Misplaced Pages

Socialism: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 16:00, 26 May 2006 edit172 (talk | contribs)24,875 editsmNo edit summary← Previous edit Revision as of 16:53, 26 May 2006 edit undoVision Thing (talk | contribs)7,574 edits reducing history, adding types of socialism backNext edit →
Line 7: Line 7:


==History of socialism== ==History of socialism==
<!--] and particularly the ] are traditional symbols of Socialism, in honour of the blood spilt in the "struggle for freedom".]]
{{Main|History of socialism}} {{Main|History of socialism}}
According to ]s (notably ]), 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.


Some socialist thinkers, such as ], have identified ], one of the leaders of the ] in England in 1381, as the first socialist. Historians have rediscovered the writings of ] in the period of the ], and the ] set up by the ], as they were called.
During the ] in the ], revolutionary thinkers and writers such as the ], ], ], ], ], and ] provided the intellectual and ideological expression of the discontented social layers in ] society. This included not only the ], at that time kept out of political power by the '']'', but also the "popular" classes among whom socialism would later take root. The idea of abolition of ] became popular in the early 19th century, and was influenced by new discoveries and the idea of the "noble savage", popularised by ].

The earliest ''modern'' socialist groups shared characteristics such as focusing on general welfare rather than ], on ] rather than ], and on laborers rather than on industrial or political leaders and structures<ref>''A History of Socialist Thought, Volume 1'' (1965) p3</ref>. They did not generally think in terms of ], but argued that the wealthy should join with the poor in building a new society. Class struggle, the challenge to ] and the accompanying notions of the special role of the ] in the ] find their earliest origins in the ] of ], an unsuccessful actor in the ]<ref>''A History of Socialist Thought, Volume 1'' (1965) pp12-22</ref>. Later, they were greatly developed by the Marxist branch of socialism.
], one of the first ].]]

By the time of the ] there were a variety of competing "socialisms", the most influential being those founded by ], ] and ]. ] and ] by this time were referring to themselves as "communists", in large part to distinguish themselves from the above ideologies, which they described as "]". (Engels later used the term "]" to describe Marxism.<ref>], Friedrich. '''' from ''Socialism: Utopian and Scientific''</ref>)
Depending on the context, the term socialism may refer either to these ideologies or any of their many lineal descendants.-->
{{Main|History of socialism}}
===Early socialism=== ===Early socialism===
⚫ The term "socialism" was first used in the context of early-19th century Western European social critics. In this period, socialism emerged from a diverse array of doctrines and social experiments associated primarily with British and French thinkers—especially ], ], ], ], and ]. These social critics saw themselves as reacting to the excesses of poverty and inequality in the period, and advocated reforms such as the egalitarian distribution of wealth and the transformation of society into small communities in which private property was to be abolished. Early socialists differed widely about how socialism was to be achieved; they differed sharply on key issues such as centralized versus decentralized control, the role of private property, the degree of ], and the organization of family and community life.
In the history of political thought, certain elements of what is typically thought of as socialism long predate the rise of the workers movement of the late 19th century, particularly in ]'s '']'' and ]'s '']''.

⚫ The term "socialism" was first used in the context of early-19th century Western European social critics. In this period, socialism emerged from a diverse array of doctrines and social experiments associated primarily with British and French thinkers—especially ], ], ], ], and ]. These social critics saw themselves as reacting to the excesses of poverty and inequality in the period, and advocated reforms such as the egalitarian distribution of wealth and the transformation of society into small communities in which private property was to be abolished. Outlining principles for the reorganization of society along collectivist lines, Saint-Simon or Owen sought to build socialism on the foundations of planned, ] communities.

Early socialists differed widely about how socialism was to be achieved; they differed sharply on key issues such as centralized versus decentralized control, the role of private property, the degree of ], and the organization of family and community life. Moreover, while many emphasized the gradual transformation of society, most notably through the foundation of small, utopian communities, a growing number of socialists became disillusioned with the viability of this approach, and instead emphasized direct political action.


===The rise of Marxism=== ===The rise of Marxism===
Line 32: Line 17:
In the mid-19th century, the transformation of socialism into a political doctrine occurred as ] and ] developed their own account of socialism as the outcome of a revolutionary class struggle between the ] and ]. In the mid-19th century, the transformation of socialism into a political doctrine occurred as ] and ] developed their own account of socialism as the outcome of a revolutionary class struggle between the ] and ].


Marx and Engels regarded themselves as "]," and distinguished themselves from the "]" of earlier generations. For Marxists, socialism is viewed as a transitional stage characterized by state ownership of the ]. They see this stage in history as a transition between ] and ], the final stage of history. For Marx, a communist society describes the absence of differing social classes and thus the end of class warfare. According to Marx, once private property had been abolished, the state would then "wither away," and humanity would move on to a higher stage of society, communism. This distinction continues to be used by Marxists, and is the cause of much confusion. The ], for example, never claimed that it was was a communist society, even though it was ruled by a ] for over seven decades. For communists, the name of the party is not meant to reflect the name of the social system. For Marxists, socialism is viewed as a transitional stage characterized by state ownership of the ]. They see this stage in history as a transition between ] and ], the final stage of history. For Marx, a communist society describes the absence of differing social classes and thus the end of class warfare. According to Marx, once private property had been abolished, the state would then "wither away," and humanity would move on to a higher stage of society, communism.


===Moderate socialism and communism=== ===Moderate socialism and communism===


In 1864 Marx founded the ], or ], which held its first congress at ] in 1866. The First International was the first international forum for the promulgation of communist doctrine. However, socialists often disagreed on a strategy for achieving their goals. Diversity and conflict between socialist thinkers was proliferating. In 1864 Marx founded the ], or ], which held its first congress at ] in 1866. The First International was the first international forum for the promulgation of communist doctrine.


Despite the rhetoric about socialism as an international force, socialists increasingly focused on the politics of the nation-state in the late 19th century. As universal male suffrage was introduced throughout the Western world in the first decades of the twentieth century, socialism became increasingly associated with newly formed trade unions and mass political parties aimed at mobilizing working class voters. Despite the rhetoric about socialism as an international force, socialists increasingly focused on the politics of the nation-state in the late 19th century. As universal male suffrage was introduced throughout the Western world in the first decades of the twentieth century, socialism became increasingly associated with newly formed trade unions and mass political parties aimed at mobilizing working class voters.


The most notable of these groups was the ] (today know as the ]), which was founded in 1869. These groups supported diverse views of socialism, from the gradualism of many trade unionists to the radical, revolutionary agendas of Marx and Engels. Nevertheless, although the orthodox Marxists in the party, led by ], managed to retain the Marxist theory of revolution as the official doctrine of the party, in practice the SPD became more and more reformist. These groups supported diverse views of socialism, from the gradualism of many trade unionists to the radical, revolutionary agendas of Marx and Engels.

As socialists gained their first experiences in government, the focus of socialism shifted from theory to practice. In government, socialists became more pragmatic, as the success of their program increasingly depended on the consent of the middle and propertied classes, who largely retained control of the bureaucratic machinery of the state. Moreover, with the extension of universal male suffrage and the beginnings of the modern ], the condition of the working class gradually improved in the Western world. Thus, the socialist revolution predicted by Marx for Western Europe had not come about.


As social democrats moved into government, divisions between the moderate and radical wings of socialism grew increasingly pronounced. On one hand, many socialist thinkers began to doubt the indispensability of revolution. Moderates like ] argued that socialism could best be achieved through the democratic political process (a model increasingly known as ]). As social democrats moved into government, divisions between the moderate and radical wings of socialism grew increasingly pronounced. On one hand, many socialist thinkers began to doubt the indispensability of revolution. Moderates like ] argued that socialism could best be achieved through the democratic political process (a model increasingly known as ]).
On the other hand, strong opposition to moderate socialism came from socialists in countries such as the ] where parliamentary democracy did not exist and did not seem possible. Russian revolutionary ] argued that revolution was the only path to socialism. In ], there was a formal split in the Russian social democratic party into revolutionary ] and reformist ] factions. On the other hand, strong opposition to moderate socialism came from socialists in countries such as the ] where parliamentary democracy did not exist and did not seem possible. Russian revolutionary ] argued that revolution was the only path to socialism. In ], there was a formal split in the Russian social democratic party into revolutionary ] and reformist ] factions.


Meanwhile, ]s and proponents of other alternative visions of socialism—emphasizing, for example, the potential of small-scale communities and agrarianism—coexisted with the more influential currents of Marxism and social democracy. The anarchists, led by the Russian ], believed that capitalism and the state were inseparable, and that one could not be abolished without the other. Consequently, they opposed Marxism and most other socialist groups, and a split between the anarchists and the Socialist International soon occurred. Meanwhile, ]s and proponents of other alternative visions of socialism—emphasizing, for example, the potential of small-scale communities and agrarianism—coexisted with the more influential currents of Marxism and social democracy. They opposed Marxism and most other socialist groups, and a split between the anarchists and the Socialist International soon occurred.

The moderate, or revisionist, wing of socialism dominated the meeting of the ] in Paris in 1889. The majority of its members, led by Eduard Bernstein, were revisionists. Still, at the Second International, Lenin and the German revolutionary ] emerged as leaders of the left-wing minority. Followers of German theorist Karl Kautsky constituted a smaller faction.


] haranguing workers under a ].]] ] haranguing workers under a ].]]
Line 55: Line 36:
In the first decades of the twentieth century, moderate socialism became increasingly influential among many European intellectuals. In 1884 British middle class intellectuals organized the ]. The Fabians in turn helped lay the groundwork for the organization of the ] in 1906. The French ] (SFIO), founded in 1905, under ] and later ] adhered to Marxist ideas, but became in practice a reformist party. In the first decades of the twentieth century, moderate socialism became increasingly influential among many European intellectuals. In 1884 British middle class intellectuals organized the ]. The Fabians in turn helped lay the groundwork for the organization of the ] in 1906. The French ] (SFIO), founded in 1905, under ] and later ] adhered to Marxist ideas, but became in practice a reformist party.


In the U.S. a Socialist Labor party was founded in 1877. This party, small as it was, became fragmented in the 1890s. In 1901 a moderate faction of the party joined with ] to form the American Socialist party. The influence of the party gradually declined, and socialism never became a major political force in the United States. Communism also failed to gain a large following in the U.S.; in fact, in the broader English-speaking world, communism never gained a large mass following. In the U.S. a Socialist Labor party was founded in 1877. This party, small as it was, became fragmented in the 1890s. The influence of the party gradually declined, and socialism never became a major political force in the United States. Communism also failed to gain a large following in the U.S.; in fact, in the broader English-speaking world, communism never gained a large mass following.


The distinction between socialists and communists became more pronounced during and after ]. When the First World War began in 1914, many European socialist leaders supported their respective governments. During the war, socialist parties in France and Germany supported the state wartime military and economic planning, despite their ideological commitments to internationalism and solidarity. Lenin, however, denounced the war as an imperialist conflict urged the workers worldwide to use the war as an occasion for proletarian revolution. This ideological conflict resulted in the collapse of the Second International. The distinction between socialists and communists became more pronounced during and after ]. When the First World War began in 1914, many European socialist leaders supported their respective governments. During the war, socialist parties in France and Germany supported the state wartime military and economic planning, despite their ideological commitments to internationalism and solidarity. Lenin, however, denounced the war as an imperialist conflict urged the workers worldwide to use the war as an occasion for proletarian revolution. This ideological conflict resulted in the collapse of the Second International.
Line 63: Line 44:
In 1917 the ] marked the definitive split between communists and social democrats. Communist parties in the Soviet Union and Europe dismissed the more moderate socialist parties and, for the most part, broke off contact. In 1917 the ] marked the definitive split between communists and social democrats. Communist parties in the Soviet Union and Europe dismissed the more moderate socialist parties and, for the most part, broke off contact.


The ] sought to "build socialism" in the Soviet Union. For the first time, socialism was not just a vision of a future society, but a description of an existing one. Lenin's regime brought all the means of production (except agricultural production) under state control, and implemented a system of government through workers' councils (in ], ''soviets''). Gradually, however, the Soviet Union developed a bureaucratic and authoritarian model of social development condemned by moderate socialists abroad for undermining the initial democratic and socialist ideals of the Russian Revolution. In 1929 ] came to power and pursued a policy of "]." The ] sought to "build socialism" in the Soviet Union. Lenin's regime brought all the means of production (except agricultural production) under state control, and implemented a system of government through workers' councils (in ], ''soviets''). Gradually the Soviet Union developed a bureaucratic and authoritarian model of social development condemned by moderate socialists abroad for undermining the initial democratic and socialist ideals of the Russian Revolution. In 1929 ] came to power and pursued a policy of "]."


The Russian Revolution provoked a powerful reaction throughout the Western world. One example was the "]" in the ], which effectively destroyed the American Socialist Party of Eugene Debs. In Europe, ] emerged as a movement against both socialism and liberalism. Fascism came to power in Italy in ] under ] (a former socialist), and strong fascist movements also developed throughout much of Europe. The Russian Revolution provoked a powerful reaction throughout the Western world. One example was the "]" in the ], which effectively destroyed the American Socialist Party of ]. In Europe, ] emerged as a movement against both socialism and liberalism. Fascism came to power in Italy in ] under ] (a former socialist), and strong fascist movements also developed throughout much of Europe.


===The interwar era and World War II=== ===The interwar era and World War II===


Despite division of the world socialist movement, Western European socialist parties won major electoral gains in the immediate postwar years. Most notably, in Britain, the Labour party under ] was in power for ten months in 1924 and again from 1929 to 1931. Despite division of the world socialist movement, Western European socialist parties won major electoral gains in the immediate postwar years. Most notably, in Britain, the Labour party under ] was in power for ten months in 1924 and again from 1929 to 1931. Throughout much of the interwar period, socialist and Communist parties were in continuous conflict. Socialists condemned communists as agents of the Soviet Union, while communists condemned socialists as betrayers of the working class.


⚫ ===Cold War years===
Throughout much of the interwar period, socialist and Communist parties were in continuous conflict. Socialists condemned communists as agents of the Soviet Union, while communists condemned socialists as betrayers of the working class.


⚫ In Western Europe, socialism gained perhaps its widest appeal in the period immediately following the Second World War. Even where conservative governments remained in power, they were forced to adopt a series of social welfare reform measures, so that in most industrialized countries, the post-World War period saw the creation of a welfare state.
However, with the rise of fascism in Italy in Germany in the 1920s and 1930s, socialists and communists made attempts in some countries to form a united front of all working-class organizations opposed to fascism. The "]" movement had limited success, even in France and Spain, where it did well in the 1936 elections. The failure of the German communists and socialists to form a "popular front" helped the ]s gain power in 1933. The "popular front" period ended in 1939 with the conclusion of the ]. Socialists condemned this act as an act of betrayal by the Stalinist Soviet Union.

⚫ ===Cold War years===
⚫ In Western Europe, socialism gained perhaps its widest appeal in the period immediately following the end of ]. Even where conservative governments remained in power, they were forced to adopt a series of social welfare reform measures, so that in most industrialized countries, the postwar period saw the creation of a welfare state.


The period following the Second World War marked another period of intensifying struggle between socialists and communists. In the postwar period, the nominally socialist parties became increasingly identified with the expansion of the capitalist welfare state. Western European socialists largely backed U.S.-led ] policies. They largely supported the ] and the ], and denounced the Soviet Union as "]." Communists denounced these measures as imperialist provocations aimed at triggering a war against the Soviet Union. Inspired by the Second International, the ] was organized in 1951 in ], ] without communist participation. The period following ] marked another period of intensifying struggle between socialists and communists. In the postwar period, the nominally socialist parties became increasingly identified with the expansion of the capitalist welfare state. Western European socialists largely backed U.S.-led ] policies. They largely supported the ] and the ]. Communists denounced these measures as imperialist provocations aimed at triggering a war against the Soviet Union.


In the postwar years, socialism became increasingly influential throughout the Third World. In 1949 the ] established a Communist state. Emerging nations of Africa, Asia, and Latin America frequently adopted socialist economic programs. In many instances, these nations nationalized industries held by foreign owners. The Soviet achievement in the 1930s seemed hugely impressive from the outside, and convinced many nationalists in the emerging former colonies of the Third World, not necessarily Communists or even socialists, of the virtues of state planning and state-guided models of social development. This was later to have important consequences in countries like ], ] and ], which tried to import some aspects of the Soviet model. In the postwar years, socialism became increasingly influential throughout the Third World. In 1949 the ] established a Communist state. Emerging nations of Africa, Asia, and Latin America frequently adopted socialist economic programs. In many instances, these nations nationalized industries held by foreign owners. The Soviet achievement in the 1930s seemed hugely impressive from the outside, and convinced many nationalists in the emerging former colonies of the Third World, not necessarily Communists or even socialists, of the virtues of state planning and state-guided models of social development.


In the 1970s, despite the radicalism of some socialist currents in the Third World, Western European communist parties effectively abandoned their revolutionary goals and fully embraced electoral politics. Dubbed "]," this new orientation resembled earlier social-democratic configurations, although distinction between the two political tendencies persists. In the 1970s, despite the radicalism of some socialist currents in the Third World, Western European communist parties effectively abandoned their revolutionary goals and fully embraced electoral politics. Dubbed "]," this new orientation resembled earlier social-democratic configurations, although distinction between the two political tendencies persists.
Line 86: Line 64:
] meeting with ], the president-elect of France and the leader of the ] on February 12, 1981. In power both Deng and Mitterrand struggled to adapt and modernize socialism in a period of growing globalization and liberalization of the global economy.]] ] meeting with ], the president-elect of France and the leader of the ] on February 12, 1981. In power both Deng and Mitterrand struggled to adapt and modernize socialism in a period of growing globalization and liberalization of the global economy.]]


In the late last quarter of the twentieth century, socialism in the Western world entered a new phase of crisis and uncertainty. Socialism came under heavy attack following the ]. In this period, ] and ] attacked social welfare systems as an impediment to individual entrepreneurship. With the rise of ] in the U.S. and ] in Britain, the Western welfare state found itself under increasing political pressure. Increasingly, Western countries and international institutions rejected social democratic methods of ] demand management were scrapped in favor of neoliberal policy prescriptions. In the late last quarter of the twentieth century, socialism in the Western world entered a new phase of crisis and uncertainty. In this period, ] and ] attacked social welfare systems as an impediment to individual entrepreneurship. With the rise of ] in the U.S. and ] in Britain, the Western welfare state found itself under increasing political pressure. Increasingly, Western countries and international institutions rejected social democratic methods of ] demand management in favor of neoliberal policy.


Western European socialists were under intense pressure to refashion their parties in the late 1980s and early 1990s, and to reconcile their traditional economic programs with the integration of a European economic community based on liberalizing markets. Some formerly socialist parties no longer support anything recognizable as socialism, particularly "]" in the United Kingdom. Western European socialists were under intense pressure to refashion their parties in the late 1980s and early 1990s, and to reconcile their traditional economic programs with the integration of a European economic community based on liberalizing markets. Some formerly socialist parties no longer support anything recognizable as socialism, particularly "]" in the United Kingdom.
Line 93: Line 71:


===Contemporary socialism=== ===Contemporary socialism===

In the 1960s and 1970s new social forces began to change the political landscape in the Western world. The long postwar boom, rising living standards for the industrial working class, and the rise of a mass university-educated white collar workforce began to break down the mass electoral base of European socialist parties. This new "]" white-collar workforce was less interested in traditional socialist policies such as state ownership and more interested expanded personal freedom and liberal social policies.


Over the past twenty-five years, efforts adapt socialism to new historical circumstances have led to a range of new left ideas and theories, some of them contained within existing socialist movements and parties, others achieving mobilization and support in the arenas of "]." Some socialist parties reacted more flexibly and successfully to these changes than others, but eventually all were forced to do so. Over the past twenty-five years, efforts adapt socialism to new historical circumstances have led to a range of new left ideas and theories, some of them contained within existing socialist movements and parties, others achieving mobilization and support in the arenas of "]." Some socialist parties reacted more flexibly and successfully to these changes than others, but eventually all were forced to do so.
Line 100: Line 76:
In the developing world, some elected noncommunist socialist parties and communist parties remain prominent, particularly in India. In China, the Chinese Communist Party has led a transition from the command economy of the Mao period under the banner of "]." Under ], the leadership of China embarked upon a program of market-based reform that was more sweeping than had been Soviet leader ]'s ] program of the late 1980s. In Latin America, in recent years socialism has reemerged in recent years with a nationalist and populist tinge, with Venezuelan President ] leading the trend. In the developing world, some elected noncommunist socialist parties and communist parties remain prominent, particularly in India. In China, the Chinese Communist Party has led a transition from the command economy of the Mao period under the banner of "]." Under ], the leadership of China embarked upon a program of market-based reform that was more sweeping than had been Soviet leader ]'s ] program of the late 1980s. In Latin America, in recent years socialism has reemerged in recent years with a nationalist and populist tinge, with Venezuelan President ] leading the trend.


<!--==Types of socialism== ==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 ], socialist ideas have developed and separated into many different streams. Notable ideologies that have been referred to using the ''label'' "socialism" are: 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 ], socialist ideas have developed and separated into many different streams. Notable ideologies that have been referred to using the ''label'' "socialism" are:


Line 151: Line 128:
* ] * ]
* ] * ]
* ]--> * ]

<!--===Communism=== ===Communism===
] (1818-1883)]] ] (1818-1883)]]
{{main article|Communism}} {{main article|Communism}}
Line 162: Line 140:
After the success of the Red ] in ], many socialist parties in other countries became communist parties, owing allegiance of varying degrees to the ] (see ]). After ], regimes calling themselves communist took power in Eastern Europe. In ], the Communists in ], led by ], came to power and established the ]. Among the other countries in the ] that adopted a Communist form of government at some point were ], ], ], ], ], and ]. By the early ], almost one-third of the world's population lived under ]s. After the success of the Red ] in ], many socialist parties in other countries became communist parties, owing allegiance of varying degrees to the ] (see ]). After ], regimes calling themselves communist took power in Eastern Europe. In ], the Communists in ], led by ], came to power and established the ]. Among the other countries in the ] that adopted a Communist form of government at some point were ], ], ], ], ], and ]. By the early ], almost one-third of the world's population lived under ]s.


Communism carries a strong ] in the ], due to a history of ]. Since the early ], the term "]" 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 ] and ]. With the collapse of the Communist governments in ] from the late 1980s and the ] on ], ], Communism's influence has decreased dramatically in Europe, but around a quarter of the world's population still lives under Communist states.--> Communism carries a strong ] in the ], due to a history of ].<!--research communism in South America--> Since the early ], the term "]" 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 ] and ]. With the collapse of the Communist governments in ] from the late 1980s and the ] on ], ], Communism's influence has decreased dramatically in Europe, but around a quarter of the world's population still lives under Communist states.

<!--====Marxism-Leninism==== ====Marxism-Leninism====
{{main article|Marxism-Leninism}} {{main article|Marxism-Leninism}}


Line 170: Line 149:
Stalin, in contrast to many contemporary revolutionaries, did not write a significant body of theoretical work. "]," 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. Stalin, in contrast to many contemporary revolutionaries, did not write a significant body of theoretical work. "]," 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. ] in particular believe that Stalinism contradicted authentic Marxism and Leninism, and they intitially used the term "Bolshevik-Leninism" to define their beliefs.<--> Whether Stalin's practices actually followed the principles of Marx and Lenin is still a subject of debate amongst historians and political scientists. ] in particular believe that Stalinism contradicted authentic Marxism and Leninism, and they intitially used the term "Bolshevik-Leninism" to define their beliefs.

<!--=====Stalinism===== =====Stalinism=====
{{main article|Stalinism}} {{main article|Stalinism}}


Line 180: Line 160:
The main contributions of Stalin to communist theory were ] and the theory of ''']''', a theoretical base supporting the repression of political opponents as necessary. The main contributions of Stalin to communist theory were ] and the theory of ''']''', a theoretical base supporting the repression of political opponents as necessary.


Stalinism has been described as being synonymous with ], or a ]. The term has been used to describe regimes that fight political dissent through violence, imprisonment, and killings.--> Stalinism has been described as being synonymous with ], or a ]. The term has been used to describe regimes that fight political dissent through violence, imprisonment, and killings.

<!--=====Maoism===== =====Maoism=====
] with Chinese words "Supreme Directives"]] ] with Chinese words "Supreme Directives"]]
{{main article|Maoism}} {{main article|Maoism}}
Line 191: Line 172:
Unlike most other political ideologies, including other ] and Marxist ones, Maoism contains an integral ] doctrine and explicitly connects its political ideology with ]. In Maoist thought, "political power comes from the barrel of the gun" (one of Mao's quotes), and the ] can be mobilized to undertake a "]" of armed struggle involving ]. Unlike most other political ideologies, including other ] and Marxist ones, Maoism contains an integral ] doctrine and explicitly connects its political ideology with ]. In Maoist thought, "political power comes from the barrel of the gun" (one of Mao's quotes), and the ] can be mobilized to undertake a "]" of armed struggle involving ].


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 ] and the ] of the ], 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.--> 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 ] and the ] of the ], 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==== ====Other types of communism====


;]: Religious communism is a form of ] centered on ] principles. The term usually refers to a number of ]n 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 ]. ;]: Religious communism is a form of ] centered on ] principles. The term usually refers to a number of ]n 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 ].
Line 204: Line 186:
;]: Trotskyism is the theory of ] as advocated by ]. Trotsky considered himself a ]-], arguing for the establishment of a ]. He considered himself an advocate of orthodox Marxism. His politics differed greatly from those of ] or ], most importantly in declaring the need for an international "]". 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. ;]: Trotskyism is the theory of ] as advocated by ]. Trotsky considered himself a ]-], arguing for the establishment of a ]. He considered himself an advocate of orthodox Marxism. His politics differed greatly from those of ] or ], most importantly in declaring the need for an international "]". 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 is a critical term applied to the form of ] associated with ]. It has two major components: a ] analysis of the ] and a ] approach to world politics. Shachtmanites believe that the ] rulers of ] countries are a new (ruling) class, distinct from the workers and rejects ]'s description of Stalinist Russia as being a "]". Max Shachtman described the ] as a "]" society. Although Shachtmanism is usually described as a form of ], both Trotsky and Shachtman were careful to not describe Shachtman's view as Trotskyist.--> ;]: Shachtmanism is a critical term applied to the form of ] associated with ]. It has two major components: a ] analysis of the ] and a ] approach to world politics. Shachtmanites believe that the ] rulers of ] countries are a new (ruling) class, distinct from the workers and rejects ]'s description of Stalinist Russia as being a "]". Max Shachtman described the ] as a "]" society. Although Shachtmanism is usually described as a form of ], both Trotsky and Shachtman were careful to not describe Shachtman's view as Trotskyist.

<!--===Libertarian socialism and Social anarchism=== ===Libertarian socialism and Social anarchism===
], one of the major thinkers of ]]] ], one of the major thinkers of ]]]
{{main articles|] and ]}} {{main articles|] and ]}}
Line 213: Line 196:
Libertarian socialists believe in the abolition of the ] and of ] over the ], 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. Libertarian socialists believe in the abolition of the ] and of ] over the ], 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 ]s also referred to their philosophy as libertarian socialism, although some supported private property (as long as it was not exploitative) and a market economy.--> Some ]s 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=== ===Democratic socialism and social democracy===
{{main articles|] and ]}} {{main articles|] and ]}}


Line 226: Line 209:
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 ] 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. 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 ] 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 ], which prospered considerably in the 1990s and 2000s. Sweden has produced a robust economy from ]s up through to ], while maintaining one of the highest ] in the world, low ], ], all while registering sizable ]. 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 . Also, Sweden experiences welfare dependency of around 20% of the working age population according to the ]. Likewise, ] has been steadily rising since the 1960s, and during the past decade has grown ever more violent.--> The prime example of social democracy is ], which prospered considerably in the 1990s and 2000s. Sweden has produced a robust economy from ]s up through to ], while maintaining one of the highest ] in the world, low ], ], all while registering sizable ]. 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 . Also, Sweden experiences welfare dependency of around 20% of the working age population according to the ]. Likewise, ] has been steadily rising since the 1960s, and during the past decade has grown ever more violent.

⚫ <!--===Religious socialism=== -->
<!--====Christian socialism==== ===Religious socialism===

⚫ ====Christian socialism====
{{main article|Christian socialism}} {{main article|Christian socialism}}


Line 234: Line 219:


], is a ] economic philosophy formulated by such Catholic thinkers as ] and ] to apply the principles of ] articulated by the Roman Catholic Church, especially in Pope ]'s encyclical ]. ], is a ] economic philosophy formulated by such Catholic thinkers as ] and ] to apply the principles of ] articulated by the Roman Catholic Church, especially in Pope ]'s encyclical ].
{{further|] and ]}}--> {{further|] and ]}}

<!--====Islamic Socialism==== ====Islamic Socialism====
].]] ].]]


Line 242: Line 228:
] (written by ]) 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 ] and encourages the institution of a form of ] based on popular committees. <!-- *** CITATION NEEDED *** Critics charge that Qaddafi uses these committees as tools of ] political repression in practice. --> ] (written by ]) 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 ] and encourages the institution of a form of ] based on popular committees. <!-- *** CITATION NEEDED *** Critics charge that Qaddafi uses these committees as tools of ] political repression in practice. -->


<!--Scholars have highlighted the similarities between the Islamic economic system and socialist theory. For example, both are against unearned income. ] does allow private ownership of ]s and large ], which are owned collectively, or at least encouraged to be so.--> Scholars have highlighted the similarities between the Islamic economic system and socialist theory. For example, both are against unearned income. ] does allow private ownership of ]s and large ], which are owned collectively, or at least encouraged to be so.

<!--===Differences between various schools=== ===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====
⚫ 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 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).
Line 253: Line 242:
Socialists are also divided on which rights and liberties are desirable, such as the "] liberties" (such as those guaranteed by the U.S. ] or the ]). 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). Socialists are also divided on which rights and liberties are desirable, such as the "] liberties" (such as those guaranteed by the U.S. ] or the ]). 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 ])? Utopian Socialists, like ] and ] 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 (]) are distributed, but for whose economic benefit are they produced and sold.--> 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 ])? Utopian Socialists, like ] and ] 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 (]) are distributed, but for whose economic benefit are they produced and sold.

<!--====Implementation==== ====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. ], 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 ]s in the planned economy of ] under ]. 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). 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. ], 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 ]s in the planned economy of ] under ]. 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).
Line 262: Line 252:
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 ] and the widespread use of ]s), but others hold that socialism entails the existence of a legislative body administered by people who would be elected in a ]. 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 ] and the widespread use of ]s), but others hold that socialism entails the existence of a legislative body administered by people who would be elected in a ].


Different ideologies support different governments. For example, in the era of the ], 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 ] claims to be socialist and refers to its own approach as "]," but most other socialists consider China to be essentially capitalist. The Chinese leadership concurs with most of the usual ], and many of their actions to manage what they call a socialist economy have been determined by this opinion.--> Different ideologies support different governments. For example, in the era of the ], 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 ] claims to be socialist and refers to its own approach as "]," but most other socialists consider China to be essentially capitalist. The Chinese leadership concurs with most of the usual ], and many of their actions to manage what they call a socialist economy have been determined by this opinion.

<!--===Controversial classifications=== ===Controversial classifications===
{{npov-section}} {{npov-section}}
Like other political terms, such as '']'', '']'' and '']'' (see, for example, the ], 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. Like other political terms, such as '']'', '']'' and '']'' (see, for example, the ], 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.
Line 269: Line 260:
It is observed by political scientists that there is a great deal of similarities between the ] and the ], with historical examples such as ], leader of the ] movement in ] Italy, whose regime has been compared to that of the ]. It has been argued by ] conservatives that movements instigated by ] 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. It is observed by political scientists that there is a great deal of similarities between the ] and the ], with historical examples such as ], leader of the ] movement in ] Italy, whose regime has been compared to that of the ]. It has been argued by ] conservatives that movements instigated by ] 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 ] who sees a close, though antagonistic, relationship between the left and the right descendants of ], see ].--> For a discussion of the controversial views of one ] who sees a close, though antagonistic, relationship between the left and the right descendants of ], see ].

<!--==== Baathism ==== ==== Baathism ====


The ] rules ], and also ruled ] under ], based on a tradition of ], non-Marxist socialism. Ba'thist beliefs combine ], ], and ]. The mostly secular ideology often contrasts with that of other Arab governments in the ], which sometimes tend to have leanings towards ] and ]. The ] rules ], and also ruled ] under ], based on a tradition of ], non-Marxist socialism. Ba'thist beliefs combine ], ], and ]. The mostly secular ideology often contrasts with that of other Arab governments in the ], which sometimes tend to have leanings towards ] and ].


Once into power, the Ba'athist regimes of Syria and Iraq were fiercely opposed, and any notion of an international Ba'ath Party was lost, although the ruling parties in both countries retained the Ba'ath name. The Ba'athists also persecuted the socialists in their own countries. In Iraq, the ] assisted Iraq with a list of Communists to eliminate, effectively wiping out the Iraqi communists. Socialist ] argues that the Iraqi Ba'athists in fact promoted capitalists from within the Party and outside the country.<ref>], Lynn. ''Imperialism and the gulf war'', , 1990-91</ref><--> Once into power, the Ba'athist regimes of Syria and Iraq were fiercely opposed, and any notion of an international Ba'ath Party was lost, although the ruling parties in both countries retained the Ba'ath name. The Ba'athists also persecuted the socialists in their own countries. In Iraq, the ] assisted Iraq with a list of Communists to eliminate, effectively wiping out the Iraqi communists. Socialist ] argues that the Iraqi Ba'athists in fact promoted capitalists from within the Party and outside the country.<ref>], Lynn. ''Imperialism and the gulf war'', , 1990-91</ref>

<!--==== Fascism ==== ==== Fascism ====

Fascism developed from ], a form of radical socialism. While opposing ] and ], fascism was rooted in part in radical leftist philosophy, including the theories of those such as ] (a former anarchist), ] (influenced by ]) or former socialist ]. Fascism developed from ], a form of radical socialism. While opposing ] and ], fascism was rooted in part in radical leftist philosophy, including the theories of those such as ] (a former anarchist), ] (influenced by ]) or former socialist ].


Fascism rejects ] and the concept of ] in favor of ]. It holds the state to be an end in and of itself (see also ]). Also, contrary to the practice of socialist states, fascist ] did not ] any industries or capitalist entities. Rather, it established a ] structure influenced by the model for class relations put forward by the ]. (For more on the influence of Catholicism on fascism see ].) Fascism rejects ] and the concept of ] in favor of ]. It holds the state to be an end in and of itself (see also ]). Also, contrary to the practice of socialist states, fascist ] did not ] any industries or capitalist entities. Rather, it established a ] structure influenced by the model for class relations put forward by the ]. (For more on the influence of Catholicism on fascism see ].)


] claimed that fascism and totalitarian forms of socialism (for example ]) stemmed from a common origin.<ref> from self-gov.org</ref> On the other hand, ] argues that "totalitarian movements use socialism and racism by emptying them of their utilitarian content, the interests of a class or nation." <ref>], Hannah. ''The Origins of Totalitarianism'', p348.</ref> Fascists rejected categorization as left or right-wing, claiming to be a "]" (see ] and ] for more information).--> ] claimed that fascism and totalitarian forms of socialism (for example ]) stemmed from a common origin.<ref> from self-gov.org</ref> On the other hand, ] argues that "totalitarian movements use socialism and racism by emptying them of their utilitarian content, the interests of a class or nation." <ref>], Hannah. ''The Origins of Totalitarianism'', p348.</ref> Fascists rejected categorization as left or right-wing, claiming to be a "]" (see ] and ] for more information).

<!--==== Nazism ==== ==== Nazism ====

] is derived from the name of the ], formerly simply the ]. Their ideology included a few of the more anti-capitalist ideas of socialism, as declared in the ], as part of the propaganda attempt<ref>], John. from the </ref> to create a ] of an ] race. ] is derived from the name of the ], formerly simply the ]. Their ideology included a few of the more anti-capitalist ideas of socialism, as declared in the ], as part of the propaganda attempt<ref>], John. from the </ref> to create a ] of an ] race.


Line 293: Line 289:


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. 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.

-->
==Socialism as an economic system== ==Socialism as an economic system==
{{Main|Socialist economics}} {{Main|Socialist economics}}

Revision as of 16:53, 26 May 2006

Socialism
History - Outline
Schools of
thought
Libertarian
(from below)
Authoritarian
(from above)
Religious
Regional variants
Key topics
and issues
Concepts
People
16th c.
18th c.
19th c.
20th c.
21st c.
Organizations
See also

Socialism refers to a broad array of doctrines, and may also refer to political movements that aspire to put these doctrines into practice. These movements generally envisage a socio-economic system in which property and the distribution of wealth are subject to social control. As an economic system, socialism is usually associated with state or collective ownership of the means of production. This control, according to socialists, may be either direct, exercised through popular collectives such as workers' councils, or it may be indirect, exercised on behalf of the people by the state.

The modern socialist movement had its origin largely in the working class movement of the late-19th century. In this period, the term "socialism" was first used in connection with European social critics who condemned capitalism and private property. For Karl Marx, who helped establish and define the modern socialist movement, socialism implied the abolition of markets, capital, and labor as a commodity.

It is difficult to make generalizations about the diverse array of doctrines and movements that have been referred to as "socialist." The various adherents of contemporary socialist movements do not agree on a common doctrine or program. As a result, the movement has split into different and sometimes opposing branches, particularly between moderate socialists and communists. Since the 19th century, socialists have differed in their vision of socialism as a system of economic organization. Some socialists have championed the complete nationalization of the means of production to implement their aims. Others have proposed selective nationalization of key industries within the framework of mixed economies. Stalinists insisted on the creation of Soviet-style command economies under strong central state direction. Others advocate "market socialism" in which social control of property exist within the framework of market economics and private property.

History of socialism

Main article: History of socialism

Early socialism

The term "socialism" was first used in the context of early-19th century Western European social critics. In this period, socialism emerged from a diverse array of doctrines and social experiments associated primarily with British and French thinkers—especially Robert Owen, Charles Fourier, Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, Louis Blanc, and Saint-Simon. These social critics saw themselves as reacting to the excesses of poverty and inequality in the period, and advocated reforms such as the egalitarian distribution of wealth and the transformation of society into small communities in which private property was to be abolished. Early socialists differed widely about how socialism was to be achieved; they differed sharply on key issues such as centralized versus decentralized control, the role of private property, the degree of egalitarianism, and the organization of family and community life.

The rise of Marxism

File:Kmarx.jpg
Karl Marx

In the mid-19th century, the transformation of socialism into a political doctrine occurred as Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels developed their own account of socialism as the outcome of a revolutionary class struggle between the proletariat and bourgeoisie.

For Marxists, socialism is viewed as a transitional stage characterized by state ownership of the means of production. They see this stage in history as a transition between capitalism and communism, the final stage of history. For Marx, a communist society describes the absence of differing social classes and thus the end of class warfare. According to Marx, once private property had been abolished, the state would then "wither away," and humanity would move on to a higher stage of society, communism.

Moderate socialism and communism

In 1864 Marx founded the International Workingmen's Association, or First International, which held its first congress at Geneva in 1866. The First International was the first international forum for the promulgation of communist doctrine.

Despite the rhetoric about socialism as an international force, socialists increasingly focused on the politics of the nation-state in the late 19th century. As universal male suffrage was introduced throughout the Western world in the first decades of the twentieth century, socialism became increasingly associated with newly formed trade unions and mass political parties aimed at mobilizing working class voters.

These groups supported diverse views of socialism, from the gradualism of many trade unionists to the radical, revolutionary agendas of Marx and Engels.

As social democrats moved into government, divisions between the moderate and radical wings of socialism grew increasingly pronounced. On one hand, many socialist thinkers began to doubt the indispensability of revolution. Moderates like Eduard Bernstein argued that socialism could best be achieved through the democratic political process (a model increasingly known as social democracy). On the other hand, strong opposition to moderate socialism came from socialists in countries such as the Russian Empire where parliamentary democracy did not exist and did not seem possible. Russian revolutionary Vladimir Lenin argued that revolution was the only path to socialism. In 1903, there was a formal split in the Russian social democratic party into revolutionary Bolshevik and reformist Menshevik factions.

Meanwhile, anarchists and proponents of other alternative visions of socialism—emphasizing, for example, the potential of small-scale communities and agrarianism—coexisted with the more influential currents of Marxism and social democracy. They opposed Marxism and most other socialist groups, and a split between the anarchists and the Socialist International soon occurred.

File:Jaurès02.jpg
Jean Jaurès haranguing workers under a red flag.

In the first decades of the twentieth century, moderate socialism became increasingly influential among many European intellectuals. In 1884 British middle class intellectuals organized the Fabian Society. The Fabians in turn helped lay the groundwork for the organization of the Labour Party in 1906. The French Section Française de l'Internationale Ouvrière (SFIO), founded in 1905, under Jean Jaurès and later Léon Blum adhered to Marxist ideas, but became in practice a reformist party.

In the U.S. a Socialist Labor party was founded in 1877. This party, small as it was, became fragmented in the 1890s. The influence of the party gradually declined, and socialism never became a major political force in the United States. Communism also failed to gain a large following in the U.S.; in fact, in the broader English-speaking world, communism never gained a large mass following.

The distinction between socialists and communists became more pronounced during and after World War I. When the First World War began in 1914, many European socialist leaders supported their respective governments. During the war, socialist parties in France and Germany supported the state wartime military and economic planning, despite their ideological commitments to internationalism and solidarity. Lenin, however, denounced the war as an imperialist conflict urged the workers worldwide to use the war as an occasion for proletarian revolution. This ideological conflict resulted in the collapse of the Second International.

The rise of the Soviet Union

In 1917 the Russian Revolution marked the definitive split between communists and social democrats. Communist parties in the Soviet Union and Europe dismissed the more moderate socialist parties and, for the most part, broke off contact.

The Soviet Communist Party sought to "build socialism" in the Soviet Union. Lenin's regime brought all the means of production (except agricultural production) under state control, and implemented a system of government through workers' councils (in Russian, soviets). Gradually the Soviet Union developed a bureaucratic and authoritarian model of social development condemned by moderate socialists abroad for undermining the initial democratic and socialist ideals of the Russian Revolution. In 1929 Stalin came to power and pursued a policy of "socialism in one country."

The Russian Revolution provoked a powerful reaction throughout the Western world. One example was the "Red Scare" in the United States, which effectively destroyed the American Socialist Party of Eugene Debs. In Europe, fascism emerged as a movement against both socialism and liberalism. Fascism came to power in Italy in 1922 under Benito Mussolini (a former socialist), and strong fascist movements also developed throughout much of Europe.

The interwar era and World War II

Despite division of the world socialist movement, Western European socialist parties won major electoral gains in the immediate postwar years. Most notably, in Britain, the Labour party under Ramsay MacDonald was in power for ten months in 1924 and again from 1929 to 1931. Throughout much of the interwar period, socialist and Communist parties were in continuous conflict. Socialists condemned communists as agents of the Soviet Union, while communists condemned socialists as betrayers of the working class.

Cold War years

In Western Europe, socialism gained perhaps its widest appeal in the period immediately following the Second World War. Even where conservative governments remained in power, they were forced to adopt a series of social welfare reform measures, so that in most industrialized countries, the post-World War period saw the creation of a welfare state.

The period following World War II marked another period of intensifying struggle between socialists and communists. In the postwar period, the nominally socialist parties became increasingly identified with the expansion of the capitalist welfare state. Western European socialists largely backed U.S.-led Cold War policies. They largely supported the Marshall Plan and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Communists denounced these measures as imperialist provocations aimed at triggering a war against the Soviet Union.

In the postwar years, socialism became increasingly influential throughout the Third World. In 1949 the Chinese Revolution established a Communist state. Emerging nations of Africa, Asia, and Latin America frequently adopted socialist economic programs. In many instances, these nations nationalized industries held by foreign owners. The Soviet achievement in the 1930s seemed hugely impressive from the outside, and convinced many nationalists in the emerging former colonies of the Third World, not necessarily Communists or even socialists, of the virtues of state planning and state-guided models of social development.

In the 1970s, despite the radicalism of some socialist currents in the Third World, Western European communist parties effectively abandoned their revolutionary goals and fully embraced electoral politics. Dubbed "Eurocommunism," this new orientation resembled earlier social-democratic configurations, although distinction between the two political tendencies persists.

File:DengMitterrand.jpg
Chinese paramount leader Deng Xiaoping meeting with Francois Mitterrand, the president-elect of France and the leader of the Socialist Party on February 12, 1981. In power both Deng and Mitterrand struggled to adapt and modernize socialism in a period of growing globalization and liberalization of the global economy.

In the late last quarter of the twentieth century, socialism in the Western world entered a new phase of crisis and uncertainty. In this period, monetarists and neoliberals attacked social welfare systems as an impediment to individual entrepreneurship. With the rise of Ronald Reagan in the U.S. and Margaret Thatcher in Britain, the Western welfare state found itself under increasing political pressure. Increasingly, Western countries and international institutions rejected social democratic methods of Keynesian demand management in favor of neoliberal policy.

Western European socialists were under intense pressure to refashion their parties in the late 1980s and early 1990s, and to reconcile their traditional economic programs with the integration of a European economic community based on liberalizing markets. Some formerly socialist parties no longer support anything recognizable as socialism, particularly "New Labour" in the United Kingdom.

The late last quarter of the twentieth century marked a far greater period of crisis for communists in the Eastern bloc, where the worsening shortages of housing and consumer goods; combined with the lack of individual rights to assembly, association, movement, and speech disillusioned many Communist party members. With the rapid collapse of Communist party rule in Eastern Europe between 1989 and 1991, socialism as it was practiced in the Soviet bloc has effectively disappeared worldwide as a political force.

Contemporary socialism

Over the past twenty-five years, efforts adapt socialism to new historical circumstances have led to a range of new left ideas and theories, some of them contained within existing socialist movements and parties, others achieving mobilization and support in the arenas of "new social movements." Some socialist parties reacted more flexibly and successfully to these changes than others, but eventually all were forced to do so.

In the developing world, some elected noncommunist socialist parties and communist parties remain prominent, particularly in India. In China, the Chinese Communist Party has led a transition from the command economy of the Mao period under the banner of "market socialism." Under Deng Xiaoping, the leadership of China embarked upon a program of market-based reform that was more sweeping than had been Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev's perestroika program of the late 1980s. In Latin America, in recent years socialism has reemerged in recent years with a nationalist and populist tinge, with Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez leading the trend.

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:

The socio-political or intellectual movements basing themselves in the Marxist-Socialist tradition can generally be further divided into:

Several forms of "socialism" are considered by those further to the left to be reformist or revisionist. These include:

Communism

File:Kmarx.jpg
Karl Marx (1818-1883)
Main article: 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

Main article: 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
Main article: 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
File:Little red book.jpg
Cover of Quotations from Chairman Mao Tse-Tung with Chinese words "Supreme Directives"
Main article: 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 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

File:PeterKropotkin.jpg
Peter Kropotkin, one of the major thinkers of Anarchist communism
Main article: ]

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

Main article: ]

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: 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 . 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

Main article: 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), 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.

Further information: ]

Islamic Socialism

File:TheGreenBook.jpg
Cover of English language edition of The Green Book.

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. Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page. Please do not remove this message until conditions to do so are met. (Learn how and when to remove this message)

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.

Once into power, the Ba'athist regimes of Syria and Iraq were fiercely opposed, and any notion of an international Ba'ath Party was lost, although the ruling parties in both countries retained the Ba'ath name. The Ba'athists also persecuted the socialists in their own countries. In Iraq, the CIA assisted Iraq with a list of Communists to eliminate, effectively wiping out the Iraqi communists. Socialist Lynn Walsh argues that the Iraqi Ba'athists in fact promoted capitalists from within the Party and outside the country.

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. 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." 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

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 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.

Anti-socialists argue that the Nazis' large public works projects and state interventions are indicative of socialism 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.

Socialism as an economic system

Main article: Socialist economics

The term "socialism" is often used is to refer to an economic system characterized by state ownership of the means of production and distribution. In the Soviet Union, state ownership of productive property was combined with central planning. Down to the workplace level, Soviet economic planners decided what goods and services were to be produced, how they were to be produced, in what quantities, and at what prices they were to be sold (see economy of the Soviet Union). Soviet economic planning was touted as an alternative to allowing prices and production to be determined by the market through supply and demand. Especially during the Great Depression, many socialists considered Soviet-style planning a remedy to what they saw as the inherent flaws of capitalism, such as monopolies, business cycles, unemployment, vast inequalities in the distribution of wealth, and the exploitation of workers.

In the West, conservative economists such as Friedrich Hayek and Milton Friedman argued that socialist planned economies were doomed to failure. They argued that central planners could never match the overall information inherent in the decision-making throughout a market economy. Nor could enterprise managers in Soviet-style socialist economies match the motivation of private profit-driven entrepreneurs in a market economy.

Following the stagnation of the Soviet economy in the 1970s and 1980s, many socialists have begun to accept the critiques of state planning of Western market economists. The economist Oskar Lange, for example, was an early proponents of "market socialism."

Socialism and social and political theory

Marxist and non-Marxist social theorists have both generally agreed that socialism, as a doctrine, developed as a reaction to the rise of modern industrial capitalism, but differ sharply on the exact nature of the relationship. Émile Durkheim saw socialism as rooted in the desire simply to bring the state closer to the realm of individual activity as a response to the growing anomie of capitalist society. Max Weber saw in socialism an acceleration of the process of rationalization commenced under capitalism. Weber was a critic of socialism who warned that putting the economy under the total bureaucratic control of the state would not result in liberation but an 'iron cage of future bondage.'

Socialist intellectuals continued to retain considerable influence on European philosophy in the mid-20th century. Herbert Marcuse's 1955 Eros and Civilization was an explicit attempt to merge Marxism with Freudianism. Structuralism, widely influential in mid-20th century French academic circles, emerged as a model of the social sciences that influenced the 1960s and 1970s socialist New Left.

Criticisms of socialism

Main article: Criticisms of socialism

Criticisms of socialism range from disagreements over the efficiency of socialist economic and political models, to condemnation of states described by themselves or others 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. There is much focus on the human rights records of communist states. Some critics identify these examples with socialism, while others reject the categorization of such examples as socialist.

Footnotes

  1. "Socialism." Encyclopædia Britannica. 2006. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. <http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9109587>.
  2. Walsh, Lynn. Imperialism and the gulf war, Chapter 5, 1990-91
  3. Friedrich Hayek - Libertarian from self-gov.org
  4. Arendt, Hannah. The Origins of Totalitarianism, p348.
  5. Simkin, John. Nazi Party - NSDAP from the Spartacus Educational website
  6. Trotsky, Leon. What is National Socialism? June 10 1933
  7. 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= (help)

See also

Political ideologies
See also

External links

Categories: