Socialism is our hope

PRODUCTION FOR USE AND FREE ACCESS

Many say socialism will never work but exactly where on this planet is capitalism working except in the interests of the privileged few? Ask yourself “Is this is as good as it gets?” Pro-capitalist apologists for the system will often readily admit that capitalism is “far from perfect,” but as socialist society is utopian, capitalism remains not only practical, but the best system we could possibly have. The terms socialism and communism are also often associated with the murderous dictatorships set up by the Bolsheviks in Russia and later copied by their followers all over the world. Although these State socialists talked of creating a free and equal communist society, their authoritarian methods ensured that they ended up creating the opposite, a totalitarian nightmare. The revolution will not be made by a socialist party. The task is too complex to be accomplished by a minority. A free socialist society needs the active participation of millions of people. And crucially that participation can only happen voluntarily. Socialism cannot be imposed on the people. It has to be a voluntary libertarian process. It does not matters what term we use: we can speak of "communitarianism” and so forth; what matters is its content.

If we are serious about achieving new society, then we have to start about it now. It isn't going to fall from the sky. The longer we wait to begin acting for ourselves the longer it's going to be till we achieve our aim. Also many people are used to letting others run society for them. Sure they might get indignant over corruption or a particular war, but it's fair to say that their actual involvement in changing anything is pretty low. Much of the time we're powerless to control things in our lives and our apathy is understandable but it is a game changer when we, the people, get a taste of our collective power. Suddenly, politics become relevant in a way they never were before. The whole point of having a minority of brainy and benevolent leaders is that they will do the difficult work for you. As such it follows that you yourself don't need to change, to participate on an equal footing with everybody else, to think about why we need socialism, you don't need to get deeply involved in making it happen. This will be fatal for any revolution because the new society will face tough times. But if people have a good understanding of what they are fighting for and have made a deep personal commitment to achieving it, it's unlikely that they are going to let it go easily.

There is a common criticism of the Socialist Party that we just say we have to wait until socialism and then racism, sexism and homophobia will all disappear. But there's no way we will ever see a successful socialist revolution unless we fight against these oppressions in the here and now. Without presenting arguments against such prejudices and promoting sympathy and solidarity, scape-goating the disadvantaged and the vulnerable can appeal to people.  It's one of a time-honoured tried and tested strategies used by the ruling class to sow divisions between workers to keep us from blaming them. Mankind faces many challenges which are not a direct result of capitalism, yet cannot be solved because of capitalism’s peculiarities. Socialism does not automatically solve these issues, but rather it merely removes the barriers to solving them.

The system is capitalism. Under it a small minority rule in fact if not in name, and profit is the be-all and end-all of economic life; human needs come second—if at all. Freed from the clutches of the profit-gougers, the major industries must be brought under common ownership and the economy must be planned by the people themselves in their own areas of work. The profit system cannot make use of automation for the benefit of society; socialism will! The future society that will be constructed under socialism will reduce work to an insignificant part of daily life and offer the individual the fullest possibilities to pursue his own abilities and interests. Socialism is governed by a logic of humanism and solidarity aimed at satisfying human needs, rather than the pursuit of profit. For social wealth to satisfy the needs of everyone in the country, it is essential that the fundamental means of production are not monopolized by a few and used for their own benefit, but are collective, social ownership. But social ownership is not the same as state property. What happened in the Soviet Union and the countries that followed its example was not real ownership of the production process by the workers, but simply a nationalization of the means of production. The state become the legal owner of the means of production. They ceased to be owned by a few, to become property of the state supposedly representing the workers. However, the production process itself underwent very few changes: a big socialist factory differed little from its capitalist counterpart; workers continued to be a mere cog in the machine; they had little or no participation in decision-making at the work- place. This "state capitalism" retained the hierarchical organization of production; the manager had "dictatorial" power, and orders were transmitted from top to bottom. Workers need to take in their hands (appropriate) the production process and be involved in organizing it. Instead of feeling like one of many cogs in the wheel; they can contribute with their ideas and knowledge acquired through practice, combining thinking and doing, so that through work they reach their full development as social human beings.

If the means of production are to be socially owned -- and this means owned by all -- the products should satisfy the needs of the people, and the surpluses thus obtained cannot be monopolized only by one specific group of workers, but must be shared with the community. Who determines these needs? It must be the people themselves who define and prioritize, through a participatory planning process.

Socialism is all about producing abundance and worldwide, there is an abundance of resources to take care of everyone. As the American Trotskyist James Cannon explained:

“In the socialist society, when there is plenty and abundance for all, what will be the point in keeping account of each one's share, any more than in the distribution of food at a well-supplied family table? You don't keep books as to who eats how many pancakes for breakfast or how many pieces of bread for dinner. Nobody grabs when the table is laden. If you have a guest, you don't seize the first piece of meat for yourself, you pass the plate and ask him to help himself first.”