The ruling class has discredited socialism by equating
socialism with dictatorship while treating capitalism and democracy as one and
the same. Economic systems are the set of relations between people and classes
in social production, essentially who owns the means of production and how the
product is distributed. Under the economic system of capitalism, the capitalist
class owns the means of production (factories, transport, etc.) as private
property. The basic law of capitalism – competition in the production of
commodities to maximise profits – results in poverty, war, exploitation and
crises. Capitalists hire workers to produce commodities, which are socially
produced, but privately owned by the capitalists, and then sold for profit. The
state provides an infrastructure to assist the capitalist class in maximizing
profit and towards this end provides some basic necessities (such as schools, unemployment
insurance, and social security) to maintain a workforce and ward off
starvation, social chaos, and revolution. With the economic system of
socialism, the means of production are not in the private hands of the
capitalists, but are socially owned. The means of production are commonly owned
and capable of producing abundance sufficient to meet the needs of all of
society. The use of money disappears because commodities are no longer produced
for a market, but for distribution on the basis of need.
In the era of
preceding the Industrial Revolution, the vision of a world without
exploitation, hunger and war galvanized the working class movement but
industrial capacity was unable to create the material conditions required for a
socialist economic system. The idea of socialism preceded the possibility. Today,
in this era of new technology the reverse is true. Now, the material conditions
for socialism exist, but the ideas are lagging behind. Socialism possible
today. The introduction of robotics and automation into production has created
the conditions for this abundance. In the 21st century, the global capitalist
system has reached a stage where goods can be produced with little or no labour.
A level of production has been achieved that makes a socialist society possible.
This is the turning point at which we stand today. Humanity today faces the
choice: will we do away with private property and build a future for all or
will a system of private property be preserved at the expense of human beings
and the planet? Technology is reducing a class that was once an essential
element of industrial production to redundancy. Attempts to do no more than
blunt the worst effects of capitalism may be well-meaning, but they divert
energy from the tasks ahead. The working class has nothing to gain from private
ownership of the means of production and needs to take the reins of power and
construct an economic system that can sustain a better world. The struggle
today is not the struggle of the last century to expand industrial production.
Nor is it reformist struggle to increase the crumbs that fall from the table of
the world’s billionaires. Though people may have different ideas about and
different ways of describing it, at this moment in history, the essence of
every struggle for a better life is objectively the struggle for socialism. Socialism
is not just an idea, but the practical resolution to immediate problems.
Imagine a society where all its members organise production
and distribution on a cooperative, democratic basis according not to profit,
but solely on the basis of need.
Such a society has no exploiting minority or exploited
majority. All property other than personal property is held in common, for the
benefit of all. Consequently, there is also no money. If you are hungry, you
can eat from the collective store of food. If you want to work, work is always
available, and each contributes what he or she can. When you are sick or old or
too young, society always takes care of you. Women are not the property or
handmaidens of men. All decisions are made collectively, and leadership is
chosen rather than imposed. There are no prisons, no standing army, and no
state bureaucracy. The threat of social ostracism is sufficient pressure
against anyone who threatens the collective or harms another. It is realisable.
The truth is, similar societies have already existed in one form or another, in
all parts of the world, in what is known as "primitive communism."
The words mine and thine were unknown. They held all things in common. Human
beings are naturally not greedy and competitive. There are plenty of examples
of spontaneous acts of sharing and cooperation in our present society that
contradict this. In a socialist society money, indeed, even a system for
accounting for what was produced and how it was allotted, would eventually
disappear. 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. The point
is that with socialism, society's surplus wealth would be collectively used to
enhance the welfare of all rather than that of a small group. Based as it is on
the collective solidarity of the producers, it would also be compelled to
socialize household functions, freeing women from bearing primary
responsibilities for taking care of kids and home, and create a society in
which all discrimination based on race, ethnicity, nationality, religion or sex
were erased.
The ethic of capitalism is: 'From each whatever you can get
out of him--to each whatever he can grab.' The socialist society of universal
abundance will be regulated by a different standard. It will 'From each according to his ability--to each
according to his needs.'"
No comments:
Post a Comment