What Socialism means
SOCIALISM
is the only system within which the problems which now face workers can
be solved; but what will it be like? Socialism is a system in which the
means for producing and distributing wealth will be owned by society as
a whole. Under capitalism the land, factories, offices, mines, railways
and other instruments of production and distribution are monopolised by
a section of society only, who thus form a privileged class. Socialism
will end this, for, with the means of life ownedin common by the entire
community, it will be a classless society in which the exploitation and
oppression of man by man will have been abolished. All human beings
will be social equals, freely able to co-operate in running social
affairs.
Drawing up a detailed blueprint for Socialism is
premature, since the exact forms will depend upon the technical
conditions and preferences of those who set up and live in Socialism;
but we can broadly define the essential features of Socialism.
Socialism
can only be democratic. At one time Socialism was known also as 'social
democracy', a phrase which shows well that democratic control would
extend to all aspects of social affairs, including the production and
distribution of wealth. There is an old socialist slogan which speaks
of 'government over people' giving way 'to the administration of
things'; meaning that the public power of coercion, and the government
which operates it will have no place in Socialism. The State, which is
an organisation composed of soldiers, policemen, judges and gaolers
charged with enforcing the laws, is only needed in class society for in
such societies there is no community of interest, only class conflict.
The purpose of govenmeat is to maintain law and order in the interests
of the dominant class. It is in fact an instrument of class oppression.
In Socialism there will be no classes and no built-in class conflicts:
everybody will have the same basic social interest. There will be
genuine social harmony and community of interest. In these
circumstances there is no need for any coercive machine to govern or
rule over people. The phrase 'socialist government' is a contradiction
in terms. Where there is Socialism there is no government and where
there is government there is no Socialism.
Those who wrongly
assume that government and administration are one and the same will
have some difficulty in imagining a society without government. A
society without administration would indeed be impossible since
'society' implies that human beings organise themselves to provide for
their needs. But a society without government is both possible and
desirable. Socialism will in fact mean the extension of democratic
administration to all aspects of social life on the basis of the common
ownership of the means of production and distribution. There will be
administrative centres which will be clearing-houses for settling
social affairs by majority decision.
But will not the
administrators become the new ruling class? Democratic organisation
does indeed involve the delegation of functions to groups and
individuals. Such people will be charged by the community with
organising necessary social functions. They will be chosen by the
community and will be answerable to it. Those who perform the
administrative functions in Socialism would be in no position to
dominate. They will not be regarded as superior persons, as tends to be
the case today, but as social equals doing an essential job. Nor will
they have at their command armies and policemen to enforce their will.
There will be no opportunity for bribery and corruption since
everybody, including those in administrative jobs, will have free
access to the stock of wealth set aside for individual consumption. The
material conditions for the rise of a new ruling class would not exist.
The
purpose of socialist production will be simply and solely to satisfy
human needs. Under present arrangements production is for the market
with a view to profit. This will be replaced by production solely and
directly for use. The production and distribution of sufficient wealth
to meet the needs of the socialist community as individuals and as a
community will be an administrative and organisational problem. It will
be no small problem but the tools for solving it have already been
created by capitalism.
Capitalism has developed technology and
social productivity to the point where plenty for all can be produced.
A society of abundance has long been technically pcssible and it is
this that is the material basis for Socialism. Capitalism, because it
is a class society with production geared to profit-making rather than
meeting human needs, cannot make full use of the world-wide productive
system it has built up over the past two hundred or so years.
Socialism, making full use of the developed methods of production, will
alter the purpose of production. Men and women will be producing wealth
solely to meet their needs, and not for the profit of a privileged few.
Using
techniques for predicting social wants (at present prostituted to the
service of capital), a socialist society can work out how much and what
sort of products and services will be needed over a given period. Men
and women will be free to discuss what they would like to be produced.
So with social research and after democratic discussion an estimate of
what is needed can be made. The next problem is to arrange for these
amounts to be produced. Capitalism, with its modern computing machines
and input-output analysis, has developed the techniques which a
socialist society can use.
When the wealth has been produced,
apart from that needed to renew and expand the means of production, all
will freely take what they feel they need to live and enjoy life. This
is what we mean by 'free access'. There will be no buying and selling,
and hence no need for money. What communities and individuals want does
not vary greatly except over long periods, and it will be a simple
administrative task to see that the stores are well-stocked with what
people need. If any shortages develop they will not last long. Planned
reserves will be held as a safeguard agzins; unforeseen natural
disasters.
'Fron each according to his ability, to each
according to his need' is another long-standing socialist principle. It
means what it says: that men and women will freely take part in social
production to the best of their abilities, and freely take from the
fruits of their common labour whatever they need.
Confronted for
the first time with this proposal for free distribution according to
need, many people are sceptical. What about the lazy man? Or the greedy
man? Who will do the dirty work? What will be the incentive to work?
These are objections socialists hear time and time again. These are
perhaps understandable reactions to what seems, to those who have never
thought about it, a startling proposition. As a matter of fact, behind
these objections is a carefully cultivated popular prejudice as to what
human nature is. We dealt with this earlier in the section on human
nature. Suffice it to say here that biological and social science and
anthropological research conclusively show that so-called human nature
is not a barrier to the establishment of Socialism.
Work, or the
expenditure of energy, is both a biological and a social must for human
beings. They must work to use up the energy generated by eating food.
They must work also to provide the food, clothing and shelter they need
to live. So in any society, be it feudal, capitalist or socialist, men
and women must work. The point at issue is how that work should be
organised. A very strong argument against capitalism is that it reduces
so central a human activity as work to the drudgery it is for most
people, instead of allowing it to provide the pleasure it could, and
would in a socialist society.
To suggest that work could be
pleasant often raises a laugh; but this only shows how much capitalism
has degraded human life. Most, but certainly not all work under
capitalism is done in the service of an employer so that people almost
without thinking identify work with employment. Working for an employer
is always degrading, often boring and unpleasant and sometimes
unhealthy and dangerous. But even under capitalism not all work, as we
have defined it, is done in the course of employment. Men and women are
working when they clean their cars, dig their gardens, or pursue their
hobbies and enjoy themselves at the same time. So close is the
misleading association of work with employment that many would not even
regard such activities as work. They think that anything that is
pleasant cannot by definition be work!
There is no reason at all
why the work of producing and distributing useful things cannot be as
enjoyable as are leisure-time activities today. The physical conditions
under which work is done can be vastly improved. So can the
relationships between people at work. Human beings, as free and equal
members of a socialist community, will no longer have to sell their
mental and physical energies to an employer for a wage or salary. The
degrading wages system will be abolished so that there will be no such
thing as employment. Instead work will be done by free men and women
co-operating and controlling their conditions of work, getting
enjoyment from creating things and doing socially useful tasks.
In
a socialist society there will be no social stigma attaching to any
kind of work. Nor will there be pressures, as exist at present (because
they are cheap and therefore profitable to the capitalists) to continue
industrial processes which are harmful or dangerous to those engaged in
them. In any event, with human needs and enjoyment as the guiding
principle, there will be no need for anybody to be tied to the same job
continuously. The opportunities for men and women to develop and
exercise their talents and to enjoy doing so will be immense.
Finally,
Socialism must be world-wide because the productive system which
capitalism has built up and which a socialist society will take over is
already international. There will be no frontiers and people will be
free to travel over the whole earth. Socialism will mean an end to all
national oppression - and, indeed, in its current political sense to
all 'nations' — and to discriminations on the grounds of race and sex.
All the people of the world, wherever they live, whatever their skin
colour, whatever language they speak, really will be members of one
vast human family. Socialism will at last realise the ags-old dream of
the Brotherhood of Man. |
 |
|
