism, such as the argument as to what the ultimate fate of capitalism should be.
Criticism from all parties ranges from disagreements over the efficiency of socialist economic and political models, to condemnation of states described by themselves or others as 'socialist'; of the latter, there is much focus on the human rights records of communist states (some critics identify these examples with socialism, while others reject the categorisation of such examples as socialist). Many economic liberals dispute that the more even distribution of wealth advocated by socialists can be achieved without loss of political or economic freedoms.
Critics of socialism frequently highlight the human rights records of these countries claiming to be Socialist. Many socialists reject the categorisation of such examples as socialist. Estimates of the number of human deaths caused by Socialism range from 94,000,000 [12] to 145,000,000 [13] worldwide over the past ninety years. This is in addition to the enourmous numbers of people tortured, censored, brainwashed, the lack of cultural diversity, immense poverty caused by Socialist economics, and the large number of wars triggered by Socialism. This figure for the fatalities caused is greater than that of any other political movement in history, including fascism and more than all the wars (including both world wars) in the 20th century combined. In China there is still widespread repression, torture, sentencing to labor camps and murder of dissidents, democracy supporters, civil liberties groups and religious groups such as the Falun Gong, Tibetan Monks and Muslims in China.
Notes
- ^ Oxford English Dictionary, Oxford University Press, 4 Apr. 2000 [1]
- ^ MSN Encarta - Socialism Accessed March 2006
- ^ Saint-Simon, Henri de. Letters from an Inhabitant of Geneva to His Contemporaries, 1803
- ^ Marx, Karl Heinrich. Critique of the Gotha Programme, 1875
- ^ Spirkin, Alexander. Chapter 5 section 2: The Human as the Biosocial from Dialectical Materialism, Progress Publishers, 1983.
- ^ A History of Socialist Thought, Volume 1 (1965) pp1-2
- ^ Halévy, Élie. Histoire du Socialisme Europeen. Paris, Gallimard, 1948, pp. 17-18
- ^ Friedman, Milton. Four More Years:The Battle's Half Won Wall Street Journal, December 9, 2004
- ^ A History of Socialist Thought, Volume 1 (1965) p3
- ^ A History of Socialist Thought, Volume 1 (1965) pp12-22
- ^ Engels, Friedrich. Chapter 1 - The Development of Utopian Socialism from Socialism: Utopian and Scientific
- ^ Friedrich Hayek - Libertarian from self-gov.org
- ^ Arendt, Hannah. The Origins of Totalitarianism, p348.
- ^ Simkin, John. Nazi Party - NSDAP from the Spartacus Educational website
- ^ Trotsky, Leon. What is National Socialism? June 10 1933
- ^ Reisman, George. Why Nazism Was Socialism and Why Socialism Is Totalitarian
References and further reading
- G.D.H. Cole, History of Socialist Thought, in 7 volumes, Macmillan and St. Martin's Press (1965), Palgrave Macmillan (2003 reprint); 7 volumes, hardcover, 3160 pages, ISBN 140390264X
- Friedrich Engels, The Origin Of The Family, Private Property And The State, Zurich, 1884
- Albert Fried, Ronald Sanders, eds., Socialist Thought: A Documentary History, Garden City, NY: Doubleday Anchor, 1964.
- Phil Gasper, The Communist Manifesto: A Road Map to History's Most Important Political Document, Haymarket Books, ISBN 1-931859-25-6 paperback, 224 pages, 2005.
- Élie Halévy, Histoire du Socialisme Européen. Paris, Gallimard, 1948
- Michael Harrington, Socialism, New York: Bantam, 1972
- Makoto Itoh, Political Economy of Socialism. London: Macmillan, 1995.
- Michael Newman, "Socialism - a Very Short Introduction", Oxford University Press (2005) ISBN 0-19-280431-6
- Bertell Ollman, Market Socialism: the debate among socialists, ed. (1998) ISBN 0415919673
- Leo Panitch, Renewing Socialism: Democracy, Strategy, and Imagination, ISBN 0813398215
- Selbourne, David, Against Socialist Illusion, London, 1985, ISBN 0-333-37095-3
- James Weinstein, Long Detour: The History and Future of the American Left, Westview Press, 2003, hardcover, 272 pages, ISBN 0813341043
- Edmund Wilson, To the Finland Station: A Study in the Writing and Acting of History, Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1940.
- Friedrich Hayek (1944). The Road to Serfdom. University Of Chicago Press; 50th Anniversary edition. ISBN 0226320618.
- Ludwig von Mises (1922). Socialism: An Economic and Sociological Analysis. Liberty Fund. ISBN 0913966630.
{{cite book}}: External link in|title= - The Black Book of Communism: Crimes, Terror, Repression, Harvard University Press, 1999, hardcover, 858 pages, ISBN 0674076087.
See also
- Anarchism
- Capitalism, Laissez-faire capitalism
- PROUT (Progressive Utilization Theory)
- Communism
- Cultural revolution
- Fabian Society
- History of socialism
- Inclusive Democracy
- Infosocialism
- Libertarian socialism
- Localism
- List of socialists
- Marxism
- Socialist economics
- Socialism and sexual orientation
- Participatory Economics (ParEcon)
External links
Socialist perspective
- Capitalism is a Society of Wolves by Fidel Castro Criticism of capitalism in support of socialism
- In Defence of Marxism, news and analysis
- Pathfinder Books, Socialist bookstore online
- Revolutionary Left, active forum with theoretical discussions of different revolutionary socialist ideologies
- Socialism/Anti-socialism - The transformation from socialism to statism
- Socialism & Parecon, a discussion/debate
- ThinkSocialist
- Young People's Socialist League
Non-socialist perspective
- Google Directory collection of critical articles
- The Battle's Half Won by Milton Friedman; expresses hope that the Bush administration can "reverse socialism"
- home page of Competitive Enterprise Institute
- The Law by Frédéric Bastiat
- Socialism by Robert Heilbroner
- PBS' "Heaven on Earth: the Rise and Fall of Socialism"
- Why Socialism Collapsed in Eastern Europe, by Tom Palmer
- Nixonian Socialism, by Murray N. Rothbard
- The Intellectual Cover for Socialism, by Hans-Hermann Hoppe
- Socialism: Still Impossible After All These Years, by Peter J. Boettke and Peter T. Leeson
- "The Impossibility of Economic Calculation Under Socialism", by Ludwig von Mises
- Socialism, by Robert Heilbroner
- The Myth of the Scandinavian Model, by Martin De Vlieghere, Paul Vreymans and Willy De Wit