Socialism
Henri de Saint-Simon (1760-1825)
„He proposed the extension of English parliament and the system of distribution of power to the rest of the Europe and the creation of an overnational European parliament that would ensure the peace, industrial cooperation and new unity of the continent similar to the one observable in Christian medieval epoch, but founded on liberal rules".
(Leszek Kołakowski)
Sounds familiar, right?
Just in case, a hint ->
The author of modern theory of socialism understood not only as an imaginary model, but also an effect of historical processes.
Descendant of ducal families, ruined by the unsuccessful business transactions.
He wanted to reform the society through scientific means - positivistic belief in social sciences. He believed that scientists will one day become the leaders of the society.
Initially he believed that the government should introduce the rules applied to conduct the enterprise to all the aspects of social life.
Saint-Simon would not find his way into this presentation if he subscribed to the aforementioned opinion his whole life. In later time he completely rejected the ideas of liberal economy and he formulated the rules of a future "organic" social alliance.
(Socialism, it sounds proudly!)
"The progress of production tools is the source of all the political changes". A take close to the historical materialism.
In consequence, he also believed the contemporary technological progress (industrial revoution) to require adequate political transformations.
The free market gives birth to anarchy in production and retail which lead to misery and poverty.
People who are productive, useful in manufacturing - factory workers, vendors, blue collar workers - they need to bear with the rule of idlers. Antagonism between parties ensues.
He proposed the "industrial" system, with power in the hands of the manufacturers.
It would allow for planned organisation of the production, and the private property would lose its old nature.
He was not opposed to the concept of private property - just postulated subjecting its usage to the good of the people.
What must be eliminated is the inheritance law. Then private property will be in hands of only those who worked hard for it. No more laziness! Competition will still exist, but now it will serve the development of an individual and, consequently, the society.
The most important societal roles will be fulfilled by bankers and intellectuals - they will be making decisions about the financial investments.
The changes are supposed to improve the situation of the working class, but the executioners of said changes would belong to the industrial party.
Peaceful reforms, not the revolution. As a result, the exploitation of people by people will be eliminated.
Theory of organic and critical periods.
A parable on the evolution of ideas quite various
In his last chapters Saint-Simon turned to religion.
He started claiming that political knowledge should be based on christian foundations, love of one's neighbour.
In consequence the supporters of Saint-Simon transformed into a sort cult, showing symptoms such as:
- the introduction of religious hierarchy,
- mystical treatment of gender/ gender mystique,
- the search for "Mother for a New Church" in Levant region.
Robert Owen (1771-1858)
Contrarily to most of his contemporaries in the field of theory of socialism, he worked in the industry for a long time and knew the life of working class first-handedly.
From rags to riches. Almost.
He was from a poor family. Forced to work since childhood. Thanks to his intelligence and resourcefulness he would quickly move up the ladder. At some point he became the co-founder and the manager of big textile plants in New Lanark, Scotland.
In his plants he introduced a number of reforms, very progressive for his times:
- he lowered the amount of hours in the working day to 10.5,
- he annuled the practice of hiring children below the age of ten,
- he developed the system of free care-taking for children, - he improved the hygiene of working conditions,
- through the educational activities alone he managed to obliterate the phenomena of theft and drunkenness among his workers.
But - what's more important - he achieved higher profits than his competition (to its utter amazement).
He fought for the improvement of the tragic situation of children, commonly used for extremely heavy jobs - huge mortality rate. Thanks to him the bill limiting the children's work in textile industry has been ordained in England.
He tried to make the governing parties realise the negative consequences of industrialization and to propose reforms that would soothe its repprecusions without affecting the quarry.
He criticized the protestant religious movement and private property. After all, protestants believed the wealth to be the proof of God's blessing, so one should not help the poor - them being poor is their own fault.
In the United States he tried to build communist boroughs. In England he established the fair trade market. He co-created syndicates and collective labour movement.
The man does not shape himself on his own. His character, feelings, opinions and beliefs are constantly influenced by his environment, family and educators.
As a result - it's not criminals' fault that they commit crimes. It's society's fault.
Man has an inherent desire for happiness. We are also born with different types of gifts and talents. Despite that the whole of human happiness and misery are dependant upon the acuired knowledge/education.
Like from Socrates - the lack of knowledge being the cause of evil etc. ->
And so he postulated for the education reform.
Next to the said reform it was also necessary to introduce the reform of the work system. The last one for the sake of capitalists - after all, working class is a group of buyers. Poverty of working class leads to the overproduction crisis - there are no buyers.
His concept of happiness was a utilitarian one - however, he would ephasize that the happiness for an individual is achievable only if others are also happy.
He postulated for social ruling over production assets, which in his opinion was a way to ensure the optimal organisation of the production system and finally the triumph of freedom and justice.
Vision of the future: huge, mechanised industrial production in harmony with farming production.
So called "centers of fair trade/just exchange" - centrally controlled - were supposed to constitute basic social units.
He never abandoned the belief that reforms can conducted gradually, evolutionarily, by simply convincing the capitalists of their validity. This was supposed to be the task for the enlightned people.
Charles Fourier (1772-1837)
„Charles Fourier had a deserved reputation of an unparalleled maniac and romancer, who - with his detailed descriptions of a future socialist country - surpassed all the utopists of past ages.”
(Leszek Kołakowski)
An eye-witness and a victim of all kinds of economic crises of his time. From those experiences his new system emerged - system that Fourtier claimed to be
"the grandest event in the history of humankind".
Throughout his whole life he was searching for a rich patron willing to put out a few million francs for the first cell (phalanstery) of future society. He believed that its success will be so spectacular, over the course of four years the whole humanity will switch to his system.
He believed himself to be a new Newton. For real. After all, he was also inspired by apples. Four apples mark four of the biggest events in the history of humankind.
Crises, speculation, worker's misery, exploitation of men by men - according to him all that was the consequence of a bad organization of work and exchange.
He claimed that the key to success is the creation of a system in which inherent human passions and drives could be fulfilled in a way that would contribute to general good rather than cause conflicts.
In phalansteries all the passions would be fulfilled and constructively applied.
12 basic passions: four emotional ones, five sensual ones and three distributive ones. Fourier "calculated" that different combinations of the passions together gives 810 types of character.
Which is why the elementary unit of a future society - phalange - should count 1620 people for the maximum variety. Or 2000 (just to be safe/as a reserve).
It's important to organize work in such a way that everyone could find an occupation the most suitable for their liking. The work in phalansteries would be the constant source of excitement.
The occupation would be changes a few times a day to countermine boredom.
Every man would possess at least forty different kinds of professional skills.
Dirty and unpleasant work - like cleaning the toilet or butchery - would be left for... small children! After all, they love to roll around in filth.
Phalansteries as the agro-industrial units. Family life obliterated - sexual freedom is one of the most important laws of the new system. Brothels - one of the most important institutions.
However, private property, inheritance law and wealth inequality would not be eliminated. They are supposed to stop being sources of conflict. Phalange ensures everybody has the necessary minimum sources of income.
Phalanges organized in a world-wide omnarchy.
Because, according to Fourier, the evil of men tainted the whole natural world, the introduction of the new system will also transform nature, and the man will obtain the full power over it. As a result:
- sea water will transform into sweet lemonade, - deserts will bloom,
- glaciers will melt
- the never-ending spring will start, - harmful animals will die out...
- ... or become people's friends - antiwhale and antilion will serve the humanity.
Aside from that:
- a new general human language will appear, - everybody will be happy and educated.
Ferdynand Lassalle (1825-1864)
He encountered socialist writing pretty soon, and quickly he grew to believe that he is destined for great things, both in the field of philosophy and social transformation of Germany.
His personal life stopped him from conquering the world.
In love with (substantially older than him) countess Sophia von Hatzefelt for ten years, he would go to dozens of courts to fight with her former husband. At some point he got accused of the theft of documents, for which he got a few months in prison.
His goal was to establish the legality of different social transformations that annull various contemporary privileges.
He claimed that rights acquired are rights that an individual obtains through her will-driven actions. But underlying every bill there is an assumption that the rights acquired are valid as long, as such kind of rights is in accord with the the existing law system. Law system is being validated only by the consciousness of the whole nation.
So if the latest bills eliminate some type of privilege, one cannot defend herself with lex retro non agiti. Otherwise someone could claim that they can have slaves, because they always did!
Taking from Hegel and Ficht, he wanted to transform the German capitalist society into the socialist one.
He proclaimed the necessity of top-down unification of Germany under Prussian leadership, the creation of new constitution and and new universal suffrage.
He demanded the expropriation of private owners and creation of, set up by the state, associations of production workers.
Further demands: the elimination of "bronze working wage law", the elimination of the capitalist profit and indirect taxes.
The German government was supposed to serve the improve the working class' situation. Idealism and socialism.
He differentiated between the written constitution and the real one.
Karol Marks (1818-1883)
“Workers of the world, Unite! You have nothing to lose but your chains” The Communist Manifesto (1848)
Every phenomenon in natural world is tied to other phenomena, Everything together is a constantly fluent unity.
Quantity changes become quality changes. In other words - the phenomenon intensifies and at some point it becomes so intense that it constitutes a new quality.
Progress happens constantly and is marked with subsequent quality changes.
Constant tendency of perfecting the society and the country.
Both social and natural phenomena have some conflicting characteristics. The struggle between those characteristics determines the development of the society and marks the stages of progress.
Materialism - mater (existence) determines consciousness and transforms reality.
Political structures derived from manufacturing relations. Change of those relations results in the change of society's productive forces.
Foundations, superstructure and forms of social consciousness.
Foundations - ownership and organization of production assets, the basis of society's functioning.
Superstructure - institutions determined by the foundations.
Forms of social awareness - legal, moral, artistic and philosophic social consciousness that influences the foundations.
Class conflict theory
The break-up of primeval society resulted in the birth of class society. Since then - the perpual class conflict.
The antagonism always comes from classes' different approaches to means of production. From antiquity and slavery until today.
Proof, according to Marks: e.g. slave rebellions.
As we know already - conflict leads to progress.
Antagonism is a fuel for society.
Proletariat must lead to the revolution that will ensure proletariat's dictatorship. Proletariat's dictatorship will result in the creation of a classless society.
The key role in this process plays the class consciousness. Proletariat needs to understand its historical role.
Fryderyk Engels (1820-1895)
Hobby: calling for the revolution, granting Marks' non-returnable loans.
In 1848 along with Marks he proclaimed The Communist Manifesto.
He supported and helped Marks. After Marks' death he fiercely defended his views against opportunism and revisionism. He was a member of the First and the Second International.
Just like a substantial amount of socialists he believed in building the socioeconomic system based on an empirically verifiable conditions of the classes' development.
In Engels's writing a big emphasis is put on the critique of private property.
He claimed private property to be the main cause of the emergence of class division and the creation of the country.
The main purpose of the state - ensuring the proprietor class has the power by using the means of legal duress.
The class of proprietors will never let the working class participate in ruling.
The only option for the working class is the REVOLUTION.
The aim of a revolution - to eliminate the private property and the exploitation of the working class.
What was supposed to lead to the revolution was the disappearance of the middle class - the process, in his mind, inevitable, for it should result from the empirically verifiable laws. As a result the society would become more polarized and the conflict would escalate.
Not inly the interest of proprietor class and working class are impossible to reconcile. Establishing the common ground between the interests of an individual and the society.
How can one eliminate the contradictions in the society itself. Simple - the revolution will do it. According to Engels, the amount of goods manufactured in Western Europe is so big there should be enough of them for everybody. Before the revolution, however, they are badly distributed.
A new postrevolutionary order would be based on the planned economy, which would ensure social equality.
Like Marks, Engels was a representative of the historical materialism. He believed that the economic progress causes social change.
Economic changes shape the culture of the society, most of all its driving ideology. Ideology gives the people an fake consciousness dependent on their class affiliation.
Dialectical materialism taken from Hegel. The negation will result in the emergence of a classless society.
Engels came from the family of industrialists. He himself never did any manual labour.
