Socialism

1. Utopian Socialists Critiqued Society But Lacked a Scientific Basis

To our three social reformers, the bourgeois world, based upon the principles of these philosophers, is quite as irrational and unjust, and, therefore, finds its way to the dust-hole quite as readily as feudalism and all the earlier stages of society.

Early critiques. Following the French Revolution, thinkers like Saint-Simon, Fourier, and Owen saw the failures of the new bourgeois society, which promised reason and justice but delivered inequality and misery. They sharply criticized the existing social order, exposing its moral and material flaws.

Ideal systems. These Utopians sought to replace the irrational system with a perfect social order conceived in their own minds. They developed detailed plans for ideal communities or societies, believing that these rational systems, once discovered, would simply need to be implemented through propaganda or model experiments to convince humanity of their truth.

Limitations. Despite their brilliant critiques and insights (like Saint-Simon's focus on the "most numerous and most poor class" or Fourier's analysis of civilization's contradictions), their approach was fundamentally unscientific. They saw their ideas as accidental discoveries of absolute truth, independent of historical development, rather than the necessary outcome of evolving material conditions and class struggles.

2. Dialectics: Understanding the World in Motion and Connection

Dialectics, on the other hand, comprehends things and their representations, ideas, in their essential connection, concatenation, motion, origin, and ending.

Beyond metaphysics. Traditional metaphysical thinking views things in isolation, as fixed and rigid entities, leading to rigid antitheses (yes/no, cause/effect). This approach struggles to grasp processes, change, and the interconnectedness of phenomena.

Nature's proof. Dialectics, revived by German philosophy culminating in Hegel, understands the world as a dynamic process of constant change, motion, and development, where opposites interpenetrate and transform. Modern science, from Darwin's evolution to the formation and death of celestial bodies, increasingly provides empirical proof that nature itself works dialectically.

Historical evolution. Applying dialectics to history reveals it not as a chaotic series of events, but as a process of evolution with underlying laws. This method allows for understanding the rise and fall of societies and ideas as interconnected stages in a continuous, dynamic flow, rather than static, isolated phenomena.

3. Historical Materialism: Economics Drives History, Not Ideas

From this point of view the final causes of all social changes and political revolutions are to be sought, not in men's brains, not in man's better insight into eternal truth and justice, but in changes in the modes of production and exchange.

The economic base. The materialist conception of history posits that the way society produces and exchanges goods forms the fundamental basis of its structure. This economic base determines the distribution of wealth, the division into classes, and ultimately shapes the legal, political, religious, philosophical, and other ideas (the superstructure) of any given historical period.

Driving force of change. Social changes and revolutions occur when the existing modes of production and exchange change, creating contradictions with the old social order and its institutions. The growing perception of injustice arises from these underlying economic shifts, not from the sudden discovery of eternal truths.

Finding solutions. Consequently, the means to resolve these social contradictions must be sought within the changed economic conditions themselves, not invented from abstract principles. This requires analyzing the specific historical and economic context to find the inherent potential for transformation.

4. Capitalism Arose from Feudalism by Socializing Production

The bourgeoisie broke up the feudal system and built upon its ruins the capitalist order of society, the kingdom of free competition, of personal liberty, of the equality, before the law, of all commodity owners, of all the rest of the capitalist blessings.

From petty production. Before capitalism, production was largely based on individual labor using small, owned tools (peasant agriculture, handicraft guilds). Producers owned their means of production and their product.

Bourgeoisie's role. The rising bourgeoisie historically transformed these scattered, limited means of production into large-scale, powerful forces (factories, machinery). This required concentrating the means of production and the laborers, turning individual production into social production involving many workers.

New social order. This process broke down the feudal system's restrictions (privileges, hereditary ties), establishing a society based on free competition and commodity exchange. The capitalist mode of production, once unleashed, developed productive forces with unprecedented speed and scale.

5. Capitalism's Core Contradiction: Social Production, Private Ownership

This contradiction, which gives to the new mode of production its capitalistic character, contains the germ of the whole of the social antagonisms of to-day.

The fundamental conflict. While the means of production and the act of production itself became increasingly socialized (requiring the cooperation of many workers in factories), the form of appropriation remained private. The capitalist, owning the means of production, appropriated the product created by the collective labor of others.

Source of antagonism. This inherent contradiction between socialized production and private capitalist appropriation is the root cause of modern social antagonisms. It creates the fundamental class division between the capitalists who own the means of production and the proletarians who own nothing but their labor power.

Growing incompatibility. As capitalist production expanded and socialized production dominated more industries, the incompatibility with the old form of private appropriation became more pronounced. This conflict is the driving force behind the struggles and instability within capitalist society.

6. Anarchy of Production Leads to Economic Crises

Anarchy reigns in socialized production.

Lack of planning. In a society based on commodity production and private ownership, there is no overall social plan for production. Individual producers (capitalists) produce in isolation, driven by competition and the desire for profit, without knowing the actual social demand or what others are producing.

Competition's chaos. Competition forces capitalists to constantly improve production methods and expand, intensifying this anarchy. While production within a factory is highly organized, production across society is chaotic and unplanned, governed by blind economic laws that act upon producers as external, coercive forces.

The product governs. This lack of social control means the products of labor, as commodities exchanged on the market, dictate the terms to the producers. The inherent laws of commodity production work themselves out destructively through competition and market fluctuations, leading to instability and periodic breakdowns.

7. Capitalism Itself Paves the Way for Social Ownership

This rebellion of the productive forces, as they grow more and more powerful, against their quality as capital... forces the capitalist class itself to treat them more and more as social productive forces, so far as this is possible under capitalist conditions.

Crises force socialization. The periodic crises of overproduction demonstrate that the capitalist system can no longer manage the productive forces it has created. These crises, along with the ruin of many capitalists, lead to the concentration of capital and the development of larger organizational forms.

New forms of ownership. Capitalism is compelled to adopt forms that partially recognize the social nature of production, such as joint-stock companies and trusts. These structures pool the means of production and distribution, managing them collectively, even though the ownership and appropriation of profits remain private.

Capitalist becomes superfluous. In these large organizations, the capitalist's function shifts from managing production to merely owning shares and collecting dividends. The actual work of directing production is done by salaried employees, demonstrating that the capitalist class is becoming economically unnecessary for the functioning of modern industry.

8. The Capitalist State Becomes the National Capitalist

The modern State, no matter what its form, is essentially a capitalist machine, the state of the capitalists, the ideal personification of the total national capital.

State as protector. The state in capitalist society serves primarily to protect the external conditions necessary for the capitalist mode of production against threats from workers or individual capitalists. It is an instrument of the capitalist class.

State ownership is not socialism. When productive forces grow too large or critical (like railways or telegraphs), the state may take them over. However, this state ownership under capitalism does not abolish the capitalist relation; it merely transforms the state into a collective capitalist, exploiting workers on a larger scale.

Technical step. State ownership is an economic advance only in that it represents a further technical step towards the socialization of productive forces. It brings the capitalist relation to a head, making the contradiction between social production and capitalist appropriation more obvious, but it is not the solution itself.

9. Socialism Resolves Capitalism's Contradictions Through Social Ownership

This solution can only consist in the practical recognition of the social nature of the modern forces of production, and therefore in the harmonizing the modes of production, appropriation, and exchange with the socialized character of the means of production.

Recognizing social nature. The resolution of capitalism's inherent contradictions requires society to consciously recognize and act upon the social nature of modern productive forces. This means aligning the way things are produced, appropriated, and exchanged with the fact that production is already a collective, social process.

Social appropriation. This can only be achieved by society as a whole taking direct possession and control of the means of production. Social ownership replaces private capitalist appropriation, ensuring that the products of social labor are appropriated socially, for the benefit of all.

Ending anarchy. By taking control of productive forces, society can replace the anarchy of capitalist production with conscious, planned organization. This eliminates the destructive cycles of crises and allows productive forces to be utilized rationally to meet social needs.

10. The State Withers Away as Class Antagonisms End

The first act by virtue of which the State really constitutes itself the representative of the whole of society—the taking possession of the means of production in the name of society—this is, at the same time, its last independent act as a State.

Historical role of the state. The state arose historically as an instrument of class rule, necessary to keep oppressed classes in check. It is essentially a power separate from and increasingly alienating itself from society.

End of class rule. When society takes possession of the means of production, it abolishes class distinctions and antagonisms. With the disappearance of classes and the anarchy of production, the need for a state power to suppress class conflict also disappears.

Administration of things. The government of persons is replaced by the administration of things and the direction of processes of production. The state does not "abolish" itself, but rather withers away as its historical function as an instrument of class oppression becomes obsolete in a classless society.

11. Humanity Moves from Necessity to Freedom

The conditions of existence which environ man, and which have hitherto ruled man, now pass under the dominion and control of man, who for the first time becomes the real, conscious lord of Nature, because he has now become master of his own social organization.

Realm of necessity. Throughout history, human society has largely been governed by blind, external forces – first natural, then economic laws under capitalism. People have been subject to circumstances they did not understand or control, living in a realm of necessity.

Conscious control. With the taking over of socialized production by society, humanity gains conscious control over its own social organization. The economic laws that previously acted blindly and destructively are now understood and directed by collective will.

Realm of freedom. This transition marks humanity's leap from the realm of necessity to the realm of freedom. Freed from the constraints and contradictions of capitalism, and having mastered their social relations, humans can fully develop their potential and consciously shape their own history.

Last updated: May 4, 2025