Difference between revisions of "Socialism"

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
(Religion: Move Marx view)
(Controversy: added Marx view to here)
Line 34: Line 34:
  
 
However, some socialists reject this description. Democratic socialists advocate a system of governance based on the principles of [[solidarity]], [[equality]] and [[liberty]], viewing these principles as interconnected. They believe increased socio-economic equality is associated with increased practical freedom to fulfill human potential. In many countries, such as Britain, socialist movements have been built on Christian, democratic and co-operative bases, embracing the notion that individuals should 'treat others as they would wish to be treated', and arguing that all individuals have a moral responsibility for the welfare of other members of their society. Socialism seeks to prioritize human welfare over other goals, such as profit and wealth accumulation by elites; it views increased redistribution of wealth as vital to securing greater freedom and happiness for the bulk of the people. Though this rosy picture of socialism is appealing to many, it ignores what Hayek called "the road to serfdom."  Though in theory socialism is an idealized, egalitarian form of economics, in practice it means rule by labor bosses who minimize individualism and economic growth in the name of equality and benefits for the working class.
 
However, some socialists reject this description. Democratic socialists advocate a system of governance based on the principles of [[solidarity]], [[equality]] and [[liberty]], viewing these principles as interconnected. They believe increased socio-economic equality is associated with increased practical freedom to fulfill human potential. In many countries, such as Britain, socialist movements have been built on Christian, democratic and co-operative bases, embracing the notion that individuals should 'treat others as they would wish to be treated', and arguing that all individuals have a moral responsibility for the welfare of other members of their society. Socialism seeks to prioritize human welfare over other goals, such as profit and wealth accumulation by elites; it views increased redistribution of wealth as vital to securing greater freedom and happiness for the bulk of the people. Though this rosy picture of socialism is appealing to many, it ignores what Hayek called "the road to serfdom."  Though in theory socialism is an idealized, egalitarian form of economics, in practice it means rule by labor bosses who minimize individualism and economic growth in the name of equality and benefits for the working class.
 +
 +
[[Marx, Karl|Karl Marx]] considered socialism to be a transitory stage between capitalism and communism. In his view, socialism is summed up by the expression: "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs." A major criticism of socialism is that it infringes individual rights in favor of the populace. In a very real sense, politics in the western world throughout the 20th century was shaped by the conflict between socialist and capitalist governmental policies.
 +
 +
Although socialist parties are common in Europe, the leading examples all currently embrace some free enterprise, individual property rights and certain other aspects of capitalism although leading European Socialists are very critical of America. In many European countries socialism has been changing to [[Social democracy]].
  
 
==Key elements==
 
==Key elements==

Revision as of 20:29, November 22, 2009

The Russian caption reads, "Long live the great undefeatable flag of Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin!" This is Leninism, a nasty version of socialism

Socialism is often used in 2009 to describe government programs conservatives dislike. However, as a historical term it has a more precise meaning of an economic system with state ownership or control of the all the major means of production and distribution of goods and services[1]. The central goal is to establish a "worker's paradise"-an ideal state with perfect equality.

In practice the socialist government owns the banks, railroads, farmlands, factories, and stores, and is the only employer. (People sometimes are allowed to have small gardens.) The central goal is to destroy the "evils of capitalism" by government ownership of the means of production, usually with one party controlling the government on behalf of the working class.

In practice however the socialist system never manages to establish this "paradise" because management for the benefit of the employees leads to featherbedding and lack of investment or economic growth, at the expense of consumers. Collective farming (operating farms like factories) sharply reduced the food supply. The most thoroughgoing efforts by Communist regimes turned into authoritarian dictatorships. The government controls all investments, production, distribution, income, and prices, as well as all organizations, schools, news media and formerly private societies. Churches and labor unions are suppressed or controlled by the government. Socialism is the antithesis of capitalism, opposes private ownership of capital or land, and rejects the free market in favor of central planning. It also rejects "civil society" and makes sure that all organizations are controlled by the government.

Theoretically socialist regimes can have multiple parties. In practice there is only one political party, and it controls the government. The leaders of the party choose the government officials and set all policies for the nation and for cities and localities. Opposition parties are not allowed access to the media or to meeting halls or to funding, and their leaders are often arrested as "enemies of the people."

As a political ideology based on the redistribution of wealth, socialism stresses the privileges of the many over the rights of the few, but in practice when socialist economic principles are forced onto a nation by a totalitarian government a new Upper Class appears which is much better off than the Lower Class.


Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy. Its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery. - Winston Churchill [2]

There are three main kinds of Socialism, but all of them are built on the premise that social control of the means of production ensures that a community's resources are used in a positive and uplifting manner.


Leninism

First there is Marxian Socialism or Leninism as revised by Lenin and practiced in the Soviet Union by Stalin (and his successors) and in China by Mao Zedong (but not by his successors), as well as Cuba, North Korea and Vietnam in the 21st century. Leninism is totalitarian, with no democracy and all decision made by the leaders of the Communist party. Virtually all property (apart from some personal possessions like clothing) is controlled by the Party, as are all jobs and all economic activity. Conservatives have been very hostile. China after Mao's death remained politically totalitarian under the Communist party, but allows a vibrant capitalism and free enterprise system.

Socialism in Communist countries such as the old Soviet Union, China in the 1949-1980 period, Cuba, North Korea and Vietnam had government ownership practically everything. That led to severe inefficiency and widespread shortages of basic goods and services. These Communist countries used an "Iron Curtain" to keep their citizens from emigrating and an elaborate, brutal secret police to ensure there was no freedom of ideas or action.

Democratic Socialism

The second form (sometimes called "Revisionism") prevailed in Western Europe down to the 1970s, and is typified by the British Labour Party. It was democratic and closely linked to labor unions that had real power. The goal was for the government to own ("nationalize") major industries such as coal mining, railways, steel making, shipbuilding, airlines, and banking. Small businesses remained private. The idea was that labor unions controlled the government and therefore unions controlled working conditions and wages for the benefit of workers, regardless of the damage to long-term economic growth.

The Socialists were well organized and after 1918 they bitterly fought the breakaway faction that became the Communist movement. In recent years major Socialist parties (in Europe and Canada) have largely dropped the long-standing demands for state ownership of the means of production and have mostly accepted capitalism. However they remain tied to labor unions and favor liberal policies regarding high taxes and public spending. Conservatives have been negative toward the economics of the second form of socialism, but they have praised its vigorous anti-Communism. Conservatives complain socialists use government power to redistribute wealth.

In countries such as Sweden, a form of democratic socialism has been much more successful, leading to high social equity and a burgeoning economy, as well as general content. Although this acts as a drag on the economy, in democratic countries of the industrialized west, some socialist ideas have been put into practice with varying degrees of success.

Communal Socialism

The third form of Socialism has nothing to do with Marx or government ownership, and emphasizes the importance of the community over the individual. Usually it means small communities sharing most of their possessions. The most famous examples are the religious Shakers of the 19th century (a conservative group), and the new-left communes that briefly existed in the 1960s and 70s.

Controversy

The ideology of Socialism is subject to a variety of interpretations. From a conservative perspective, Marxist socialism is an economic system whereby the means of production are seized and monopolized by the government sometimes without compensation to the builders of the capital. Investments, production, distribution, income, prices, and economic justice are administered by a government nomenklatura that regulates the transfer of money, goods (including capital goods), and services primarily through taxation, regulation and aggressive institutionalized coercion.

However, some socialists reject this description. Democratic socialists advocate a system of governance based on the principles of solidarity, equality and liberty, viewing these principles as interconnected. They believe increased socio-economic equality is associated with increased practical freedom to fulfill human potential. In many countries, such as Britain, socialist movements have been built on Christian, democratic and co-operative bases, embracing the notion that individuals should 'treat others as they would wish to be treated', and arguing that all individuals have a moral responsibility for the welfare of other members of their society. Socialism seeks to prioritize human welfare over other goals, such as profit and wealth accumulation by elites; it views increased redistribution of wealth as vital to securing greater freedom and happiness for the bulk of the people. Though this rosy picture of socialism is appealing to many, it ignores what Hayek called "the road to serfdom." Though in theory socialism is an idealized, egalitarian form of economics, in practice it means rule by labor bosses who minimize individualism and economic growth in the name of equality and benefits for the working class.

Karl Marx considered socialism to be a transitory stage between capitalism and communism. In his view, socialism is summed up by the expression: "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs." A major criticism of socialism is that it infringes individual rights in favor of the populace. In a very real sense, politics in the western world throughout the 20th century was shaped by the conflict between socialist and capitalist governmental policies.

Although socialist parties are common in Europe, the leading examples all currently embrace some free enterprise, individual property rights and certain other aspects of capitalism although leading European Socialists are very critical of America. In many European countries socialism has been changing to Social democracy.

Key elements

As a political ideology based on the expropriation of wealth, socialism stresses the privileges of the nomenklatura over the rights of workers and earners. Many of the most notoriously oppressive dictatorships have been socialist, such as the Soviet Union and China under Mao Zedong. Private wealth was seized and the owners executed.

Welfare state

As an economic theory, democratic socialism calls for equalization of incomes, through taxation of private wealth coupled with welfare state spending. The nationalization of major industries is primarily a device to allow the unionized workers to control their own wages and working conditions, cutting out the capitalistic owners.

State pensions and unemployment insurance were not brought in by Socialists--they were first introduced by arch-conservative Chancellor Bismark in Germany in the 1870s. In Britain they were introduced about 1910 by Winston Churchill and David Lloyd George of the Liberal Party, and in the U.S. were part of Democratic President, Franklin D. Roosevelt's,New Deal in the 1930s. Welfare state ideas such as universal health care, and state control of key industries have been common throughout the developed world in the modern era. However, the United States has always rejected socialism as an ideological position, with a few exceptions such as the TVA.

Religion

Some forms of socialism have often been atheistic in character, and many leading socialists (most prominently Karl Marx) have been critical of the role of religion - and conservative religion in particular - which they criticize for lending support to an unjust social order. Other Socialists have been Christians, and there has been considerable interplay between Christian and Socialist ideas. Christian socialists have asserted that early Christian communities, in particular, displayed certain traits, such as the holding of possessions in common,[3] the rejection of conventional sexual mores and gender roles, the provision for communal education, etc., that could be considered similar to socialism. See, for instance, Arnold Toynbee, the British historian, has responded to this,

"the Marxian excerpt from a Christian Socialism is an experiment which is doomed to failure because it has denied itself the aid of the spiritual power which alone is capable of making Socialism a success. ….'Christianity', they say, 'is the opiate of the People'; and, in the Soviet Union… Christianity or of any other theistic religion have been debarred… from admission to membership of the All-Union Communist Party. In fact, Communism has been definitely and militantly anti-Christian. Thus the campaign against Christianity which is to-day an integral part of the propaganda of Marxian Socialism is a challenge to the living generation of Christians …we latter-day Christians may still turn a Marxian attack upon Christianity to good account … a re-awakening of the Christian social conscience has been the one great positive practical achievement of Karl Marx" [4]

Communist persecution notwithstanding, the earliest Christians were decidedly living in a manner consistent with basic aims of socialism, albeit with critical requirements and distinctions from its secularist expressions. Luke 14:33 does require the forsaking of all one has if one will be a disciple of Christ, and Acts 4:32-5:11 describes community redistribution of property, and also details the Divine punishment of a husband and wife for hypocrisy, in keeping proceeds from selling a piece of property while opening pretending that they gave it all, as others voluntarily did.[5] However, forsaking all is shown to be the surrender of oneself and life to the God of the Bible, with literal giving as a result being as He directs, and voluntary. (2Cor. 8,9) In addition, in the early organic church, the "administrators" were humble servants who were manifestly examples of self-sacrifice, and who worked with their own hands as needed, (1Cor. 4:9-16) while the only pro-active exercise of church discipline was by supernatural or otherwise spiritual means, not carnal force.[6] Furthermore, while the early organic community provides a noble model of communal life, and of a "seminary" type experience, it was also soon dispersed by persecution (thus greatly expanding the church: Acts 8:1-5; 11:19), and it is later indicated that believers retained ownership of property after conversion. (Acts 16:14,15,40; 1Cor. 11:22) Rich Christians are evidenced to have been part of the early church, but are commanded not to be lofty in mind, but to be ready and willing to share, out of faith in God. (1Tim. 6:17-19) Moreover, in both Testaments capitalism is supported,[7] and indolence is not subsidized, but penalized by poverty, while diligence in work is rewarded by its fruits. (Prov. 6:6-11; 13:4; 20:4; 2Thes. 3:10-12; 1Tim. 5:17-18) Although holy widows over 60 years old who were without support were taken in by the church, a man is clearly required to provide for his own family, if able. (1Tim. 5:2ff)

While the success of the early church as an organic community is often invoked is support of Socialism or Communism, yet the former is evidenced to require extra-ordinary aspects, which renders it inimitable without them. One critic of the advocation of socialism by liberal Christianity states,

Socialism, unfortunately, completely disregards Biblical teaching about the fallen nature of human beings and assumes that human beings will act in a morally upright fashion if their basic needs are met. This is at the heart of why socialistic systems never work: because human nature does not work in this fashion.[8]

Britain, the Labor Party and Socialism

At its inception, the Labour Party borrowed socialist ideas by committing itself to a program of nationalization under 'Clause 4' of their Constitution, but was always fundamentally committed to the British State and the Westminster model of parliamentary government. Clause 4 was formally dropped after the election of Tony Blair as Party leader, signaling the creation of 'New' Labour.[9] The British governments of 1945-1950 and 1950-1951 under Clement Attlee implemented the nationalization of several industries and utilities, including coal, steel, water, railways and electricity. Former owners of nationalized industries were compensated. The best known example is the nationalization of health care to create the National Health Service (NHS). This made - literally overnight - health care "free" at the point of delivery for everybody in Britain.

Since the election to government of the Labour Party in 1997, many "progressive" measures have been introduced, such as the Minimum Wage, Child Tax Credits, union recognition legislation, increased maternity and paternity leave, the Child Trust Fund, refurbishment of council housing, free bus travel for the elderly, increased paid leave for all workers, free nursery-school places, and large cuts in unemployment.[10] In addition, over a million children and a million pensioners have been lifted out of poverty; however, many in the Labour Movement are extremely critical of New Labour's tentative approach to reducing inequality, and are frustrated that the government has not been more willing to make the case to the public for the redistribution of wealth.

Criticism of socialism

Friedrich Hayek and Ludwig von Mises were important critics of socialism, particularly regarding what is known as the Socialist Calculation Debate. Hayek and Mises argued that a socialist economy would face information constraints that would prevent even well intentioned planners from efficiently allocating resources. That is, the planners would not know how much a battleship or a hospital cost, and could not efficiently allocate resources among different choices. This criticism should be considered as compatible with, but independent of, criticisms based on Public choice theory that bring into consideration the incentives of political actors.

Svetlana Kunin, retired software developer in Connecticut, lived in the Soviet Union until 1980 where she was a civil engineer. Writing a series of articles in Investors Business Daily, she warns America of the socialism she sees it pursuing. Below are excerpts:

When I came to America in 1980 and experienced life in this country, I thought it was fortunate that those living in the USSR did not know how unfortunate they were. Now in 2009, I realize how unfortunate it is that many Americans do not understand how fortunate they are. They vote to give government more and more power without understanding the consequences.

Life in the USSR modeled the socialist ideal. God-based religion was suppressed and replaced with cultlike adoration for political figures....Only the ruling class of communist leaders had access to special stores, medicine and accommodations that could compare to those in the West. The rest of the citizenry had to deal with permanent shortages of food and other necessities, and had access to free but inferior, unsanitary and low-tech medical care.

USSR, 1959: I am a "young pioneer" in school. History classes remind us that there is a higher authority than their parents and teachers: the leaders of the Communist Party.

Those who left Russia found a different set of values in America: freedom of religion, speech, individual pursuits, the right to private property and free enterprise....These opportunities let the average immigrant live a better life than many elites in the Soviet Communist Party...

The slogans of "fairness and equality" sound better than the slogans of capitalism. But unlike at the beginning of the 20th century, when these slogans and ideas were yet to be tested, we have accumulated history and reality.[11]

Past Socialist Countries

Chile

Marxist socialist leader Salvador Allende was popularly elected in Chile in 1970 in a minority government run by the Popular Unity Party. Allende's economic policy, known as the Vuskovic Plan, sought to achieve transition to socialism. The Vuskovic Plan involved nationalization of large foreign enterprises, land redistribution to farmers, and redistribution of income. The majority in Parliament never supported it and the plan was never carried out as Allende was overthrown by the military.

Other Socialist Countries (Current )

Cuba

Communist leader Fidel Castro violently overthrew the Cuban government in the 1950's and has declared Cuba to be Communist since then. Today, Cuba faces copious economic problems and the people lack their Fundamental Rights. (Raul Castro now runs the country, having taken it over from his ailing brother Fidel.)

North Korea

North Korea's form of communism is in the form of "Juche" - a doctrine established by Kim Il Sung and carried on by current leader Kim Jong Il. Although it is investing heavily in nuclear weapons and long-range missiles, extreme poverty on the verge of starvation is the fate of the people, who are very tightly controlled. The country has little to no electrical power at night outside the capital, which can be verified by looking at nighttime satellite photos. [12]

Venezuela

The socialist policies of president-for-life Hugo Chavez have destroyed the economy of that oil-rich nation. In 2009, he seized the Venezuelan operations of U.S. based Cargill in order to tighten his grip on the shrinking food supply in his country. [13]

Different Strands of Socialism

Bibliography

  • Busky, Donald F. Communism in History and Theory: From Utopian Socialism to the Fall of the Soviet Union (2002) excerpt and text search
  • Dougherty, Jude P. "Socialist Man: A Psychological Profile," Modern Age Volume 46, Number 1-2; Winter/Spring 2004 online edition, a conservative critique
  • Laslett, John, ed. Failure of a Dream: Essays in the History of American Socialism (1984)
  • Lindemann, Albert S. A History of European Socialism (1984)
  • Lipset, Seymour Martin, and Gary Marks. It Didn't Happen Here: Why Socialism Failed in the United States (2001), Lipset was a leading conservative scholar excerpt and text search
  • Malia, Martin. Soviet Tragedy: A History of Socialism in Russia (1995) excerpt and text search
  • Muravchik, Joshua. Heaven on Earth: The Rise and Fall of Socialism (2003) by conservative historian excerpt and text search
  • Novak, Michael. Capitalism and Socialism: A Theological Inquiry (1988) excerpt and text search, bu leading conservative scholar
  • Nove, Alec. An Economic History of the USSR 1917-1991 (3rd ed. 1993)
  • Pipes, Richard. Communism: A History (2003), by a leading conservative
  • Suny, Ronald Grigor. The Soviet Experiment: Russia, the USSR, and the Successor States. (1998) online edition

References

  1. Meriam-Webster
  2. Churchill; Quotesdaddy.com
  3. Acts 2:44: "Everyone was filled with awe, and many wonders and miraculous signs were done by the apostles. All the believers were together and had everything in common. Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he had need."
  4. Arnold Toynbee, A Study of History, Annex II to Vol. V, Part C (i) (c) 2, p. 585-586, Marxism, Socialism, and Christianity.
  5. Matthew Henry’s Commentary on the Whole Bible, Acts 5:1-11)
  6. (Acts 5:5,9,10; 1Cor. 4:19-21; 2Cor. 13:2,3; 2Thes. 3:14,15; 2Tim. 4:2)
  7. Gary North, Capitalism and the Bible
  8. Bob Ellis, Capitalism and Socialism in Light of the Bible Dakota Voice, June 23rd, 2009
  9. http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/july/21/newsid_2515000/2515825.stm
  10. [1]
  11. The Perspective Of A Russian Immigrant, Investors Business Daily, 09/10/2009
  12. http://epod.usra.edu/archive/epodviewer.php3?oid=87488
  13. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/southamerica/venezuela/4938993/Venezuelas-Hugo-Chavez-tightens-state-control-of-food-amid-rocketing-inflation-and-food-shortages.html

External links