The twin brother of communism and socialism can be understood only from this. The term is used by Marx and Engels in their Manifesto, to distinguish right from socialism, which in their view, it is gentrified away from the reality of the factories.
12.1. Socialism and Communism
Backed by thinkers such as Owen, Saint-Simon, Fourier and Proudhon, and having roots in the Stoic-Cynic philosophy and early Christianity, the socialist ideology spreads around the middle of the eighteenth century to establish itself in a concrete manner after the fall of Napoleon, when the socio-political field is occupied by two main currents: the conservatives, who support capitalism, and that of the reformists, which differ in individualistic or anarchists, and anti-individualistic or social-communists.
Socialism hopes a strong, centralized state, which has the means of production, programs, economic activities and the distribution of jobs, and implement measures to help the lower classes in order to reduce differences in wealth. In other words, the socialist state must be present and intervene heavily in the society to plan activities economic, ensuring full employment, protect the most vulnerable and create conditions for a strong egalitarianism. In general, socialism includes a diverse set of doctrines that place on top of the scale of values \u200b\u200band prefer "the purpose and collective behavior exasperated against utilitarianism individual or group's own capitalist market" (Degl'Innocenti 1998: 63).
A central theme in social thought is the institution of private property, which is seen differently by different thinkers. In addition to extreme forms of socialism, which wants the abolition of private property (Babeuf, Blanqui, Cabet, Owen), there are others are content with a substantial limitation of the property itself (Fourier, Proudhon), and others who support comprehensive reform in the collective sense (Saint-Simon, Marx), although there are kind of liberal positions, which justify fully the properties , albeit with a particular emphasis on the welfare state.
Even Communism is a political doctrine based on the centrality of state: the means of production and production activities are all state-owned, individual initiative is minimized, pluralism is weak, private ownership is collective, the differences in social status of citizens is minimal. For the communist equality is the supreme value and strive for collective ownership of the tool for a harmonious social life. "From each according to his ability and to each according to his needs", this is the supreme principle which is based on communism.
"The core idea of \u200b\u200bcommunism is that the economic mechanisms stemming from private property, the resulting social relations, political institutions that govern them and the legal systems that protect them, necessarily produce a structural inequality between men 's many of oppression and privilege of the few, that equality constitutes the supreme value and purpose, and to achieve the latter should be a total subversion of the foundations of society, which introduces the collective ownership "(Salvador, 1992: 188-9). Although it considers that private ownership is "the matrix of all social ills" (Salvador, 1992: 189), communism is not opposed to any kind of private property, but only one that goes beyond the actual production capacity, control and use by the owner. According to Marx, "what distinguishes communism is not the abolition of property generally, but the abolition of bourgeois property" (from GROUP 1969: 194), namely the ownership of the means of production, they use a few rich to subjugate and exploit the majority of the poor.
12.2. Social History of Communism-Communism and socialism
come together in the eighteenth century in response to social problems posed by the industrial revolution, and for several decades, the two terms are used interchangeably. The rift between the two ideologies occurs on two occasions: the first time in Germany (1914), the second time in Russia (1921). C. The
has attracted attention worldwide as a valid form of government, an alternative to capitalism, from Lenin, the Bolshevik Revolution who wanted to make the political model of a global hegemon. Lenin's plan should be conducted in two phases: the first phase is the so-called dictatorship of the proletariat, the second stage of the socialist democracy or popular. In reality, there has been neither the one nor the other, but rather a dictatorship of the proletariat made by the one-party communist and authoritarian Stalinist regime.
"In the so-called communist people's democracy - it is sad to say - the people and freedom were more absent than they were in bourgeois democracy" (SCHIAVONE 2001: 285). Moreover, communism has not promoted economic development and well-being comparable to those of capitalism. In contrast, in countries where it was the government, socialism has allowed a high human development index, a good quality of social services and a lower level of inequality, even if it has not been able to substantially change the balance of class, which were typical of liberal republics.
In 1989, the Soviet communist system collapsed, and two years later, the USSR dissolved, giving way to a Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS), which showed a trend toward westernized. Even the communists have other models proved to hold its own against the capitalist society or to be able to achieve the same level of welfare for citizens, and so communism was eclipsed by the political landscape.
12.3. The communist systems
There is no single model Communist politician, but a number of variants of the same interpretation. Here I limit myself to a nod to the Soviet system and Italian. The Soviet Communist
model is built around the thought of Marx, Engels, Lenin and a few others. Marx is convinced that: 1) man can not be an atom (atoms do not need this), that the isolated individual is an invention of the utilitarian theory, there is no individual who has not been generated and shaped by a company, which is precisely its social character that distinguishes man from animals, 2) that "history is nothing but the process in which humans create and continually meet their needs "(Giddens 1998: 57), 3) that private property is not derived from a natural state, but it is cultural acquisition, 4) that" the classes begin to appear only when the surplus wealth created by the private becomes appropriate enough for a group that is reproduced by co-optation can be clearly separate from the mass of producers "(Giddens 1998: 63), 5) that" all ruling classes claim that ideology is universal legitimizes their position of dominance "(Giddens 1998: 89), 6) that economic power is the basis of politics.
Marx is also convinced that: 1) capitalist exploitation is a necessary phase of social development, 2) that the socialist revolution can begin only when capitalism has reached its maturity, that is, when the middle classes will have disappeared and that they front of a small number of big capitalists and the great mass of proletarians, 3) that, once started, the revolution will take on international dimensions and will take place in two stages: first, it will establish the dictatorship of the proletariat, after all, nothing is a form of oppression of the working class to the bourgeoisie, while the second will come to the elimination of social classes and the affirmation society without property and without the state, where the protagonist is the individual, now made ripe thanks to the emancipation of religion, and the formula governing the DD. Marx, therefore, "had identified the direct democratic mandate with the new form of government that would rise from the ashes of representative democracy degenerated into personal rule" (Bobbio 1999: 53).
The intention of Lenin and Trotsky, the Bolshevik Revolution would spread to the whole world, or at least to a large number of countries, creating a new culture and a new lifestyle filled with the common principles. If the revolution was limited to Russia and its satellites, accordance with the above, it would be in degeneration and failure. However, when the facts show that the international revolution is an unrealistic goal, Stalin shall transform the Bolshevik Leninist movement in nationalist ideology and implement: 1) a rigid central planning economy, 2) the forced collectivization of land, 3 a) a police repression of political opponents, 4) heightened militarization of the industry, 5) the centralization of all powers in his hands.
the individual reason, the c. supersedes the right of the collective. The end result is gigantism of the party which dominates all the shrinkage of the individual citizen. The values that matter, for c. (Equality, justice, solidarity, courage, generosity, altruism, etc..) Are not born but rather by the individual, namely, the party that interprets the meaning. These values \u200b\u200bare down, they are supra. For the c. is the party that operates the distinction between good and evil and set a moral code.
The principles of communism are clearly set out in the Constitution of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (1936) and are essentially two. The first is the idea that private ownership is "the matrix of all social ills" (Salvador, 1992: 189). "The idea Communism is the central economic mechanisms stemming from private property [...] produce necessarily a structural inequality between men, many of oppression and privilege of the few "(Salvador, 1992: 188). Here then is the need to abolish the private ownership of means of production (Article 4), in the hope that this is sufficient to eliminate the exploitation of man by man (art. 4). The second common principle is represented by the work: "Who does not work, do not eat '(Article 12). Lacking in communism the unconditional recognition of the right to a dignified life of the individual. The state controls the Soviet Communist
the economy and all forms of communication, distributed work, sets salary levels and ensure that nobody is deprived of the minimum for subsistence. The communist society "must keep all its members, regardless of the total production of the work" (COLE 1976: 182). It, therefore, has among its purposes include "to give all members a fair chance of life, protecting them from unnecessary suffering, and gently help those who suffer from their sins" (COLE 1976: 184). The result is that the level of unemployment is among the lowest, although this does not mean that people are well located.
"In the Soviet Union the most coarse offenses against the human spirit are common: censorship and thought control, prosecution fraudulently on the basis of false accusations, constant intimidation such as to demean any citizen who would otherwise be able to think for themselves, a semi-secret world of special privileges for the elite of a system that professes egalitarian but does not provide even adequate medical care to the population, accompanied by widespread alcoholism of mass hooliganism. And the list is far from over "(Lindblom 1979: 264).
The model emerges from the Italian Communist program with which the PCI is presented to the Italians in 1946, the eve of the election of the Constituent Assembly. The Communist Party aims to establish "a democratic republic of workers of the arm and the mind, straight with representative parliamentary system, on which are guaranteed and defended the fundamental freedoms of citizens, freedom of speech, conscience, press, worship, of association and political propaganda, association and religion, the deletion of all forms of political and legal inferiority of women, both opened the way for the realization of the right of every citizen to work, rest, education and social insurance. To achieve full recovery and for the defense of national independence, the Communist Party advocates a foreign policy of peace, respect for human rights of all nations, organized collaboration with all peoples and in particular with the neighboring countries. [...]. Claim for municipalities and other local administrative autonomy [...]. In the industrial field the Communist Party is proposing the nationalization of large groups of monopoly, the big banks and insurance companies, a beginning of national planning and the establishment of a national monitoring system of production [...]. In agriculture the Communist Party is proposing the liquidation of large estates assenteistica (estate), the limitation of the big capitalist property [...], resulting in the defense of small and medium property "(TOGLIATTI 1997: 98-101). As a result, the image of a party oriented to distribute land to the peasants in the state to intervene in the productive sectors of the country and to implement a policy in favor of the weaker classes (welfare), but at the same time, respect the democratic rights of citizens, as any of the Liberal Party.
12.4 Communism today
What is Communism today? This is really over or a doctrine that may still have some meaning for us? The major criticism that continues to move towards the c. not so much Marxist economic analysis, which seems correct, because the forward-looking statements made by Marx, who could not be substantiated, although this may be, at least in part, charged to factors outside the Marxist doctrine. Among other things, Marx predicted that workers would be exploited more and more until it was forced to live in poverty. If this is not the case it is also due to the fact that, thanks to the work of trade unions, the introduction of certain adjustments, such as antitrust laws, and the welfare state, the pure capitalism does not exist today in any part of the planet. Marx had also predicted that socialism would reverse the relationship and to put human values \u200b\u200bfirst and second ones of the plant. Today we see that the Marxist regime countries have made economic conditions worse for employees than in capitalist countries. Again, one can observe that, in any country, the principles of Marxism has been put into practice fairly and consistently. Marx also foresaw the emergence of dictatorship of the proletariat, which had to be some sort of direct democracy, whose main task would have been to overthrow the bourgeois supremacy and, subsequently, a stateless and classless society based on equality of all and community property (communism), where the state would be confined to administrative functions and the central subject of the individual companies would be fully developed to its full potential. In this respect, the facts have shown that predictions Marx did not materialize and now are many who believe that they are not feasible, nor desirable.
Marx also served on the side to criticism about his conception of history, which is derived from Hegel (the story would have its own personality, its own rules and its own development, which are independent and higher-level to the individual sphere). According to Weber, the principles expressed by Marx does not constitute a universal law and are valid only in a particular historical period and in a particular culture. It is a mistake then Marx, Weber continues to conceive of the historical development only in economic, because there are other factors that influence the story, like religion, whose character is not primarily economic.
Beyond the limits of socialist ideology and historical experience of c., Marxist economic analysis is still valid and all the problems that revolve around it and who have not yet found a solution. The center is Communism failed, of course, but it is no longer needed to find answers to the questions it raised. And here's why, even today, Marxism can not be considered dead. On it there are still conflicting views of all: on the one hand there are those who consider the most pernicious theory that has ever been proposed, others, the neo-Marxist, continue to defend him, saying that has never been tested properly. C. The
, therefore, has light and dark, but not a "black hole", a bubo to be eradicated, certainly has some positive aspects that may still be useful for a possible new historical experience. Perhaps the c. is not dead, and perhaps could return to life. This is the point of view of neo-Marxism.
12.5. Neo-Marxism
Similarly the elite, the neo-Marxist, as R. Miliband, N. Poulantzas and Ch Lindblom, argue that political power is in the hands of a few rich, but, unlike the elitists, they feel that this is neither good nor fair. According to the N., there are two powers (the politics and economics), presenting this important difference: while politicians have to account to the electorate, which is regularly called upon to express their opinion through a vote, employers not only have no responsibility to the people, but since they provide employment for many citizens, are considered socially meritorious and the state is induced to protect and encourage them. In so doing, the State ceases to be an impartial referee between the interests of all citizens and ends to favor the business world. It follows that the rich do not only influence policy but are also from this award, becoming rich and powerful.
12.6. Advantages and limitations
The main advantage of the c. can be shown that, at least in theory, it is based on an economic analysis is still valid and that his ideal of justice is compatible with democratic political type.
The main limitation comes from the way in which the communist governments actually have interpreted the communist spirit, in practice, they have come to assume an attitude of paternalistic and, on the pretext of having to look after the welfare of citizens, have done well to deny democratic rights and to lead their country in an authoritarian manner, and degrades the values \u200b\u200bof social justice contained in their political programs.
0 comments:
Post a Comment