Anger at capitalism is growing daily. Human beings are
losers. We have lost families, friends and our communities. Have we also now
lost our will to fight back? Capitalism’s days are numbered. Across the world,
millions of people have taken to the streets against austerity, injustice and
endless war. Capitalism has far outlived any usefulness. Under capitalism, people
have no future beyond wage slavery and poverty. Socialism as a possibility will
exist so long as capitalism persists as a reality. To build unity and
solidarity, we need a vision for the future. One vision of socialism is the
expansion of democratic decision-making into the economy, the common ownership
of resources and free access to goods and services based on need. In other
words, making the worker and community control over production a reality. It is
clear that the world as a whole is becoming one community, or at least needs to
be seen and treated as one. The human species needs socialism not only to
realise all its potentials but to survive.
Marx used 'socialism' and 'communism' as synonymous terms,
both referring to the same kind of society, that is, a 'cooperative society' or
'association' based on 'free associated labour'. Marx nowhere speaks of 'socialism' as a
distinct stage or social formation or of 'transition between socialism and
communism'. For Marx, as the new society
emerges from the capitalist society itself, the former is obviously an integral
part of the same new society, being its 'first phase' only chronologically,
with the specific kind of developments corresponding to it. For him between
capitalism and communism lies no stage or stages, only a transition, more or
less prolonged according to circumstances. That there is no fore-ordained model or
blueprint of socialism or socialist transition, certainly none suitable for all
countries and all times, does not mean absence of general principles. Marx was
no determinist. For Marx socialism is nothing inevitable, it is something to be
struggled for. Thus there are no guarantees of victory; only alternatives, one
being the mutual ruination of the contending classes, the total destruction of
humanity summed up by Rosa Luxemburg as 'socialism or barbarism'. Optimistically,
Marx gave capitalism a short lease of life, looking forward to an early
revolution in Europe and, therefore, Marx never explored the possibility of
this imminent threat hanging over the future of humankind. This makes the
struggle for socialism all the more imperative and urgent today.
However, capitalism continues to survive, but this, by
itself, cannot be seen as an argument for the desirability, or a sign of the
progressiveness of the capitalist order. Capitalism is a system that is
chronically diseased by pathological inflictions which manifest themselves
variously in different places as racism, sexism, anti-semitism, xenophobia,
ethnic or national hatreds, fundamentalism and intolerance, even as plain
cruelty and criminal aggression.
Poverty, unemployment and insecurity-related crimes and associated
phenomena – ill-health and suicides, alcoholism and drug addiction, violence
against women and child abuse, etc. -- are on the rise everywhere. The introduction
of new technology and communication have become the means of debasing people's
understanding and preventing them from looking beyond the capitalist horizon of
a consumerist paradise of instant gratification. Gone is the aspiration for a
life which would fulfil basic human needs -- decent livelihood, knowledge,
solidarity, cooperation with fellow human beings, job satisfaction at work and
freedom from unnecessary drudgery and toil. Today’s society is sick and who can
deny that diagnosis but it lingers on in its putrefying decay. Socialism will always
remain on the agenda wherever capitalism exists, be it 'developed', 'under-developed',
'developing' or any other part of the world. Socialists say surely it is people
and not 'economic growth' and GDP that must come first in society. Socialism is a humane society that fosters
cooperation, solidarity and respect and makes for a non-alienated, 'truly rich
human life' that Marx spoke of. Of
course, such a world cannot be achieved without basic material conditions being
met but to believe that you can assure satisfy the majority of people through
greed, private acquisition, competition and rivalry-- the values of capitalism
-- and yet still hope for a humane society of cooperation and solidarity is
utopianism of the worst kind. As human beings, people simply don't fit into the
capitalist market exchange economy. Capitalism has to go. No matter how slowly
or haltingly we must strive and struggle for our emancipatory vision of
socialism. Just as there is no single model of socialism, one that is suitable
for all climes and all times, there is none of socialist politics either. The specific conditions or demands and the
forms of struggle they generate will vary from country to country. Which, however, also again, does not mean the
absence of general principles to guide it. The application of these principles
is in fact a must for any successful pursuit of socialist politics today. Socialism
is the only just, rational and sustainable future for the people of the world
and that this future has to be struggled for here and now.
Socialism is a difficult word to define, especially given
the various countries that have called themselves "socialist" at one
point or another in time. Many people believe socialism only means government
nationalization of the means of production, which is a definition we in the
World Socialist Movement distance ourselves from. Socialism isn't something
that can be summed up in one sentence. Socialism is about radical democracy. It
would give people democratic control over political as well as economic
matters, rather than the system we have now that concentrates the control of
these areas into the hands of a small group of people at the top of the
socio-economic ladder. It means giving you control over your workplace rather
than in the hands of some board of trustees, the stock holders, or the
bureaucrat official in a government ministry who are only interested in profit
and not your livelihood. Within socialism people have the right to a job , decent housing, health care, education, etc. Socialism means common ownership, and
democratic control by the people, of the factories, farms, mines, offices and
all other industries and services, a moneyless wageless stateless commonwealth.
But if you need just one sentence, there is the old adage: "From each
according to ability, to each according to needs." Or in two words –
People Power. The workers must prepare themselves for their emancipation by
class-conscious organisation on both the political and the economic fields for
the establishment of socialism. The Socialist Party never asserted that
socialist society would result from the actions of parliamentary delegates
alone.
The most common argument against a moneyless society is that
money seems to be the only effective regulating force which can prevent
wastage. This may be the case in a money-driven society, where everything is
evaluated by its price-tag, and the manner in which we deal with things is
determined to a big extent by the monetary value. The higher the price, the
bigger the value, the more one takes care of it; the lower the price, the lower
the value, resulting in indifference and carelessness; this is the mechanism of
a money-based society. But in a moneyless society the rules of a money-driven
society do not apply anymore. You cannot predict behaviour patterns in a
moneyless society by the rules of a money-driven society. In the usual
money-based society the individual has the right to do whatever he wants with
his financial resources. He sees everything through the perspective of its
price. And if he has enough money, why not afford something which makes life
more convenient or nice? And if something is cheap or free of charge, why
bother about it? In this attitude the typical individual is fully justified in
a money-based state of life.
But if we try to install a moneyless society around the
world, then this attitude of course has to change, and will change. Once it is
clear that electricity, water or food is a common commodity, which is free for
all, but which has a cost for the community, then the justification for a
non-caring attitude is gone. Today the fact that somebody pays for his
electricity gives him the right to use it as he wants. Nobody can say anything,
and he may feel himself fully justified in using it carelessly, or with care.
This attitude of a money-based approach is of course stillexists within today’s
society, since we still have a money-based society. But once we no longer have
it, this attitude will change. Even the richest of the rich then won’t be able
to treat the common commodities carelessly anymore, because they will no longer
be “his electricity”, “his water”, “his food”, etc, that he is using. He will
use a collective value and be forced to cherish it. There may be people who
won’t like it that their electricity or water or food comes free, because it
takes away their justification to use it as they like. Responsibility for the
collective is inevitable in a collective based economy.
We therefore do not think that individuals will start
wasting common commodities with indifference once he or she no longer feels any
personal financial disadvantage in doing so. Some people may claim that a
person will leave their light on when they leave the house, their windows open
with air conditioners running, etc, once electricity is free. Such a claim can
only be based on the assumption that the average-person is a careless,
unconscious person who is not interested in anything but their own personal
advantage. We do not think that this is true.
.Attempts to install a money-less approach within a
money-driven society cannot work. As long as the basic thought and behaviour
pattern is still money-based, you cannot expect a consciousness to come up. The
basic idea of a money-less economy is that the motivation to work, to care, to
make an effort, does not originate from a desire for money. If we want to
install a money-less economy on a money-based consciousness we will fail.