What is socialism?
Article in Spectre 5/1998, p. 22
What is socialism? The answer remains open. The modern Left cannot accept the old
Marxist-Leninist concept. Socialism ā la Soviet Union was state-owned land and means of
production, centralized state planning system, media censorship and the political
dictatorship of one (communist) party with the support of secret police and army.
 The Prague Spring was
supposed to be an introduction to "human" socialism. It declared an end to
censorship, but all the other characteristics of socialism were maintained. Today we can
be wise after the event and find that socialism ā la Soviet Union would not have lasted
through even the limited experiment of Prague. The invasion of Czechoslovakia merely
prolonged the agony.
This does not mean that the Left should abandon socialism, a rational faith that gives
us the strength to believe that there still exist unexplored potentials of human progress.
We must, however, be prepared to define our terms and explain ourselves. The traditional
view of socialism, that it denies the right to all kinds of private property, has created
enormous resistance. Thus, when we argue in favour, not of an end to private property, but
of the nationalisation of major enterprises, of banks, insurance companies and large-scale
production, we must be prepared to explain our aspirations - what afterwards.
The Right, those reactionaries who gain from the status quo wish to see the logic of
capital unaltered and the functioning of the economy unchanged. The Left must, on the
contrary, stand for change. Our challenge is to find a recipe to change the logic of
capital and to develop the philosophical underpinnings of a new social order. To do this,
the Left needs to define its own progressive values, the ways in which they differ from
those of the power elite. Neo-socialism must accommodate a moral ethos which recognises
the importance of the individual and of pluralism. Time has, in any case, undermined the
authority of those labour movement leaders whose power is based on poorly-understood
collectivistic concepts defined by themselves. Workers are individuals, not passively
obedient followers of corporatist leaders.
The most promising criterion for a new self-understanding on the part of the Left is
democracy. Reactionary people share a determinism which accepts exploitation. The Left
must confront current developments which allow markets to be viewed as beyond the reach of
democracy. For us there is no other alternative but to be democratic within our own group
and to be worthy of trust in all our acts and words. Socialism is democracy?
To give a concrete example, the European Left needs to define its relationship to the
EU and develop a common analysis of global capitalism. We in the North of Europe have
sought to defend democracy, which, according to our experience, can be achieved only at
the national level. The federalists who are aiming for a United States of Europe can give
no proper answer to the question of how supranational democracy would work. Nevertheless,
we have to face up to the present imbalance caused by the national nature of politics and
the supranational nature of private ownership.
The EU in its present form is advancing values that are totally opposed to the Left's
thinking. The free movement of capitals is accepted, whilst the EU's system of justice is
governed by capitalistic logic. According to this the "invisible hand" of the
market controls the system.
At present, what might be called "electronic" and "real time"
capitalism has been functioning better than ever, enabling capital to search the world for
the best returns. Globally, daily currency flows are sixty times more than it is needed
for world trade transactions. The world has become a global casino. Real property has been
divided into small portions which, with the aid of financial instruments (shares, futures,
options, indexes) can be multiply owned and repeatedly traded. Sky- rocketing profits have
lost their track of their origin in human labour. We must face the fact that capital is
living its own life, independent of the real economy.
The Left must, regrettably, accept the fact that no one knows, for the time being,
either how to restrict the free movement of capital or how to add social responsibility to
its logic. Tobin's proposed transaction tax would not solve the problem of tax havens, and
there is no solution in practice to the question of how to create an effective worldwide
tax system.
In these circumstances, where the definition of socialism is unclear, we must face the
problem that the Left has no alternative to global capitalism. There is no way back to a
one party system or to centralized planning. Perhaps global capitalism can only be
suffocated by its own bubble logic, for example by a stock market crash.
If the Left demands revolution, which is not credible, we have to know - what
afterwards? But we do not have an answer to that question. While we are searching for the
alternative, we can share some common targets which are useful in constructing an
all-European progressive movement. The Left must pronounce against unsustainable global
development by "greening" social thinking. We must demand shortening of working
hours, a social Europe, justice and equal opportunities, and meet the challenge of
creating international and national solidarity against racism. We need to know whether we
want freedom from the state or freedom within one, and indeed, what the federal state is.
Antonio Gramsci wrote about "pessimism of reason and optimism of will". What
he meant by this was that one must have the will and the strength to work within the
present structures. We need critical reason to analyse the actual state of affairs and
good will (based on humanistic values) to create a new progressive order. At present, the
reason is pessimistic, and this is dangerous. The combination of optimism of will and
pessimism of reason defines the present crisis of humanism. Humanism has drifted into a
defensive position in the face of market economy totalitarianism. There are no socialistic
but only humanistic values?
A counter attack for sovereignty of nation-states, coupled with closer cooperation,
must be launched. It is a fight for democracy.
| 