Socialism is a political, social and economic philosophy encompassing a range of economic and social systems characterized by social ownership of the means of production and workers’ self-management of enterprises. It includes the political theories and movements associated with such systems. Social ownership can be public, collective, cooperative or of equity. While no single definition encapsulates many types of socialism, social ownership is the one common element.
Socialist systems are divided into non-market and market forms. Non-market socialism substitutes factor markets and money with integrated economic planning and engineering or technical criteria based on calculation performed in-kind, thereby producing a different economic mechanism that functions according to different economic laws and dynamics than those of capitalism. A non-market socialist system eliminates the inefficiencies and crises traditionally associated with capital accumulation and the profit system in capitalism. The socialist calculation debate, originated by the economic calculation problem, concerns the feasibility and methods of resource allocation for a planned socialist system. By contrast, market socialism retains the use of monetary prices, factor markets and in some cases the profit motive, with respect to the operation of socially owned enterprises and the allocation of capital goods between them. Profits generated by these firms would be controlled directly by the workforce of each firm or accrue to society at large in the form of a social dividend.
Socialist politics has been both internationalist and nationalist in orientation; organized through political parties and opposed to party politics; at times overlapping with trade unions and at other times independent and critical of them; and present in both industrialized and developing nations. Social democracy originated within the socialist movement, supporting economic and social interventions to promote social justice. While retaining socialism as a long-term goal, since the post-war period it has come to embrace a Keynesian mixed economy within a predominantly developed capitalist market economy and liberal democratic polity that expands state intervention to include income redistribution, regulation and a welfare state. Economic democracy proposes a sort of market socialism, with more democratic control of companies, currencies, investments and natural resources.
The socialist political movement includes a set of political philosophies that originated in the revolutionary movements of the mid-to-late 18th century and out of concern for the social problems that were associated with capitalism. By the late 19th century, after the work of Karl Marx and his collaborator Friedrich Engels, socialism had come to signify opposition to capitalism and advocacy for a post-capitalist system based on some form of social ownership of the means of production. By the 1920s, communism and social democracy had become the two dominant political tendencies within the international socialist movement, with socialism itself becoming the most influential secular movement of the 20th century. Socialist parties and ideas remain a political force with varying degrees of power and influence on all continents, heading national governments in many countries around the world. Today, many socialists have also adopted the causes of other social movements such as environmentalism, feminism and progressivism.
While the emergence of the Soviet Union as the world’s first nominally socialist state led to socialism’s widespread association with the Soviet economic model, some economists and intellectuals argued that in practice the model functioned as a form of state capitalism or a non-planned administrative or command economy. Academics, political commentators and other scholars tend to distinguish between authoritarian socialist and democratic socialist states, with the first representing the Soviet Bloc and the latter representing Western Bloc countries which have been democratically governed by socialist parties such as Britain, France, Sweden and Western social-democracies in general, among others.
For Andrew Vincent, “[t]he word ‘socialism’ finds its root in the Latin sociare, which means to combine or to share. The related, more technical term in Roman and then medieval law was societas. This latter word could mean companionship and fellowship as well as the more legalistic idea of a consensual contract between freemen”.
Socialism was coined by Henri de Saint-Simon, one of the founders of what would later be labelled utopian socialism. Simon contrasted it to the liberal doctrine of individualism that emphasized the moral worth of the individual whilst stressing that people act or should act as if they are in isolation from one another. The original utopian socialists condemned this doctrine of individualism for failing to address social concerns during the Industrial Revolution, including poverty, oppression and vast inequalities in wealth. They viewed their society as harming community life by basing society on competition. They presented socialism as an alternative to liberal individualism based on the shared ownership of resources. Saint-Simon proposed economic planning, scientific administration and the application of scientific understanding to the organization of society. By contrast, Robert Owen proposed to organize production and ownership via cooperatives. Socialism is also attributed in France to Pierre Leroux and Marie Roch Louis Reybaud while in Britain it is associated to Owen, who became one of the fathers of the cooperative movement.
The definition and usage of socialism settled by the 1860s, replacing associationist, co-operative and mutualist that had been used as synonyms while communism fell out of use during this period. An early distinction between communism and socialism was that the latter aimed to only socialise production while the former aimed to socialize both production and consumption (in the form of free access to final goods). By 1888, Marxists employed socialism in place of communism as the latter had come to be considered an old-fashion synonym for socialism. It was not until after the Bolshevik Revolution that socialism was appropriated by Vladimir Lenin to mean a stage between capitalism and communism. He used it to defend the Bolshevik program from Marxist criticism that Russia’s productive forces were not sufficiently developed for communism. The distinction between communism and socialism became salient in 1918 after the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party renamed itself to the All-Russian Communist Party, interpreting communism specifically to mean socialists who supported the politics and theories of Bolshevism, Leninism and later that of Marxism–Leninism, although communist parties continued to describe themselves as socialists dedicated to socialism. According to The Oxford Handbook of Karl Marx, “Marx used many terms to refer to a post-capitalist society—positive humanism, socialism, Communism, realm of free individuality, free association of producers, etc. He used these terms completely interchangeably. The notion that ‘socialism’ and ‘Communism’ are distinct historical stages is alien to his work and only entered the lexicon of Marxism after his death”.
In Christian Europe, communists were believed to have adopted atheism. In Protestant England, communism was too close to the Roman Catholic communion rite, hence socialist was the preferred term. Engels argued that in 1848, when The Communist Manifesto was published, socialism was respectable in Europe while communism was not. The Owenites in England and the Fourierists in France were considered respectable socialists while working-class movements that “proclaimed the necessity of total social change” denoted themselves communists. This branch of socialism produced the communist work of Étienne Cabet in France and Wilhelm Weitling in Germany. British moral philosopher John Stuart Mill discussed a form of economic socialism within a liberal context that would later be known as liberal socialism. In later editions of his Principles of Political Economy (1848), Mill further argued that “as far as economic theory was concerned, there is nothing in principle in economic theory that precludes an economic order based on socialist policies” and promoted substituting capitalist businesses with worker cooperatives. While democrats looked to the Revolutions of 1848 as a democratic revolution which in the long run ensured liberty, equality and fraternity, Marxists denounced it as a betrayal of working-class ideals by a bourgeoisie indifferent to the proletariat.
Socialist models and ideas espousing common or public ownership have existed since antiquity. The economy of the 3rd century BCE Mauryan Empire of India was described as “a socialized monarchy” and “a sort of state socialism”. Elements of socialist thought were discerned in the politics of classical Greek philosophers Plato and Aristotle. Mazdak the Younger (died c. 524 or 528 CE), a Persian communal proto-socialist, instituted communal possessions and advocated the public good. Abu Dharr al-Ghifari, a Companion of Muhammad, is credited by multiple authors as a principal antecedent of Islamic socialism. The teachings of Jesus are frequently described as socialist, especially by Christian socialists. Acts 4:35 records that in the early church in Jerusalem “[n]o one claimed that any of their possessions was their own”, although the pattern soon disappears from church history except within monasticism. Christian socialism was one of the founding threads of the British Labour Party and is claimed to begin with the uprising of Wat Tyler and John Ball in the 14th century CE. After the French Revolution, activists and theorists such as François-Noël Babeuf, Étienne-Gabriel Morelly, Philippe Buonarroti and Auguste Blanqui influenced the early French labour and socialist movements. In Britain, Thomas Paine proposed a detailed plan to tax property owners to pay for the needs of the poor in Agrarian Justice while Charles Hall wrote The Effects of Civilization on the People in European States, denouncing capitalism’s effects on the poor of his time. This work influenced the utopian schemes of Thomas Spence.
The first self-conscious socialist movements developed in the 1820s and 1830s. Fourierists, Owenites and Saint-Simonians and provided a series of analyses and interpretations of society. Especially the Owenites overlapped with other working-class movements such as the Chartists in the United Kingdom. The Chartists gathered significant numbers around the People’s Charter of 1838 which sought democratic reforms focused on the extension of suffrage to all male adults. Leaders in the movement called for a more equitable distribution of income and better living conditions for the working classes. The first trade unions and consumer cooperative societies followed the Chartist movement. Pierre-Joseph Proudhon proposed his philosophy of mutualism in which “everyone had an equal claim, either alone or as part of a small cooperative, to possess and use land and other resources as needed to make a living”. Other currents inspired Christian socialism “often in Britain and then usually coming out of left liberal politics and a romantic anti-industrialism” which produced theorists such as Edward Bellamy, Charles Kingsley and Frederick Denison Maurice.
The first advocates of socialism favored social levelling in order to create a meritocratic or technocratic society based on individual talent. Henri de Saint-Simon was fascinated by the potential of science and technology and advocated a socialist society that would eliminate the disorderly aspects of capitalism based on equal opportunities.[unreliable source?] He sought a society in which each person was ranked according to his or her capacities and rewarded according to his or her work. His key focus was on administrative efficiency and industrialism and a belief that science was essential to progress. This was accompanied by a desire for a rationally organized economy based on planning and geared towards large-scale scientific and material progress. Other early socialist thinkers such as Charles Hall and Thomas Hodgkin based their ideas on David Ricardo‘s economic theories. They reasoned that the equilibrium value of commodities approximated prices charged by the producer when those commodities were in elastic supply and that these producer prices corresponded to the embodied labour—the cost of the labor (essentially the wages paid) that was required to produce the commodities. The Ricardian socialists viewed profit, interest and rent as deductions from this exchange-value.
West European social critics, including Louis Blanc, Charles Fourier, Charles Hall, Robert Owen, Pierre-Joseph Proudhon and Saint-Simon were the first modern socialists who criticized the poverty and inequality of the Industrial Revolution. They advocated reform, Owen advocating the transformation of society to small communities without private property. Owen’s contribution to modern socialism was his claim that individual actions and characteristics were largely determined by their social environment. On the other hand, Fourier advocated Phalanstères (communities that respected individual desires, including sexual preferences), affinities and creativity and saw that work has to be made enjoyable for people. Owen and Fourier’s ideas were practiced in intentional communities around Europe and North America in the mid-19th century.
The Paris Commune was a government that ruled Paris from 18 March (formally, from 28 March) to 28 May 1871. The Commune was the result of an uprising in Paris after France was defeated in the Franco-Prussian War. The Commune elections were held on 26 March. They elected a Commune council of 92 members, one member for each 20,000 residents. Despite internal differences, the council began to organize public services. It reached a consensus on certain policies that tended towards a progressive, secular and highly democratic social democracy.
Because the Commune was able to meet on fewer than 60 days in total, only a few decrees were actually implemented. These included the separation of church and state; the remission of rents owed for the period of the siege (during which payment had been suspended); the abolition of night work in the hundreds of Paris bakeries; the granting of pensions to the unmarried companions and children of National Guards killed on active service; and the free return of all workmen’s tools and household items valued up to 20 francs that had been pledged during the siege. The Commune was concerned that skilled workers had been forced to pawn their tools during the war; the postponement of commercial debt obligations and the abolition of interest on the debts; and the right of employees to take over and run an enterprise if it were deserted by its owner. The Commune nonetheless recognized the previous owner’s right to compensation.
In 1864, the First International was founded in London. It united diverse revolutionary currents, including socialists such as the French followers of Proudhon, Blanquists, Philadelphes, English trade unionists and social democrats. In 1865 and 1866, it held a preliminary conference and had its first congress in Geneva, respectively. Due to their wide variety of philosophies, conflict immediately erupted. The first objections to Marx came from the mutualists who opposed state socialism. Shortly after Mikhail Bakunin and his followers joined in 1868, the First International became polarised into camps headed by Marx and Bakunin. The clearest differences between the groups emerged over their proposed strategies for achieving their visions. The First International became the first major international forum for the promulgation of socialist ideas.
Bakunin’s followers were called collectivists and sought to collectivize ownership of the means of production while retaining payment proportional to the amount and kind of labour of each individual. Like Proudhonists, they asserted the right of each individual to the product of his labour and to be remunerated for his particular contribution to production. By contrast, anarcho-communists sought collective ownership of both the means and the products of labour. As Errico Malatesta put it, “instead of running the risk of making a confusion in trying to distinguish what you and I each do, let us all work and put everything in common. In this way each will give to society all that his strength permits until enough is produced for every one; and each will take all that he needs, limiting his needs only in those things of which there is not yet plenty for every one”. Anarcho-communism as a coherent economic-political philosophy was first formulated in the Italian section of the First International by Malatesta, Carlo Cafiero, Emilio Covelli, Andrea Costa and other ex-Mazzinian republicans. Out of respect for Bakunin, they did not make their differences with collectivist anarchism explicit until after his death.
Syndicalism emerged in France inspired in part by Proudhon and later by Pelloutier and Georges Sorel. It developed at the end of the 19th century out of the French trade-union movement (syndicat is the French word for trade union). It was a significant force in Italy and Spain in the early 20th century until it was crushed by the fascist regimes in those countries. In the United States, syndicalism appeared in the guise of the Industrial Workers of the World, or “Wobblies”, founded in 1905. Syndicalism is an economic system that organizes industries into confederations (syndicates) and the economy is managed by negotiation between specialists and worker representatives of each field, comprising multiple non-competitive categorized units. Syndicalism is a form of communism and economic corporatism, but also refers to the political movement and tactics used to bring about this type of system. An influential anarchist movement based on syndicalist ideas is anarcho-syndicalism. The International Workers Association is an international anarcho-syndicalist federation of various labor unions.
The Fabian Society is a British socialist organization established to advance socialism via gradualist and reformist means. The society laid many foundations of the Labour Party and subsequently affected the policies of states emerging from the decolonisation of the British Empire, most notably India and Singapore. Originally, the Fabian Society was committed to the establishment of a socialist economy, alongside a commitment to British imperialism as a progressive and modernizing force. Later, the society functioned primarily as a think tank and is one of fifteen socialist societies affiliated with the Labor Party. Similar societies exist in Australia (the Australian Fabian Society), in Canada (the Douglas-Coldwell Foundation and the now disbanded League for Social Reconstruction) and in New Zealand.
Guild socialism is a political movement advocating workers’ control of industry through the medium of trade-related guilds “in an implied contractual relationship with the public”. It originated in the United Kingdom and was at its most influential in the first quarter of the 20th century. Inspired by medieval guilds, theorists such as Samuel George Hobson and G. D. H. Cole advocated the public ownership of industries and their workforces’ organization into guilds, each of which under the democratic control of its trade union. Guild socialists were less inclined than Fabians to invest power in a state. At some point, like the American Knights of Labor, guild socialism wanted to abolish the wage system.
As the ideas of Marx and Engels gained acceptance, particularly in central Europe, socialists sought to unite in an international organization. In 1889 (the centennial of the French Revolution), the Second International was founded, with 384 delegates from twenty countries representing about 300 labour and socialist organizations. It was termed the Socialist International and Engels was elected honorary president at the third congress in 1893. Anarchists were banned, mainly due to pressure from Marxists. It has been argued that at some point the Second International turned “into a battleground over the issue of libertarian versus authoritarian socialism. Not only did they effectively present themselves as champions of minority rights; they also provoked the German Marxists into demonstrating a dictatorial intolerance which was a factor in preventing the British labour movement from following the Marxist direction indicated by such leaders as H. M. Hyndman“.
Reformism arose as an alternative to revolution. Eduard Bernstein was a leading social democrat in Germany who proposed the concept of evolutionary socialism. Revolutionary socialists quickly targeted reformism: Rosa Luxemburg condemned Bernstein’s Evolutionary Socialism in her 1900 essay Social Reform or Revolution? Revolutionary socialism encompasses multiple social and political movements that may define “revolution” differently. The Social Democratic Party of Germany (SPD) became the largest and most powerful socialist party in Europe, despite working illegally until the anti-socialist laws were dropped in 1890. In the 1893 elections, it gained 1,787,000 votes, a quarter of the total votes cast, according to Engels. In 1895, the year of his death, Engels emphasised The Communist Manifesto‘s emphasis on winning, as a first step, the “battle of democracy”.
Early 20th century
In Argentina, the Socialist Party of Argentina was established in the 1890s led by Juan B. Justo and Nicolás Repetto, among others. It was the first mass party in the country and in Latin America. The party affiliated itself with the Second International. Between 1924 and 1940, it was a member of the Labour and Socialist International.
In 1904, Australians elected Chris Watson as the first Australian Labor Party Prime Minister, becoming the first democratically elected socialist. In 1909, the first Kibbutz was established in Palestine by Russian Jewish Immigrants. The Kibbutz Movement expanded through the 20th century following a doctrine of Zionist socialism. The British Labour Party first won seats in the House of Commons in 1902. The International Socialist Commission (ISC, also known as Berne International) was formed in February 1919 at a meeting in Bern by parties that wanted to resurrect the Second International.
By 1917, the patriotism of World War I changed into political radicalism in Australia, most of Europe and the United States. Other socialist parties from around the world who were beginning to gain importance in their national politics in the early 20th century included the Italian Socialist Party, the French Section of the Workers’ International, the Spanish Socialist Workers’ Party, the Swedish Social Democratic Party, the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party and the Socialist Party in Argentina, the Socialist Workers’ Party in Chile and the Socialist Party of America in the United States.
In February 1917, revolution exploded in Russia. Workers, soldiers and peasants established soviets (councils), the monarchy fell and a provisional government convened pending the election of a constituent assembly. In April of that year, Vladimir Lenin, leader of the Bolshevik faction of socialists in Russia and known for his profound and controversial expansions of Marxism, was allowed to cross Germany to return from exile in Switzerland.
Lenin had published essays on his analysis of imperialism, the monopoly and globalisation phase of capitalism, as well as analyses on social conditions. He observed that as capitalism had further developed in Europe and America, the workers remained unable to gain class consciousness so long as they were too busy working to pay their expenses. He therefore proposed that the social revolution would require the leadership of a vanguard party of class-conscious revolutionaries from the educated and politically active part of the population.
Upon arriving in Petrograd, Lenin declared that the revolution in Russia had only begun, and that the next step was for the workers’ soviets to take full authority. He issued a thesis outlining the Bolshevik programme, including rejection of any legitimacy in the provisional government and advocacy for state power to be administered through the soviets. The Bolsheviks became the most influential force. On 7 November, the capitol of the provisional government was stormed by Bolshevik Red Guards in what afterwards became known as the Great October Socialist Revolution. The provisional government ended and the Russian Socialist Federative Soviet Republic—the world’s first constitutionally socialist state—was established. On 25 January 1918, Lenin declared “Long live the world socialist revolution!” at the Petrograd Soviet and proposed an immediate armistice on all fronts and transferred the land of the landed proprietors, the crown and the monasteries to the peasant committees without compensation.
The day after assuming executive power on 25 January, Lenin wrote Draft Regulations on Workers’ Control, which granted workers control of businesses with more than five workers and office employees and access to all books, documents and stocks and whose decisions were to be “binding upon the owners of the enterprises”. Governing through the elected soviets and in alliance with the peasant-based Left Socialist-Revolutionaries, the Bolshevik government began nationalizing banks and industry; and disavowed the national debts of the deposed Romanov royal régime. It sued for peace, withdrawing from World War I and convoked a Constituent Assembly in which the peasant Socialist-Revolutionary Party (SR) won a majority.
The Constituent Assembly elected SR leader Victor Chernov President of a Russian republic, but rejected the Bolshevik proposal that it endorse the Soviet decrees on land, peace and workers’ control and acknowledge the power of the Soviets of Workers’, Soldiers’ and Peasants’ Deputies. The next day, the Bolsheviks declared that the assembly was elected on outdated party lists and the All-Russian Central Executive Committee of the Soviets dissolved it. In March 1919, world communist parties formed Comintern (also known as the Third International) at a meeting in Moscow.
International Working Union of Socialist Parties
Parties which did not want to be a part of the resurrected Second International (ISC) or Comintern formed the International Working Union of Socialist Parties (IWUSP, also known as Vienna International/Vienna Union/Two-and-a-Half International) on 27 February 1921 at a conference in Vienna. The ISC and the IWUSP joined to form the Labour and Socialist International (LSI) in May 1923 at a meeting in Hamburg Left-wing groups which did not agree to the centralisation and abandonment of the soviets by the Bolshevik Party led left-wing uprisings against the Bolsheviks—such groups included Socialist Revolutionaries, Left Socialist Revolutionaries, Mensheviks and anarchists.
Within this left-wing discontent, the most large-scale events were the worker’s Kronstadt rebellion and the anarchist led Revolutionary Insurrectionary Army of Ukraine uprising which controlled an area known as the Free Territory.
The Bolshevik Russian Revolution of January 1918 launched communist parties in many countries and concomitant revolutions from 1917–1923. Few communists doubted that the Russian experience depended on successful, working-class socialist revolutions in developed capitalist countries. In 1919, Lenin and Trotsky organized the world’s communist parties into an international association of workers—the Communist International (Comintern), also called the Third International.
The Russian Revolution influenced uprisings in other countries. The German Revolution of 1918–1919 replaced Germany’s imperial government with a republic. The revolution lasted from November 1918 until the establishment of the Weimar Republic in August 1919. It included an episode known as the Bavarian Soviet Republic and the Spartacist uprising. In Italy, the events known as the Biennio Rosso were characterized by mass strikes, worker demonstrations and self-management experiments through land and factory occupations. In Turin and Milan, workers’ councils were formed and many factory occupations took place led by anarcho-syndicalists organised around the Unione Sindacale Italiana.
By 1920, the Red Army under Trotsky had largely defeated the royalist White Armies. In 1921, War Communism was ended and under the New Economic Policy (NEP) private ownership was allowed for small and medium peasant enterprises. While industry remained largely state-controlled, Lenin acknowledged that the NEP was a necessary capitalist measure for a country unready for socialism. Profiteering returned in the form of “NEP men” and rich peasants (kulaks) gained power. Trotsky’s role was questioned by other socialists, including ex-Trotskyists. In the United States, Dwight Macdonald broke with Trotsky and left the Trotskyist Socialist Workers Party by noting the Kronstadt rebellion, which Trotsky and the other Bolsheviks had brutally repressed. He then moved towards democratic socialism and anarchism.
A similar critique of Trotsky’s role in the Kronstadt rebellion was raised by American anarchist Emma Goldman. In her essay “Trotsky Protests Too Much”, she states, “I admit, the dictatorship under Stalin’s rule has become monstrous. That does not, however, lessen the guilt of Leon Trotsky as one of the actors in the revolutionary drama of which Kronstadt was one of the bloodiest scenes”.
4th World Congress of the Communist International
In 1922, the fourth congress of the Communist International took up the policy of the United Front. It urged communists to work with rank and file social democrats while remaining critical of their leaders. They criticised those leaders for betraying the working class by supporting the capitalists’ war efforts. The social democrats pointed to the dislocation caused by revolution and later the growing authoritarianism of the communist parties. The Labour Party rejected the Communist Party of Great Britain‘s application to affiliate to them in 1920.
On seeing the Soviet State’s growing coercive power in 1923, a dying Lenin said Russia had reverted to “a bourgeois tsarist machine […] barely varnished with socialism”. After Lenin’s death in January 1924, the Communist Party of the Soviet Union—then increasingly under the control of Joseph Stalin—rejected the theory that socialism could not be built solely in the Soviet Union in favour of the concept of socialism in one country. Despite the marginalised Left Opposition‘s demand for the restoration of Soviet democracy, Stalin developed a bureaucratic, authoritarian government that was condemned by democratic socialists, anarchists and Trotskyists for undermining the Revolution’s ideals.[self-published source?][unreliable source?]
In 1924, the Mongolian People’s Republic was established and was ruled by the Mongolian People’s Party. The Russian Revolution and its aftermath motivated national communist parties elsewhere that gained political and social influence, in France, the US, Italy, China, Mexico, the Brazil, Chile and Indonesia.
Spanish Civil War
In Spain in 1936, the national anarcho-syndicalist trade union Confederación Nacional del Trabajo (CNT) initially refused to join a popular front electoral alliance. Their abstention led to a right-wing election victory. In 1936, the CNT changed its policy and anarchist votes helped return the popular front to power. Months later, the former ruling class attempted a coup, sparking the Spanish Civil War (1936–1939).
In response to the army rebellion, an anarchist-inspired movement of peasants and workers, supported by armed militias, took control of Barcelona and of large areas of rural Spain where they collectivised the land. The Spanish Revolution was a workers’ social revolution that began with the Spanish Civil War in 1936 and resulted in the widespread implementation of anarchist and more broadly libertarian socialist organisational principles in some areas for two to three years, primarily Catalonia, Aragon, Andalusia and parts of Levante.
Much of Spain’s economy came under worker control. In anarchist strongholds like Catalonia the figure was as high as 75%, but lower in areas with heavy Communist Party influence, which actively resisted attempts at collectivisation. Factories were run through worker committees, agrarian areas became collectivised and run as libertarian communes. Anarchist historian Sam Dolgoff estimated that about eight million people participated directly or indirectly in the Spanish Revolution.
Post-World War II
Trotsky’s Fourth International was established in France in 1938 when Trotskyists argued that the Comintern or Third International had become irretrievably “lost to Stalinism” and thus incapable of leading the working class to power. The rise of Nazism and the start of World War II led to the dissolution of the LSI in 1940. After the War, the Socialist International was formed in Frankfurt in July 1951 as its successor.
After World War II, social democratic governments introduced social reform and wealth redistribution via welfare and taxation. Social democratic parties dominated post-war politics in countries such as France, Italy, Czechoslovakia, Belgium and Norway. At one point, France claimed to be the world’s most state-controlled capitalist country. It nationalised public utilities including Charbonnages de France (CDF), Électricité de France (EDF), Gaz de France (GDF), Air France, Banque de France and Régie Nationale des Usines Renault.
In 1945, the British Labour Party led by Clement Attlee was elected based on a radical socialist programme. The Labour government nationalised industries including mines, gas, coal, electricity, rail, iron, steel and the Bank of England. British Petroleum was officially nationalised in 1951. Anthony Crosland said that in 1956 25% of British industry was nationalised and that public employees, including those in nationalised industries, constituted a similar proportion of the country’s workers. The Labour Governments of 1964–1970 and 1974–1979 intervened further. It re-nationalised British Steel (1967) after the Conservatives had denationalised it and nationalised British Leyland (1976). The National Health Service provided taxpayer-funded health care to everyone, free at the point of service. Working-class housing was provided in council housing estates and university education became available via a school grant system.
During most of the post-war era, Sweden was governed by the Swedish Social Democratic Party largely in cooperation with trade unions and industry. In Sweden, the Swedish Social Democratic Party held power from 1936 to 1976, 1982 to 1991, 1994 to 2006 and 2014 through 2023, most recently in a minority coalition. Tage Erlander was the first leader of the Swedish Social Democratic Party (SSDP). He led the government from 1946 to 1969, the longest uninterrupted parliamentary government. These governments substantially expanded the welfare state. Swedish Prime Minister Olof Palme identified as a “democratic socialist” and was described as a “revolutionary reformist”.
The Norwegian Labour Party was established in 1887 and was largely a trade union federation. The party did not proclaim a socialist agenda, elevating universal suffrage and dissolution of the union with Sweden as its top priorities. In 1899, the Norwegian Confederation of Trade Unions separated from the Labour Party. Around the time of the Russian Revolution, the Labour Party moved to the left and joined the Communist International from 1919 through 1923. Thereafter, the party still regarded itself as revolutionary, but the party’s left-wing broke away and established the Communist Party of Norway while the Labour Party gradually adopted a reformist line around 1930. In 1935, Johan Nygaardsvold established a coalition that lasted until 1945.
From 1946 to 1962, the Norwegian Labour Party held an absolute majority in the parliament led by Einar Gerhardsen, who remained Prime Minister for seventeen years. Although the party abandoned most of its pre-war socialist ideas, the welfare state was expanded under Gerhardsen to ensure the universal provision of basic human rights and stabilise the economy. In the 1945 Norwegian parliamentary election, the Communist Party took 12% of the votes, but it largely vanished during the Cold War. In the 1950s, popular socialism emerged in Nordic countries. It placed itself between communism and social democracy. In the early 1960s, the Socialist Left Party challenged the Labour Party from the left. Also in the 1960s, Gerhardsen established a planning agency and tried to establish a planned economy. In the 1970s, a more radical socialist party, the Worker’s Communist Party (AKP), broke from the Socialist Left Party and had notable influence in student associations and some trade unions. The AKP identified with Communist China and Albania rather than the Soviet Union.
In countries such as Sweden, the Rehn–Meidner model allowed capitalists owning productive and efficient firms to retain profits at the expense of the firms’ workers, exacerbating inequality and causing workers to agitate for a share of the profits in the 1970s. At that time, women working in the state sector began to demand better wages. Rudolf Meidner established a study committee that came up with a 1976 proposal to transfer excess profits into worker-controlled investment funds, with the intention that firms would create jobs and pay higher wages rather than reward company owners and managers. Capitalists immediately labeled this proposal as socialism and launched an unprecedented opposition—including calling off the class compromise established in the 1938 Saltsjöbaden Agreement. Social democratic parties are some of the oldest such parties and operate in all Nordic countries. Countries or political systems that have long been dominated by social democratic parties are often labelled social democratic. Those countries fit the social democratic type of “high socialism” which is described as favouring “a high level of decommodification and a low degree of stratification”.
The Nordic model is a form of economic-political system common to the Nordic countries (Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden). It has three main ingredients, namely peaceful, institutionalised negotiation between employers and trade unions; active, predictable and measured macroeconomic policy; and universal welfare and free education. The welfare system is governmental in Norway and Sweden whereas trade unions play a greater role in Denmark, Finland and Iceland. The Nordic model is often labelled social democratic and contrasted with the conservative continental model and the liberal Anglo-American model. Major reforms in the Nordic countries are the results of consensus and compromise across the political spectrum. Key reforms were implemented under social democratic cabinets in Denmark, Norway and Sweden while centre-right parties dominated during the implementation of the model in Finland and Iceland. Since World War II, Nordic countries have largely maintained a social democratic mixed economy, characterised by labour force participation, gender equality, egalitarian and universal benefits, redistribution of wealth and expansionary fiscal policy.
In Norway, the first mandatory social insurances were introduced by conservative cabinets in 1895 (Francis Hagerups‘s cabinet) and 1911 (Konow’s Cabinet). During the 1930s, the Labour Party adopted the conservatives’ welfare state project. After World War II, all political parties agreed that the welfare state should be expanded. Universal social security (Folketrygden) was introduced by the conservative Borten’s Cabinet. Norway’s economy is open to the international or European market for most products and services, joining the European Union’s internal market in 1994 through European Economic Area. Some of the mixed economy institutions from the post-war period were relaxed by the conservative cabinet of the 1980s and the finance market was deregulated. Within the Varieties of Capitalism-framework, Finland, Norway and Sweden are identified as coordinated market economies.
Soviet Union and Eastern Europe
The Soviet era saw some of the most significant technological achievements of the 20th century, including the world’s first spacecraft and the first astronaut. The Soviet economy was the modern world’s first centrally planned economy. It adopted state ownership of industry managed through Gosplan (the State Planning Commission), Gosbank (the State Bank) and the Gossnab (State Commission for Materials and Equipment Supply).
Economic planning was conducted through serial Five-Year Plans. The emphasis was on development of heavy industry. The nation became one of the world’s top manufacturers of basic and heavy industrial products, while deemphasizing light industrial production and consumer durables. Modernisation brought about a general increase in the standard of living.
The Eastern Bloc was the group of Communist states of Central and Eastern Europe, including the Soviet Union and the countries of the Warsaw Pact, including Poland, the German Democratic Republic, the Hungary, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, Romania, Albania and Yugoslavia. The Hungarian Revolution of 1956 was a spontaneous nationwide revolt against the Communist government, lasting from 23 October until 10 November 1956. Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev’s denunciation of the excesses of Stalin’s regime during the Twentieth Communist Party Congress in 1956 as well as the Hungarian revolt, produced disunity within Western European communist and socialist parties.
Asia, Africa and Latin America
In the post-war years, socialism became increasingly influential in many then-developing countries. Embracing Third World socialism, countries in Africa, Asia and Latin America often nationalised industries.
The Chinese Revolution was the second stage in the Chinese Civil War, which ended with the establishment of the People’s Republic of China led by the Chinese Communist Party. The then-Chinese Kuomintang Party in the 1920s incorporated Chinese socialism as part of its ideology.
The emergence of this new political entity in the frame of the Cold War was complex and painful. Several tentative efforts were made to organise newly independent states in order to establish a common front to limit the United States’ and the Soviet Union’s influence on them. This led to the Sino-Soviet split. The Non-Aligned Movement gathered around the figures of Jawaharlal Nehru of India, Sukarno of Indonesia, Josip Broz Tito of Yugoslavia and Gamal Abdel Nasser of Egypt. After the 1954 Geneva Conference which ended the French war in Vietnam, the 1955 Bandung Conference gathered Nasser, Nehru, Tito, Sukarno and Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai. As many African countries gained independence during the 1960s, some of them rejected capitalism in favour of African socialism as defined by Julius Nyerere of Tanzania, Léopold Senghor of Senegal, Kwame Nkrumah of Ghana and Sékou Touré of Guinea.
The Cuban Revolution (1953–1959) was an armed revolt conducted by Fidel Castro‘s 26th of July Movement and its allies against the government of Fulgencio Batista. Castro’s government eventually adopted communism, becoming the Communist Party of Cuba in October 1965.
In Indonesia, a right-wing military regime led by Suharto killed between 500,000 and one million people in 1965 and 1966, mainly to crush the growing influence of the Communist Party and other leftist groups, with support from the United States which provided kill lists containing thousands of names of suspected high-ranking Communists.
The New Left was a term used mainly in the United Kingdom and United States in reference to activists, educators, agitators and others in the 1960s and 1970s who sought to implement a broad range of reforms on issues such as gay rights, abortion, gender roles and drugs in contrast to earlier leftist or Marxist movements that had taken a more vanguardist approach to social justice and focused mostly on labour unionisation and questions of social class. The New Left rejected involvement with the labour movement and Marxism‘s historical theory of class struggle.
In the United States, the New Left was associated with the Hippie movement and anti-war college campus protest movements as well as the black liberation movements such as the Black Panther Party. While initially formed in opposition to the “Old Left” Democratic Party, groups composing the New Left gradually became central players in the Democratic coalition.
Protests of 1968
The protests of 1968 represented a worldwide escalation of social conflicts, predominantly characterised by popular rebellions against military, capitalist and bureaucratic elites who responded with an escalation of political repression. These protests marked a turning point for the civil rights movement in the United States which produced revolutionary movements like the Black Panther Party. The prominent civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr. organised the “Poor People’s Campaign” to address issues of economic justice, while personally showing sympathy with democratic socialism. In reaction to the Tet Offensive, protests also sparked a broad movement in opposition to the Vietnam War all over the United States and even into London, Paris, Berlin and Rome. In 1968, the International of Anarchist Federations was founded during an international anarchist conference held in Carrara by the three existing European federations of France, the Italian and the Iberian Anarchist Federation as well as the Bulgarian federation in French exile.
Mass socialist or communist movements grew not only in the United States, but also in most European countries. The most spectacular manifestation of this were the May 1968 protests in France in which students linked up with strikes of up to ten million workers and for a few days the movement seemed capable of overthrowing the government.
In many other capitalist countries, struggles against dictatorships, state repression and colonisation were also marked by protests in 1968, such as the beginning of the Troubles in Northern Ireland, the Tlatelolco massacre in Mexico City and the escalation of guerrilla warfare against the military dictatorship in Brazil. Countries governed by communist parties had protests against bureaucratic and military elites. In Eastern Europe there were widespread protests that escalated particularly in the Prague Spring in Czechoslovakia. In response, Soviet Union occupied Czechoslovakia, but the occupation was denounced by the Italian and French communist parties and the Communist Party of Finland. Few western European political leaders defended the occupation, among them the Portuguese communist secretary-general Álvaro Cunhal. along with the Luxembourg party and conservative factions of the Communist Party of Greece.
In the Chinese Cultural Revolution, a social-political youth movement mobilised against “bourgeois” elements which were seen to be infiltrating the government and society at large, aiming to restore capitalism. This movement motivated Maoism-inspired movements around the world in the context of the Sino-Soviet split.
Late 20th century
In the 1960s, a socialist tendency within the Latin American Catholic church appeared and was known as liberation theology It motivated the Colombian priest Camilo Torres Restrepo to enter the ELN guerrilla. In Chile, Salvador Allende, a physician and candidate for the Socialist Party of Chile, was elected president in 1970. In 1973, his government was ousted by the United States-backed military dictatorship of Augusto Pinochet, which lasted until the late 1980s. Pinochet’s regime was a leader of Operation Condor, a U.S.-backed campaign of repression and state terrorism carried out by the intelligence services of the Southern Cone countries of Latin America to eliminate suspected Communist subversion. In Jamaica, the democratic socialist Michael Manley served as the fourth Prime Minister of Jamaica from 1972 to 1980 and from 1989 to 1992. According to opinion polls, he remains one of Jamaica’s most popular Prime Ministers since independence. The Nicaraguan Revolution encompassed the rising opposition to the Somoza dictatorship in the 1960s and 1970s, the campaign led by the Sandinista National Liberation Front (FSLN) to violently oust the dictatorship in 1978–1979, the subsequent efforts of the FSLN to govern Nicaragua from 1979 until 1990 and the socialist measures which included wide-scale agrarian reform and educational programs. The People’s Revolutionary Government was proclaimed on 13 March 1979 in Grenada which was overthrown by armed forces of the United States in 1983. The Salvadoran Civil War (1979–1992) was a conflict between the military-led government of El Salvador and the Farabundo Martí National Liberation Front (FMLN), a coalition or umbrella organisation of five socialist guerrilla groups. A coup on 15 October 1979 led to the killings of anti-coup protesters by the government as well as anti-disorder protesters by the guerrillas, and is widely seen as the tipping point towards the civil war.
In Italy, Autonomia Operaia was a leftist movement particularly active from 1976 to 1978. It took an important role in the autonomist movement in the 1970s, aside earlier organisations such as Potere Operaio (created after May 1968) and Lotta Continua. This experience prompted the contemporary socialist radical movement autonomism. In 1982, the newly elected French socialist government of François Mitterrand made nationalisations in a few key industries, including banks and insurance companies. Eurocommunism was a trend in the 1970s and 1980s in various Western European communist parties to develop a theory and practice of social transformation that was more relevant for a Western European country and less aligned to the influence or control of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. Outside Western Europe, it is sometimes called neocommunism. Some communist parties with strong popular support, notably the Italian Communist Party (PCI) and the Communist Party of Spain (PCE) adopted Eurocommunism most enthusiastically and the Communist Party of Finland was dominated by Eurocommunists. The French Communist Party (PCF) and many smaller parties strongly opposed Eurocommunism and stayed aligned with the Communist Party of the Soviet Union until the end of the Soviet Union.
In the late 1970s and in the 1980s, the Socialist International (SI) had extensive contacts and discussion with the two powers of the Cold War, the United States and the Soviet Union, about east–west relations and arms control. Since then, the SI has admitted as member parties the Nicaraguan FSLN, the left-wing Puerto Rican Independence Party, as well as former communist parties such as the Democratic Party of the Left of Italy and the Front for the Liberation of Mozambique (FRELIMO). The SI aided social democratic parties in re-establishing themselves when dictatorship gave way to democracy in Portugal (1974) and Spain (1975). Until its 1976 Geneva Congress, the SI had few members outside Europe and no formal involvement with Latin America.
After Mao’s death in 1976 and the arrest of the faction known as the Gang of Four, who were blamed for the excesses of the Cultural Revolution, Deng Xiaoping took power and led the People’s Republic of China to significant economic reforms. The Communist Party of China loosened governmental control over citizens’ personal lives and the communes were disbanded in favour of private land leases, thus China’s transition from a planned economy to a mixed economy named as “socialism with Chinese characteristics“ which maintained state ownership rights over land, state or cooperative ownership of much of the heavy industrial and manufacturing sectors and state influence in the banking and financial sectors. China adopted its current constitution on 4 December 1982. President Jiang Zemin and Premier Zhu Rongji led the nation in the 1990s. Under their administration, China’s economic performance pulled an estimated 150 million peasants out of poverty and sustained an average annual gross domestic product growth rate of 11.2%. At the Sixth National Congress of the Communist Party of Vietnam in December 1986, reformist politicians replaced the “old guard” government with new leadership. The reformers were led by 71-year-old Nguyen Van Linh, who became the party’s new general secretary. Linh and the reformers implemented a series of free market reforms—known as Đổi Mới (“Renovation”)—which carefully managed the transition from a planned economy to a “socialist-oriented market economy“. Mikhail Gorbachev wished to move the Soviet Union towards of Nordic-style social democracy, calling it “a socialist beacon for all mankind”. Prior to its dissolution in 1991, the economy of the Soviet Union was the second largest in the world after the United States. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, the economic integration of the Soviet republics was dissolved and overall industrial activity declined substantially. A lasting legacy remains in the physical infrastructure created during decades of combined industrial production practices, and widespread environmental destruction. The transition to capitalism in the former Soviet Union and Eastern Bloc, which was accompanied by Washington Consensus-inspired “shock therapy“, resulted in a steep fall in the standard of living. The region experienced rising economic inequality and poverty a surge in excess mortality and a decline in life expectancy, which was accompanied by the entrenchment of a newly established business oligarchy in the former. The average post-communist country had returned to 1989 levels of per-capita GDP by 2005, although some are still far behind that. These developments led to increased nationalist sentiment and nostalgia for the Communist era.
Many social democratic parties, particularly after the Cold War, adopted neoliberal market policies including privatisation, deregulation and financialisation. They abandoned their pursuit of moderate socialism in favour of economic liberalism. By the 1980s, with the rise of conservative neoliberal politicians such as Ronald Reagan in the United States, Margaret Thatcher in Britain, Brian Mulroney in Canada and Augusto Pinochet in Chile, the Western welfare state was attacked from within, but state support for the corporate sector was maintained. Monetarists and neoliberals attacked social welfare systems as impediments to private entrepreneurship. In the United Kingdom, Labour Party leader Neil Kinnock made a public attack against the entryist group Militant at the 1985 Labour Party conference. Labour ruled that Militant was ineligible for affiliation with the party and it gradually expelled Militant supporters. The Kinnock leadership had refused to support the 1984–1985 miner’s strike over pit closures, a decision that the party’s left wing and the National Union of Mineworkers blamed for the strike’s eventual defeat. In 1989, the 18th Congress of the Socialist International adopted a new Declaration of Principles, stating:
Democratic socialism is an international movement for freedom, social justice, and solidarity. Its goal is to achieve a peaceful world where these basic values can be enhanced and where each individual can live a meaningful life with the full development of his or her personality and talents, and with the guarantee of human and civil rights in a democratic framework of society.
In the 1990s, the British Labour Party under Tony Blair enacted policies based on the free market economy to deliver public services via the private finance initiative. Influential in these policies was the idea of a “Third Way” which called for a re-evaluation of welfare state policies. In 1995, the Labour Party re-defined its stance on socialism by re-wording Clause IV of its constitution, defining socialism in ethical terms and removing all references to public, direct worker or municipal ownership of the means of production. The Labour Party stated: “The Labour Party is a democratic socialist party. It believes that, by the strength of our common endeavour we achieve more than we achieve alone, so as to create, for each of us, the means to realise our true potential, and, for all of us, a community in which power, wealth, and opportunity are in the hands of the many, not the few”.
African socialism has been and continues to be a major ideology around the continent. Julius Nyerere was inspired by Fabian socialist ideals. He was a firm believer in rural Africans and their traditions and ujamaa, a system of collectivisation that according to Nyerere was present before European imperialism. Essentially he believed Africans were already socialists. Other African socialists include Jomo Kenyatta, Kenneth Kaunda, Nelson Mandela and Kwame Nkrumah. Fela Kuti was inspired by socialism and called for a democratic African republic. In South Africa the African National Congress (ANC) abandoned its partial socialist allegiances after taking power and followed a standard neoliberal route. From 2005 through to 2007, the country was wracked by many thousands of protests from poor communities. One of these gave rise to a mass movement of shack dwellers, Abahlali baseMjondolo that despite major police suppression continues to work for popular people’s planning and against the creation of a market economy in land and housing.
In Asia, states with socialist economies—such as the People’s Republic of China, North Korea, Laos and Vietnam—have largely moved away from centralised economic planning in the 21st century, placing a greater emphasis on markets. Forms include the Chinese socialist market economy and the Vietnamese socialist-oriented market economy. They use state-owned corporate management models as opposed to modelling socialist enterprise on traditional management styles employed by government agencies. In China living standards continued to improve rapidly despite the late-2000s recession, but centralised political control remained tight. Brian Reynolds Myers in his book The Cleanest Race, later supported by other academics, dismisses the idea that Juche is North Korea’s leading ideology, regarding its public exaltation as designed to deceive foreigners and that it exists to be praised and not actually read, pointing out that North Korea’s constitution of 2009 omits all mention of communism.
Although the authority of the state remained unchallenged under Đổi Mới, the government of Vietnam encourages private ownership of farms and factories, economic deregulation and foreign investment, while maintaining control over strategic industries. The Vietnamese economy subsequently achieved strong growth in agricultural and industrial production, construction, exports and foreign investment. However, these reforms have also caused a rise in income inequality and gender disparities.
Elsewhere in Asia, some elected socialist parties and communist parties remain prominent, particularly in India and Nepal. The Communist Party of Nepal[which?] in particular calls for multi-party democracy, social equality and economic prosperity. In Singapore, a majority of the GDP is still generated from the state sector comprising government-linked companies. In Japan, there has been a resurgent interest in the Japanese Communist Party among workers and youth. In Malaysia, the Socialist Party of Malaysia got its first Member of Parliament, Dr. Jeyakumar Devaraj, after the 2008 general election. In 2010, there were 270 kibbutzim in Israel. Their factories and farms account for 9% of Israel’s industrial output, worth US$8 billion and 40% of its agricultural output, worth over $1.7 billion. Some Kibbutzim had also developed substantial high-tech and military industries. Also in 2010, Kibbutz Sasa, containing some 200 members, generated $850 million in annual revenue from its military-plastics industry.
The United Nations World Happiness Report 2013 shows that the happiest nations are concentrated in Northern Europe, where the Nordic model is employed, with Denmark topping the list. This is at times attributed to the success of the Nordic model in the region that has been labelled social democratic in contrast with the conservative continental model and the liberal Anglo-American model. The Nordic countries ranked highest on the metrics of real GDP per capita, healthy life expectancy, having someone to count on, perceived freedom to make life choices, generosity and freedom from corruption.
The objectives of the Party of European Socialists, the European Parliament’s socialist and social democratic bloc, are now “to pursue international aims in respect of the principles on which the European Union is based, namely principles of freedom, equality, solidarity, democracy, respect of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, and respect for the Rule of Law”. As a result, today the rallying cry of the French Revolution—Liberté, égalité, fraternité—is promoted as essential socialist values. To the left of the PES at the European level is the Party of the European Left (PEL), also commonly abbreviated “European Left”), which is a political party at the European level and an association of democratic socialist, socialist and communist political parties in the European Union and other European countries. It was formed in January 2004 for the purposes of running in the 2004 European Parliament elections. PEL was founded on 8–9 May 2004 in Rome. Elected MEPs from member parties of the European Left sit in the European United Left–Nordic Green Left (GUE/NGL) group in the European parliament.
The socialist Left Party in Germany grew in popularity due to dissatisfaction with the increasingly neoliberal policies of the SPD, becoming the fourth biggest party in parliament in the general election on 27 September 2009. Communist candidate Dimitris Christofias won a crucial presidential runoff in Cyprus, defeating his conservative rival with a majority of 53%. In Ireland, in the 2009 European election Joe Higgins of the Socialist Party took one of three seats in the capital Dublin European constituency.
In Denmark, the Socialist People’s Party (SF) more than doubled its parliamentary representation to 23 seats from 11, making it the fourth largest party. In 2011, the Social Democrats, Socialist People’s Party and the Danish Social Liberal Party formed government, after a slight victory over the main rival political coalition. They were led by Helle Thorning-Schmidt, and had the Red-Green Alliance as a supporting party.
In Norway, the Red-Green Coalition consists of the Labour Party (Ap), the Socialist Left Party (SV) and the Centre Party (Sp) and governed the country as a majority government from the 2005 general election until 2013.
In the Greek legislative election of January 2015, the Coalition of the Radical Left (SYRIZA) led by Alexis Tsipras won a legislative election for the first time while the Communist Party of Greece won 15 seats in parliament. SYRIZA has been characterised as an anti-establishment party, whose success has sent “shock-waves across the EU”.
In the United Kingdom, the National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers put forward a slate of candidates in the 2009 European Parliament elections under the banner of No to EU – Yes to Democracy, a broad left-wing alter-globalisation coalition involving socialist groups such as the Socialist Party, aiming to offer an alternative to the “anti-foreigner” and pro-business policies of the UK Independence Party. In the following May 2010 United Kingdom general election, the Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition, launched in January 2010 and backed by Bob Crow, the leader of the National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers union (RMT), other union leaders and the Socialist Party among other socialist groups, stood against Labour in 40 constituencies. The Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition contested the 2011 local elections, having gained the endorsement of the RMT June 2010 conference, but gained no seats. Left Unity was also founded in 2013 after the film director Ken Loach appealed for a new party of the left to replace the Labour Party, which he claimed had failed to oppose austerity and had shifted towards neoliberalism. In 2015, following a defeat at the 2015 United Kingdom general election, self-described socialist Jeremy Corbyn took over from Ed Miliband as leader of the Labour Party.
In France, Olivier Besancenot, the Revolutionary Communist League (LCR) candidate in the 2007 presidential election, received 1,498,581 votes, 4.08%, double that of the communist candidate. The LCR abolished itself in 2009 to initiate a broad anti-capitalist party, the New Anticapitalist Party, whose stated aim is to “build a new socialist, democratic perspective for the twenty-first century”.
On 25 May 2014, the Spanish left-wing party Podemos entered candidates for the 2014 European parliamentary elections, some of which were unemployed. In a surprise result, it polled 7.98% of the vote and thus was awarded five seats out of 54 while the older United Left was the third largest overall force obtaining 10.03% and 5 seats, 4 more than the previous elections.
The government of Portugal established on 26 November 2015 was a Socialist Party (PS) minority government led by prime minister António Costa, who succeeded in securing support for a Socialist minority government by the Left Bloc (B.E.), the Portuguese Communist Party (PCP) and the Ecologist Party “The Greens” (PEV).
According to a 2013 article in The Guardian, “[c]ontrary to popular belief, Americans don’t have an innate allergy to socialism. Milwaukee has had several socialist mayors (Frank Zeidler, Emil Seidel and Daniel Hoan), and there is currently an independent socialist in the US Senate, Bernie Sanders of Vermont”. Sanders, once mayor of Vermont’s largest city, Burlington, has described himself as a democratic socialist and has praised Scandinavian-style social democracy. In 2016, Sanders made a bid for the Democratic Party presidential candidate, thereby gaining considerable popular support, particularly among the younger generation, but lost the nomination to Hillary Clinton. As of 2019, the Democratic Socialists of America have two members in Congress, and various members in state legislatures and city councils. According to a 2018 Gallup poll, 37% of American adults have a positive view of socialism, including 57% of Democrat-leaning voters and 16% of Republican-leaning voters. A 2019 YouGov poll found that 7 out of 10 millennials would vote for a socialist presidential candidate, and 36% had a favorable view of communism. An earlier 2019 Harris Poll found that socialism is more popular with women than men, with 55% of women between the ages of 18 and 54 preferring to live in a socialist society while a majority of men surveyed in the poll chose capitalism over socialism.
Anti-capitalism, anarchism and the anti-globalisation movement rose to prominence through events such as protests against the World Trade Organization Ministerial Conference of 1999 in Seattle. Socialist-inspired groups played an important role in these movements, which nevertheless embraced much broader layers of the population and were championed by figures such as Noam Chomsky. In Canada, the Co-operative Commonwealth Federation (CCF), the precursor to the social democratic New Democratic Party (NDP), had significant success in provincial politics. In 1944, the Saskatchewan CCF formed the first socialist government in North America. At the federal level, the NDP was the Official Opposition, from 2011 through 2015.
In their Johnson linguistics column, The Economist opines that in the 21st century United States, the term socialism, without clear definition, has become a pejorative used by conservatives to attack liberal and progressive policies, proposals, and public figures.
Latin America and the Caribbean
For the Encyclopedia Britannica, “the attempt by Salvador Allende to unite Marxists and other reformers in a socialist reconstruction of Chile is most representative of the direction that Latin American socialists have taken since the late 20th century. […] Several socialist (or socialist-leaning) leaders have followed Allende’s example in winning election to office in Latin American countries”. The success of the Workers’ Party (Portuguese: Partido dos Trabalhadores – PT) of Brazil, formed in 1980 and governing Brazil from 2003 to 2016, was the first major breakthrough for this trend.
Foro de São Paulo is a conference of leftist political parties and other organisations from Latin America and the Caribbean. It was launched by the Workers’ Party in 1990 in the city of São Paulo, after the PT approached other parties and social movements of Latin America and the Caribbean with the objective of debating the new international scenario after the fall of the Berlin Wall and the consequences of the implementation of what were taken as neoliberal policies adopted at the time by contemporary right-leaning governments in the region, the stated main objective of the conference being to argue for alternatives to neoliberalism. Among its members have been socialist and social-democratic parties in government in the region such as Bolivia‘s Movement for Socialism, the Communist Party of Cuba, Ecuador’s PAIS Alliance, the United Socialist Party of Venezuela, the Socialist Party of Chile, Uruguay‘s Broad Front, Nicaragua’s Sandinista National Liberation Front, El Salvador‘s Farabundo Martí National Liberation Front and members of Argentina‘s Frente de Todos.
In the first decade of the 21st century, Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez, Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega, Bolivian President Evo Morales and Ecuadorian president Rafael Correa referred to their political programmes as socialist, and Chávez adopted the term “socialism of the 21st century“. After winning re-election in December 2006, Chávez said: “Now more than ever, I am obliged to move Venezuela’s path towards socialism”. Chávez was also reelected in October 2012 for his third six-year term as president, but he died in March 2013 from cancer. After Chávez’s death on 5 March 2013, Vice President from Chavez’s party Nicolás Maduro assumed the powers and responsibilities of the President. A special election was held on 14 April of the same year to elect a new president, which Maduro won by a tight margin as the candidate of the United Socialist Party of Venezuela and he was formally inaugurated on 19 April. “Pink tide” is a term used in political analysis, in the media and elsewhere to describe the perception that leftist ideology in general and left-wing politics in particular were increasingly influential in Latin America in the 2000s. Some of the “pink tide” governments were criticised for turning from socialism to populism and authoritarianism. The “pink tide” was followed in the 2010s by a “conservative wave” as right-wing governments came to power in Argentina, Brazil and Chile, and Venezuela and Nicaragua experienced political crises. However, socialism saw a resurgence in 2018–19 after successive electoral victories of left-wing and centre-left candidates in Mexico, Panama, and Argentina.
Australia saw an increase in interest of socialism in the early 21st century, especially amongst youth. It is strongest in Victoria, where three socialist parties have merged into the Victorian Socialists, who aim to address problems in housing and public transportation.
In New Zealand, socialism emerged within the budding trade union movement during the late 19th century and early 20th century. In July 1916, several left-wing political organisations and trade unions merged to form the New Zealand Labour Party. While Labour traditionally had a socialist orientation, the party shifted towards a more social democratic orientation during the 1920s and 1930s. Following the 1935 general election, the First Labour Government pursued socialist policies such as nationalising industry, broadcasting, transportation, and implementing a Keynesian welfare state. However, the party did not seek to abolish capitalism, instead opting for a mixed economy. Labour’s welfare state and mixed economy were not challenged until the 1980s. During the 1980s, the Fourth Labour Government implemented a raft of neoliberal economic reforms known as Rogernomics which saw New Zealand society and the economy shift towards a more free market model. Labour’s abandonment of its traditional values fractured the party. Successive Labour governments have since pursued centre-left social and economic policies while maintaining a free-market economy. The current Prime Minister of New Zealand Jacinda Ardern formerly served as President of the International Union of Socialist Youth. Ardern is a self-described social democrat who has criticized capitalism as a “blatant failure” due to high levels of homelessness and low wages. New Zealand still has a small socialist scene, mainly dominated by Trotskyist groups.
Melanesian socialism developed in the 1980s, inspired by African socialism. It aims to achieve full independence from Britain and France in Melanesian territories and creation of a Melanesian federal union. It is very popular with the New Caledonia independence movement.
The Progressive Alliance is a political international founded on 22 May 2013 by political parties, the majority of whom are current or former members of the Socialist International. The organisation states the aim of becoming the global network of “the progressive, democratic, social-democratic, socialist and labour movement“.
Social and political theory
Early socialist thought took influences from a diverse range of philosophies such as civic republicanism, Enlightenment rationalism, romanticism, forms of materialism, Christianity (both Catholic and Protestant), natural law and natural rights theory, utilitarianism and liberal political economy. Another philosophical basis for a lot of early socialism was the emergence of positivism during the European Enlightenment. Positivism held that both the natural and social worlds could be understood through scientific knowledge and be analysed using scientific methods. This core outlook influenced early social scientists and different types of socialists ranging from anarchists like Peter Kropotkin to technocrats like Saint Simon.
The fundamental objective of socialism is to attain an advanced level of material production and therefore greater productivity, efficiency and rationality as compared to capitalism and all previous systems, under the view that an expansion of human productive capability is the basis for the extension of freedom and equality in society. Many forms of socialist theory hold that human behaviour is largely shaped by the social environment. In particular, socialism holds that social mores, values, cultural traits and economic practices are social creations and not the result of an immutable natural law. The object of their critique is thus not human avarice or human consciousness, but the material conditions and man-made social systems (i.e. the economic structure of society) that gives rise to observed social problems and inefficiencies. Bertrand Russell, often considered to be the father of analytic philosophy, identified as a socialist. Russell opposed the class struggle aspects of Marxism, viewing socialism solely as an adjustment of economic relations to accommodate modern machine production to benefit all of humanity through the progressive reduction of necessary work time.
Socialists view creativity as an essential aspect of human nature and define freedom as a state of being where individuals are able to express their creativity unhindered by constraints of both material scarcity and coercive social institutions. The socialist concept of individuality is intertwined with the concept of individual creative expression. Karl Marx believed that expansion of the productive forces and technology was the basis for the expansion of human freedom and that socialism, being a system that is consistent with modern developments in technology, would enable the flourishing of “free individualities” through the progressive reduction of necessary labour time. The reduction of necessary labour time to a minimum would grant individuals the opportunity to pursue the development of their true individuality and creativity.
Criticism of capitalism
Socialists argue that the accumulation of capital generates waste through externalities that require costly corrective regulatory measures. They also point out that this process generates wasteful industries and practices that exist only to generate sufficient demand for products such as high-pressure advertisement to be sold at a profit, thereby creating rather than satisfying economic demand.
Socialists argue that capitalism consists of irrational activity, such as the purchasing of commodities only to sell at a later time when their price appreciates, rather than for consumption, even if the commodity cannot be sold at a profit to individuals in need and therefore a crucial criticism often made by socialists is that “making money”, or accumulation of capital, does not correspond to the satisfaction of demand (the production of use-values). The fundamental criterion for economic activity in capitalism is the accumulation of capital for reinvestment in production, but this spurs the development of new, non-productive industries that do not produce use-value and only exist to keep the accumulation process afloat (otherwise the system goes into crisis), such as the spread of the financial industry, contributing to the formation of economic bubbles.
Socialists view private property relations as limiting the potential of productive forces in the economy. According to socialists, private property becomes obsolete when it concentrates into centralised, socialised institutions based on private appropriation of revenue—but based on cooperative work and internal planning in allocation of inputs—until the role of the capitalist becomes redundant. With no need for capital accumulation and a class of owners, private property in the means of production is perceived as being an outdated form of economic organisation that should be replaced by a free association of individuals based on public or common ownership of these socialised assets. Private ownership imposes constraints on planning, leading to uncoordinated economic decisions that result in business fluctuations, unemployment and a tremendous waste of material resources during crisis of overproduction.
Excessive disparities in income distribution lead to social instability and require costly corrective measures in the form of redistributive taxation, which incurs heavy administrative costs while weakening the incentive to work, inviting dishonesty and increasing the likelihood of tax evasion while (the corrective measures) reduce the overall efficiency of the market economy. These corrective policies limit the incentive system of the market by providing things such as minimum wages, unemployment insurance, taxing profits and reducing the reserve army of labour, resulting in reduced incentives for capitalists to invest in more production. In essence, social welfare policies cripple capitalism and its incentive system and are thus unsustainable in the long-run. Marxists argue that the establishment of a socialist mode of production is the only way to overcome these deficiencies. Socialists and specifically Marxian socialists argue that the inherent conflict of interests between the working class and capital prevent optimal use of available human resources and leads to contradictory interest groups (labour and business) striving to influence the state to intervene in the economy in their favour at the expense of overall economic efficiency.
Early socialists (utopian socialists and Ricardian socialists) criticised capitalism for concentrating power and wealth within a small segment of society. In addition, they complained that capitalism does not use available technology and resources to their maximum potential in the interests of the public.
—Karl Marx, Critique of the Gotha Program
Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels argued that socialism would emerge from historical necessity as capitalism rendered itself obsolete and unsustainable from increasing internal contradictions emerging from the development of the productive forces and technology. It was these advances in the productive forces combined with the old social relations of production of capitalism that would generate contradictions, leading to working-class consciousness.
Marx and Engels held the view that the consciousness of those who earn a wage or salary (the working class in the broadest Marxist sense) would be moulded by their conditions of wage slavery, leading to a tendency to seek their freedom or emancipation by overthrowing ownership of the means of production by capitalists and consequently, overthrowing the state that upheld this economic order. For Marx and Engels, conditions determine consciousness and ending the role of the capitalist class leads eventually to a classless society in which the state would wither away. The Marxist conception of socialism is that of a specific historical phase that would displace capitalism and precede communism. The major characteristics of socialism (particularly as conceived by Marx and Engels after the Paris Commune of 1871) are that the proletariat would control the means of production through a workers’ state erected by the workers in their interests. Economic activity would still be organised through the use of incentive systems and social classes would still exist, but to a lesser and diminishing extent than under capitalism.
For orthodox Marxists, socialism is the lower stage of communism based on the principle of “from each according to his ability, to each according to his contribution” while upper stage communism is based on the principle of “from each according to his ability, to each according to his need“, the upper stage becoming possible only after the socialist stage further develops economic efficiency and the automation of production has led to a superabundance of goods and services. Marx argued that the material productive forces (in industry and commerce) brought into existence by capitalism predicated a cooperative society since production had become a mass social, collective activity of the working class to create commodities but with private ownership (the relations of production or property relations). This conflict between collective effort in large factories and private ownership would bring about a conscious desire in the working class to establish collective ownership commensurate with the collective efforts their daily experience.
Role of the state
Socialists have taken different perspectives on the state and the role it should play in revolutionary struggles, in constructing socialism and within an established socialist economy.
In the 19th century, the philosophy of state socialism was first explicitly expounded by the German political philosopher Ferdinand Lassalle. In contrast to Karl Marx’s perspective of the state, Lassalle rejected the concept of the state as a class-based power structure whose main function was to preserve existing class structures. Lassalle also rejected the Marxist view that the state was destined to “wither away”. Lassalle considered the state to be an entity independent of class allegiances and an instrument of justice that would therefore be essential for achieving socialism.
Preceding the Bolshevik-led revolution in Russia, many socialists including reformists, orthodox Marxist currents such as council communism, anarchists and libertarian socialists criticised the idea of using the state to conduct central planning and own the means of production as a way to establish socialism. Following the victory of Leninism in Russia, the idea of “state socialism” spread rapidly throughout the socialist movement and eventually state socialism came to be identified with the Soviet economic model.
Joseph Schumpeter rejected the association of socialism and social ownership with state ownership over the means of production because the state as it exists in its current form is a product of capitalist society and cannot be transplanted to a different institutional framework. Schumpeter argued that there would be different institutions within socialism than those that exist within modern capitalism, just as feudalism had its own distinct and unique institutional forms. The state, along with concepts like property and taxation, were concepts exclusive to commercial society (capitalism) and attempting to place them within the context of a future socialist society would amount to a distortion of these concepts by using them out of context.
Utopian versus scientific
Utopian socialism is a term used to define the first currents of modern socialist thought as exemplified by the work of Henri de Saint-Simon, Charles Fourier and Robert Owen which inspired Karl Marx and other early socialists. However, visions of imaginary ideal societies, which competed with revolutionary social democratic movements, were viewed as not being grounded in the material conditions of society and as reactionary. Although it is technically possible for any set of ideas or any person living at any time in history to be a utopian socialist, the term is most often applied to those socialists who lived in the first quarter of the 19th century who were ascribed the label “utopian” by later socialists as a negative term in order to imply naivete and dismiss their ideas as fanciful or unrealistic.
Religious sects whose members live communally such as the Hutterites are not usually called “utopian socialists”, although their way of living is a prime example. They have been categorised as religious socialists by some. Similarly, modern intentional communities based on socialist ideas could also be categorised as “utopian socialist”.
For Marxists, the development of capitalism in Western Europe provided a material basis for the possibility of bringing about socialism because according to The Communist Manifesto “[w]hat the bourgeoisie produces above all is its own grave diggers”, namely the working class, which must become conscious of the historical objectives set it by society.
Reform versus revolution
Revolutionary socialists believe that a social revolution is necessary to effect structural changes to the socioeconomic structure of society. Among revolutionary socialists there are differences in strategy, theory and the definition of revolution. Orthodox Marxists and left communists take an impossibilist stance, believing that revolution should be spontaneous as a result of contradictions in society due to technological changes in the productive forces. Lenin theorised that under capitalism the workers cannot achieve class consciousness beyond organising into trade unions and making demands of the capitalists. Therefore, Leninists advocate that it is historically necessary for a vanguard of class conscious revolutionaries to take a central role in coordinating the social revolution to overthrow the capitalist state and eventually the institution of the state altogether. Revolution is not necessarily defined by revolutionary socialists as violent insurrection, but as a complete dismantling and rapid transformation of all areas of class society led by the majority of the masses: the working class.
Reformism is generally associated with social democracy and gradualist democratic socialism. Reformism is the belief that socialists should stand in parliamentary elections within capitalist society and if elected use the machinery of government to pass political and social reforms for the purposes of ameliorating the instabilities and inequities of capitalism. Within socialism, reformism is used in two different ways. One has no intention of bringing about socialism or fundamental economic change to society and is used to oppose such structural changes. The other is based on the assumption that while reforms are not socialist in themselves, they can help rally supporters to the cause of revolution by popularizing the cause of socialism to the working class.
The debate on the ability for social democratic reformism to lead to a socialist transformation of society is over a century old. Reformism is criticized for being paradoxical as it seeks to overcome the existing economic system of capitalism while trying to improve the conditions of capitalism, thereby making it appear more tolerable to society. According to Rosa Luxemburg, capitalism is not overthrown, “but is on the contrary strengthened by the development of social reforms”. In a similar vein, Stan Parker of the Socialist Party of Great Britain argues that reforms are a diversion of energy for socialists and are limited because they must adhere to the logic of capitalism. French social theorist Andre Gorz criticized reformism by advocating a third alternative to reformism and social revolution that he called “non-reformist reforms“, specifically focused on structural changes to capitalism as opposed to reforms to improve living conditions within capitalism or to prop it up through economic interventions.
Socialist economics starts from the premise that “individuals do not live or work in isolation but live in cooperation with one another. Furthermore, everything that people produce is in some sense a social product, and everyone who contributes to the production of a good is entitled to a share in it. Society as whole, therefore, should own or at least control property for the benefit of all its members”.
The original conception of socialism was an economic system whereby production was organised in a way to directly produce goods and services for their utility (or use-value in classical and Marxian economics), with the direct allocation of resources in terms of physical units as opposed to financial calculation and the economic laws of capitalism (see law of value), often entailing the end of capitalistic economic categories such as rent, interest, profit and money. In a fully developed socialist economy, production and balancing factor inputs with outputs becomes a technical process to be undertaken by engineers.
Market socialism refers to an array of different economic theories and systems that use the market mechanism to organise production and to allocate factor inputs among socially owned enterprises, with the economic surplus (profits) accruing to society in a social dividend as opposed to private capital owners. Variations of market socialism include libertarian proposals such as mutualism, based on classical economics, and neoclassical economic models such as the Lange Model. However, some economists such as Joseph Stiglitz, Mancur Olson and others not specifically advancing anti-socialists positions have shown that prevailing economic models upon which such democratic or market socialism models might be based have logical flaws or unworkable presuppositions.
The ownership of the means of production can be based on direct ownership by the users of the productive property through worker cooperative; or commonly owned by all of society with management and control delegated to those who operate/use the means of production; or public ownership by a state apparatus. Public ownership may refer to the creation of state-owned enterprises, nationalisation, municipalisation or autonomous collective institutions. Some socialists feel that in a socialist economy, at least the “commanding heights” of the economy must be publicly owned. However, economic liberals and right libertarians view private ownership of the means of production and the market exchange as natural entities or moral rights which are central to their conceptions of freedom and liberty and view the economic dynamics of capitalism as immutable and absolute, therefore they perceive public ownership of the means of production, cooperatives and economic planning as infringements upon liberty.
Management and control over the activities of enterprises are based on self-management and self-governance, with equal power-relations in the workplace to maximise occupational autonomy. A socialist form of organisation would eliminate controlling hierarchies so that only a hierarchy based on technical knowledge in the workplace remains. Every member would have decision-making power in the firm and would be able to participate in establishing its overall policy objectives. The policies/goals would be carried out by the technical specialists that form the coordinating hierarchy of the firm, who would establish plans or directives for the work community to accomplish these goals.
The role and use of money in a hypothetical socialist economy is a contested issue. According to the Austrian school economist Ludwig von Mises, an economic system that does not use money, financial calculation and market pricing would be unable to effectively value capital goods and coordinate production and therefore these types of socialism are impossible because they lack the necessary information to perform economic calculation in the first place. Socialists including Karl Marx, Robert Owen, Pierre-Joseph Proudhon and John Stuart Mill advocated various forms of labour vouchers or labour credits, which like money would be used to acquire articles of consumption, but unlike money they are unable to become capital and would not be used to allocate resources within the production process. Bolshevik revolutionary Leon Trotsky argued that money could not be arbitrarily abolished following a socialist revolution. Money had to exhaust its “historic mission”, meaning it would have to be used until its function became redundant, eventually being transformed into bookkeeping receipts for statisticians and only in the more distant future would money not be required for even that role.
A planned economy is a type of economy consisting of a mixture of public ownership of the means of production and the coordination of production and distribution through economic planning. A planned economy can be either decentralised or centralised. Enrico Barone provided a comprehensive theoretical framework for a planned socialist economy. In his model, assuming perfect computation techniques, simultaneous equations relating inputs and outputs to ratios of equivalence would provide appropriate valuations in order to balance supply and demand.
The most prominent example of a planned economy was the economic system of the Soviet Union and as such the centralised-planned economic model is usually associated with the communist states of the 20th century, where it was combined with a single-party political system. In a centrally planned economy, decisions regarding the quantity of goods and services to be produced are planned in advance by a planning agency (see also the analysis of Soviet-type economic planning). The economic systems of the Soviet Union and the Eastern Bloc are further classified as “command economies”, which are defined as systems where economic coordination is undertaken by commands, directives and production targets. Studies by economists of various political persuasions on the actual functioning of the Soviet economy indicate that it was not actually a planned economy. Instead of conscious planning, the Soviet economy was based on a process whereby the plan was modified by localised agents and the original plans went largely unfulfilled. Planning agencies, ministries and enterprises all adapted and bargained with each other during the formulation of the plan as opposed to following a plan passed down from a higher authority, leading some economists to suggest that planning did not actually take place within the Soviet economy and that a better description would be an “administered” or “managed” economy.
Although central planning was largely supported by Marxist–Leninists, some factions within the Soviet Union before the rise of Stalinism held positions contrary to central planning. Leon Trotsky rejected central planning in favour of decentralised planning. He argued that central planners, regardless of their intellectual capacity, would be unable to coordinate effectively all economic activity within an economy because they operated without the input and tacit knowledge embodied by the participation of the millions of people in the economy. As a result, central planners would be unable to respond to local economic conditions. State socialism is unfeasible in this view because information cannot be aggregated by a central body and effectively used to formulate a plan for an entire economy, because doing so would result in distorted or absent price signals.
A self-managed, decentralised economy is based on autonomous self-regulating economic units and a decentralised mechanism of resource allocation and decision-making. This model has found support in notable classical and neoclassical economists including Alfred Marshall, John Stuart Mill and Jaroslav Vanek. There are numerous variations of self-management, including labour-managed firms and worker-managed firms. The goals of self-management are to eliminate exploitation and reduce alienation. Guild socialism is a political movement advocating workers’ control of industry through the medium of trade-related guilds “in an implied contractual relationship with the public”. It originated in the United Kingdom and was at its most influential in the first quarter of the 20th century. It was strongly associated with G. D. H. Cole and influenced by the ideas of William Morris.
One such system is the cooperative economy, a largely free market economy in which workers manage the firms and democratically determine remuneration levels and labour divisions. Productive resources would be legally owned by the cooperative and rented to the workers, who would enjoy usufruct rights. Another form of decentralised planning is the use of cybernetics, or the use of computers to manage the allocation of economic inputs. The socialist-run government of Salvador Allende in Chile experimented with Project Cybersyn, a real-time information bridge between the government, state enterprises and consumers. Another, more recent variant is participatory economics, wherein the economy is planned by decentralised councils of workers and consumers. Workers would be remunerated solely according to effort and sacrifice, so that those engaged in dangerous, uncomfortable and strenuous work would receive the highest incomes and could thereby work less. A contemporary model for a self-managed, non-market socialism is Pat Devine‘s model of negotiated coordination. Negotiated coordination is based upon social ownership by those affected by the use of the assets involved, with decisions made by those at the most localised level of production.
Michel Bauwens identifies the emergence of the open software movement and peer-to-peer production as a new alternative mode of production to the capitalist economy and centrally planned economy that is based on collaborative self-management, common ownership of resources and the production of use-values through the free cooperation of producers who have access to distributed capital.
Anarcho-communism is a theory of anarchism which advocates the abolition of the state, private property and capitalism in favour of common ownership of the means of production. Anarcho-syndicalism was practised in Catalonia and other places in the Spanish Revolution during the Spanish Civil War. Sam Dolgoff estimated that about eight million people participated directly or at least indirectly in the Spanish Revolution.
The economy of the former Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia established a system based on market-based allocation, social ownership of the means of production and self-management within firms. This system substituted Yugoslavia’s Soviet-type central planning with a decentralised, self-managed system after reforms in 1953.
The Marxian economist Richard D. Wolff argues that “re-organising production so that workers become collectively self-directed at their work-sites” not only moves society beyond both capitalism and state socialism of the last century, but would also mark another milestone in human history, similar to earlier transitions out of slavery and feudalism. As an example, Wolff claims that Mondragon is “a stunningly successful alternative to the capitalist organisation of production”.
State socialism can be used to classify any variety of socialist philosophies that advocates the ownership of the means of production by the state apparatus, either as a transitional stage between capitalism and socialism, or as an end-goal in itself. Typically, it refers to a form of technocratic management, whereby technical specialists administer or manage economic enterprises on behalf of society and the public interest instead of workers’ councils or workplace democracy.
A state-directed economy may refer to a type of mixed economy consisting of public ownership over large industries, as promoted by various Social democratic political parties during the 20th century. This ideology influenced the policies of the British Labour Party during Clement Attlee’s administration. In the biography of the 1945 United Kingdom Labour Party Prime Minister Clement Attlee, Francis Beckett states: “[T]he government […] wanted what would become known as a mixed economy”.
Nationalisation in the United Kingdom was achieved through compulsory purchase of the industry (i.e. with compensation). British Aerospace was a combination of major aircraft companies British Aircraft Corporation, Hawker Siddeley and others. British Shipbuilders was a combination of the major shipbuilding companies including Cammell Laird, Govan Shipbuilders, Swan Hunter and Yarrow Shipbuilders, whereas the nationalisation of the coal mines in 1947 created a coal board charged with running the coal industry commercially so as to be able to meet the interest payable on the bonds which the former mine owners’ shares had been converted into.
Market socialism consists of publicly owned or cooperatively owned enterprises operating in a market economy. It is a system that uses the market and monetary prices for the allocation and accounting of the means of production, thereby retaining the process of capital accumulation. The profit generated would be used to directly remunerate employees, collectively sustain the enterprise or finance public institutions. In state-oriented forms of market socialism, in which state enterprises attempt to maximise profit, the profits can be used to fund government programs and services through a social dividend, eliminating or greatly diminishing the need for various forms of taxation that exist in capitalist systems. Neoclassical economist Léon Walras believed that a socialist economy based on state ownership of land and natural resources would provide a means of public finance to make income taxes unnecessary. Yugoslavia implemented a market socialist economy based on cooperatives and worker self-management.
Mutualism is an economic theory and anarchist school of thought that advocates a society where each person might possess a means of production, either individually or collectively, with trade representing equivalent amounts of labour in the free market. Integral to the scheme was the establishment of a mutual-credit bank that would lend to producers at a minimal interest rate, just high enough to cover administration. Mutualism is based on a labour theory of value that holds that when labour or its product is sold, in exchange it ought to receive goods or services embodying “the amount of labour necessary to produce an article of exactly similar and equal utility”.
The current economic system in China is formally referred to as a socialist market economy with Chinese characteristics. It combines a large state sector that comprises the commanding heights of the economy, which are guaranteed their public ownership status by law, with a private sector mainly engaged in commodity production and light industry responsible from anywhere between 33% to over 70% of GDP generated in 2005. Although there has been a rapid expansion of private-sector activity since the 1980s, privatisation of state assets was virtually halted and were partially reversed in 2005. The current Chinese economy consists of 150 corporatised state-owned enterprises that report directly to China’s central government. By 2008, these state-owned corporations had become increasingly dynamic and generated large increases in revenue for the state, resulting in a state-sector led recovery during the 2009 financial crises while accounting for most of China’s economic growth. However, the Chinese economic model is widely cited as a contemporary form of state capitalism, the major difference between Western capitalism and the Chinese model being the degree of state-ownership of shares in publicly listed corporations.
The Socialist Republic of Vietnam has adopted a similar model after the Doi Moi economic renovation, but slightly differs from the Chinese model in that the Vietnamese government retains firm control over the state sector and strategic industries, but allows for private-sector activity in commodity production.
The major socialist political movements are described below. Independent socialist theorists, utopian socialist authors and academic supporters of socialism may not be represented in these movements. Some political groups have called themselves socialist while holding views that some consider antithetical to socialism. The term socialist has also been used by some politicians on the political right as an epithet against certain individuals who do not consider themselves to be socialists and against policies that are not considered socialist by their proponents. There are many variations of socialism and as such there is no single definition encapsulating all of socialism. However, there have been common elements identified by scholars.
In his Dictionary of Socialism (1924), Angelo S. Rappoport analysed forty definitions of socialism to conclude that common elements of socialism include general criticism of the social effects of private ownership and control of capital—as being the cause of poverty, low wages, unemployment, economic and social inequality and a lack of economic security; a general view that the solution to these problems is a form of collective control over the means of production, distribution and exchange (the degree and means of control vary amongst socialist movements); an agreement that the outcome of this collective control should be a society based upon social justice, including social equality, economic protection of people and should provide a more satisfying life for most people.
In The Concepts of Socialism (1975), Bhikhu Parekh identifies four core principles of socialism and particularly socialist society, namely sociality, social responsibility, cooperation and planning. In his study Ideologies and Political Theory (1996), Michael Freeden states that all socialists share five themes: the first is that socialism posits that society is more than a mere collection of individuals; second, that it considers human welfare a desirable objective; third, that it considers humans by nature to be active and productive; fourth, it holds the belief of human equality; and fifth, that history is progressive and will create positive change on the condition that humans work to achieve such change.
Anarchism advocates stateless societies often defined as self-governed voluntary institutions, but that several authors have defined as more specific institutions based on non-hierarchical free associations. While anarchism holds the state to be undesirable, unnecessary or harmful, it is not the central aspect. Anarchism entails opposing authority or hierarchical organisation in the conduct of human relations, including the state system. Mutualists support market socialism, collectivist anarchists favour workers cooperatives and salaries based on the amount of time contributed to production, anarcho-communists advocate a direct transition from capitalism to libertarian communism and a gift economy and anarcho-syndicalists prefer workers’ direct action and the general strike.
The authoritarian–libertarian struggles and disputes within the socialist movement go back to the First International and the expulsion in 1872 of the anarchists, who went on to lead the Anti-authoritarian International and then founded their own libertarian international, the Anarchist St. Imier International. In 1888, the individualist anarchist Benjamin Tucker, who proclaimed himself to be an anarchistic socialist and libertarian socialist in opposition to the authoritarian state socialism and the compulsory communism, included the full text of a “Socialistic Letter” by Ernest Lesigne in his essay on “State Socialism and Anarchism”. According to Lesigne, there are two types of socialism: “One is dictatorial, the other libertarian”. Tucker’s two socialisms were the authoritarian state socialism which he associated to the Marxist school and the libertarian anarchist socialism, or simply anarchism, that he advocated. Tucker noted that the fact that the authoritarian “State Socialism has overshadowed other forms of Socialism gives it no right to a monopoly of the Socialistic idea”. According to Tucker, what those two schools of socialism had in common was the labor theory of value and the ends, by which anarchism pursued different means.
According to anarchists such as the authors of An Anarchist FAQ, anarchism is one of the many traditions of socialism. For anarchists and other anti-authoritarian socialists, socialism “can only mean a classless and anti-authoritarian (i.e. libertarian) society in which people manage their own affairs, either as individuals or as part of a group (depending on the situation). In other words, it implies self-management in all aspects of life”, including at the workplace. Michael Newman includes anarchism as one of many socialist traditions. Peter Marshall argues that “[i]n general anarchism is closer to socialism than liberalism. […] Anarchism finds itself largely in the socialist camp, but it also has outriders in liberalism. It cannot be reduced to socialism, and is best seen as a separate and distinctive doctrine”.
—Martin Luther King Jr., 1966
Democratic socialism represents any socialist movement that seeks to establish an economy based on economic democracy by and for the working class. Democratic socialism is difficult to define and groups of scholars have radically different definitions for the term. Some definitions simply refer to all forms of socialism that follow an electoral, reformist or evolutionary path to socialism rather than a revolutionary one. According to Christopher Pierson, “[i]f the contrast which 1989 highlights is not that between socialism in the East and liberal democracy in the West, the latter must be recognized to have been shaped, reformed and compromised by a century of social democratic pressure”. Pierson further claims that “social democratic and socialist parties within the constitutional arena in the West have almost always been involved in a politics of compromise with existing capitalist institutions (to whatever far distant prize its eyes might from time to time have been lifted)”. For Pierson, “if advocates of the death of socialism accept that social democrats belong within the socialist camp, as I think they must, then the contrast between socialism (in all its variants) and liberal democracy must collapse. For actually existing liberal democracy is, in substantial part, a product of socialist (social democratic) forces”.
Social democracy is a socialist tradition of political thought. Many social democrats refer to themselves as socialists or democratic socialists and some such as Tony Blair employ these terms interchangeably. Others found “clear differences” between the three terms and prefer to describe their own political beliefs by using the term social democracy. The two main directions were to establish democratic socialism or to build first a welfare state within the capitalist system. The first variant advances democratic socialism through reformist and gradualist methods. In the second variant, social democracy is a policy regime involving a welfare state, collective bargaining schemes, support for publicly financed public services and a mixed economy. It is often used in this manner to refer to Western and Northern Europe during the later half of the 20th century. It was described by Jerry Mander as “hybrid economics”, an active collaboration of capitalist and socialist visions. Numerous studies and surveys indicate that people tend to live happier lives in social democratic societies rather than neoliberal ones.
Social democrats advocate for a peaceful, evolutionary transition of the economy to socialism through progressive social reform. It asserts that the only acceptable constitutional form of government is representative democracy under the rule of law. It promotes extending democratic decision-making beyond political democracy to include economic democracy to guarantee employees and other economic stakeholders sufficient rights of co-determination. It supports a mixed economy that opposes inequality, poverty and oppression while rejecting both a totally unregulated market economy or a fully planned economy. Common social democratic policies include universal social rights and universally accessible public services such as education, health care, workers’ compensation and other services, including child care and elder care. Social democracy supports the trade union labour movement and supports collective bargaining rights for workers. Most social democratic parties are affiliated with the Socialist International.
Modern democratic socialism is a broad political movement that seeks to promote the ideals of socialism within the context of a democratic system. Some democratic socialists support social democracy as a temporary measure to reform the current system while others reject reformism in favour of more revolutionary methods. Modern social democracy emphasises a program of gradual legislative modification of capitalism in order to make it more equitable and humane while the theoretical end goal of building a socialist society is relegated to the indefinite future. According to Sheri Berman, Marxism is loosely held to be valuable for its emphasis on changing the world for a more just, better future.
The two movements are widely similar both in terminology and in ideology, although there are a few key differences. The major difference between social democracy and democratic socialism is the object of their politics in that contemporary social democrats support a welfare state and unemployment insurance as well as other practical, progressive reforms of capitalism and are more concerned to administrate and humanise it. On the other hand, democratic socialists seek to replace capitalism with a socialist economic system, arguing that any attempt to humanise capitalism through regulations and welfare policies would distort the market and create economic contradictions.
Ethical socialism appeals to socialism on ethical and moral grounds as opposed to economic, egoistic and consumeristic grounds. It emphasizes the need for a morally conscious economy based upon the principles of altruism, cooperation and social justice while opposing possessive individualism. Ethical socialism has been the official philosophy of mainstream socialist parties.
Liberal socialism incorporates liberal principles to socialism. It has been compared to post-war social democracy for its support of a mixed economy that includes both public and private capital goods. While democratic socialism and social democracy are anti-capitalist positions insofar as criticism of capitalism is linked to the private ownership of the means of production, liberal socialism identifies artificial and legalistic monopolies to be the fault of capitalism and opposes an entirely unregulated market economy. It considers both liberty and social equality to be compatible and mutually dependent.
Principles that can be described as ethical or liberal socialist have been based upon or developed by philosophers such as John Stuart Mill, Eduard Bernstein, John Dewey, Carlo Rosselli, Norberto Bobbio and Chantal Mouffe. Other important liberal socialist figures include Guido Calogero, Piero Gobetti, Leonard Trelawny Hobhouse, John Maynard Keynes and R. H. Tawney. Liberal socialism has been particularly prominent in British and Italian politics.
Leninism and precedents
Blanquism is a conception of revolution named for Louis Auguste Blanqui. It holds that socialist revolution should be carried out by a relatively small group of highly organised and secretive conspirators. Upon seizing power, the revolutionaries introduce socialism. Rosa Luxemburg and Eduard Bernstein criticised Lenin, stating that his conception of revolution was elitist and Blanquist. Marxism–Leninism combines Marx’s scientific socialist concepts and Lenin’s anti-imperialism, democratic centralism and party-building principles.
Hal Draper defined socialism from above as the philosophy which employs an elite administration to run the socialist state. The other side of socialism is a more democratic socialism from below. The idea of socialism from above is much more frequently discussed in elite circles than socialism from below—even if that is the Marxist ideal—because it is more practical. Draper viewed socialism from below as being the purer, more Marxist version of socialism. According to Draper, Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels were devoutly opposed to any socialist institution that was “conducive to superstitious authoritarianism”. Draper makes the argument that this division echoes the division between “reformist or revolutionary, peaceful or violent, democratic or authoritarian, etc.” and further identifies six major varieties of socialism from above, among them “Philanthropism”, “Elitism”, “Pannism”, “Communism”, “Permeationism” and “Socialism-from-Outside”.
According to Arthur Lipow, Marx and Engels were “the founders of modern revolutionary democratic socialism”, described as a form of “socialism from below” that is “based on a mass working-class movement, fighting from below for the extension of democracy and human freedom”. This type of socialism is contrasted to that of the “authoritarian, antidemocratic creed” and “the various totalitarian collectivist ideologies which claim the title of socialism” as well as “the many varieties of ‘socialism from above’ which have led in the twentieth century to movements and state forms in which a despotic ‘new class‘ rules over a statified economy in the name of socialism”, a division that “runs through the history of the socialist movement”. Lipow identifies Bellamyism and Stalinism as two prominent authoritarian socialist currents within the history of the socialist movement.
Libertarian socialism, sometimes called left-libertarianism, social anarchism and socialist libertarianism, is an anti-authoritarian, anti-statist and libertarian tradition within socialism that rejects centralised state ownership and control including criticism of wage labour relationships (wage slavery) as well as the state itself. It emphasises workers’ self-management and decentralised structures of political organisation. Libertarian socialism asserts that a society based on freedom and equality can be achieved through abolishing authoritarian institutions that control production. Libertarian socialists generally prefer direct democracy and federal or confederal associations such as libertarian municipalism, citizens’ assemblies, trade unions and workers’ councils.
Anarcho-syndicalist Gaston Leval explained: “We therefore foresee a Society in which all activities will be coordinated, a structure that has, at the same time, sufficient flexibility to permit the greatest possible autonomy for social life, or for the life of each enterprise, and enough cohesiveness to prevent all disorder. […] In a well-organised society, all of these things must be systematically accomplished by means of parallel federations, vertically united at the highest levels, constituting one vast organism in which all economic functions will be performed in solidarity with all others and that will permanently preserve the necessary cohesion”. All of this is generally done within a general call for libertarian and voluntary free associations through the identification, criticism and practical dismantling of illegitimate authority in all aspects of human life.
As part of the larger socialist movement, it seeks to distinguish itself from Bolshevism, Leninism and Marxism–Leninism as well as social democracy. Past and present political philosophies and movements commonly described as libertarian socialist include anarchism (anarcho-communism, anarcho-syndicalism collectivist anarchism, individualist anarchism and mutualism), autonomism, Communalism, participism, libertarian Marxism (council communism and Luxemburgism), revolutionary syndicalism and utopian socialism (Fourierism).
Christian socialism is a broad concept involving an intertwining of Christian religion with socialism.
Islamic socialism is a more spiritual form of socialism. Muslim socialists believe that the teachings of the Qur’an and Muhammad are compatible with principles of equality and public ownership, drawing inspiration from the early Medina welfare state he established. Muslim socialists are more conservative than their Western contemporaries and find their roots in anti-imperialism, anti-colonialism and Arab nationalism. Islamic socialists believe in deriving legitimacy from political mandate as opposed to religious texts.
Socialist feminism is a branch of feminism that argues that liberation can only be achieved by working to end both economic and cultural sources of women’s oppression. Marxist feminism‘s foundation was laid by Engels in The Origin of the Family, Private Property, and the State (1884). August Bebel‘s Woman under Socialism (1879), is the “single work dealing with sexuality most widely read by rank-and-file members of the Social Democratic Party of Germany (SPD)”. In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, both Clara Zetkin and Eleanor Marx were against the demonisation of men and supported a proletariat revolution that would overcome as many male-female inequalities as possible. As their movement already had the most radical demands in women’s equality, most Marxist leaders, including Clara Zetkin and Alexandra Kollontai, counterposed Marxism against liberal feminism rather than trying to combine them. Anarcha-feminism began with late 19th- and early 20th-century authors and theorists such as anarchist feminists Goldman and Voltairine de Cleyre In the Spanish Civil War, an anarcha-feminist group, Mujeres Libres (“Free Women”) linked to the Federación Anarquista Ibérica, organised to defend both anarchist and feminist ideas. In 1972, the Chicago Women’s Liberation Union published “Socialist Feminism: A Strategy for the Women’s Movement”, which is believed to be the first published use of the term “socialist feminism”.
Many socialists were early advocates for LGBT rights. For early socialist Charles Fourier, true freedom could only occur without suppressing passions, as the suppression of passions is not only destructive to the individual, but to society as a whole. Writing before the advent of the term “homosexuality”, Fourier recognised that both men and women have a wide range of sexual needs and preferences which may change throughout their lives, including same-sex sexuality and androgénité. He argued that all sexual expressions should be enjoyed as long as people are not abused and that “affirming one’s difference” can actually enhance social integration. In Oscar Wilde‘s The Soul of Man Under Socialism, he advocates for an egalitarian society where wealth is shared by all, while warning of the dangers of social systems that crush individuality. Edward Carpenter actively campaigned for homosexual rights. His work The Intermediate Sex: A Study of Some Transitional Types of Men and Women was a 1908 book arguing for gay liberation. who was an influential personality in the foundation of the Fabian Society and the Labour Party. After the Russian Revolution under the leadership of Lenin and Trotsky, the Soviet Union abolished previous laws against homosexuality. Harry Hay was an early leader in the American LGBT rights movement as well as a member of the Communist Party USA. He is known for his roles in helping to found gay organisations, including the Mattachine Society, the first sustained gay rights group in the United States which in its early days reflected a strong Marxist influence. The Encyclopedia of Homosexuality reports that “[a]s Marxists the founders of the group believed that the injustice and oppression which they suffered stemmed from relationships deeply embedded in the structure of American society”. Emerging from events such as the May 1968 insurrection in France, the anti-Vietnam war movement in the US and the Stonewall riots of 1969, militant gay liberation organisations began to spring up around the world. Many sprang from left radicalism more than established homophile groups, although the Gay Liberation Front took an anti-capitalist stance and attacked the nuclear family and traditional gender roles.
Eco-socialism is a political strain merging aspects of socialism, Marxism or libertarian socialism with green politics, ecology and alter-globalisation. Eco-socialists generally claim that the expansion of the capitalist system is the cause of social exclusion, poverty, war and environmental degradation through globalisation and imperialism under the supervision of repressive states and transnational structures. Contrary to the depiction of Karl Marx by some environmentalists, social ecologists and fellow socialists as a productivist who favoured the domination of nature, eco-socialists revisited Marx’s writings and believe that he “was a main originator of the ecological world-view”. Marx discussed a “metabolic rift” between man and nature, stating that “private ownership of the globe by single individuals will appear quite absurd as private ownership of one man by another” and his observation that a society must “hand it [the planet] down to succeeding generations in an improved condition”. English socialist William Morris is credited with developing principles of what was later called eco-socialism. During the 1880s and 1890s, Morris promoted his ideas within the Social Democratic Federation and Socialist League. Green anarchism blends anarchism with environmental issues. An important early influence was Henry David Thoreau and his book Walden as well as Élisée Reclus.
In the late 19th century, anarcho-naturism fused anarchism and naturist philosophies within individualist anarchist circles in France, Spain, Cuba and Portugal. Murray Bookchin‘s first book Our Synthetic Environment was followed by his essay “Ecology and Revolutionary Thought” which introduced ecology as a concept in radical politics. In the 1970s, Barry Commoner, claimed that capitalist technologies were chiefly responsible for environmental degradation as opposed to population pressures. In the 1990s socialist/feminists Mary Mellor and Ariel Salleh adopt an eco-socialist paradigm. An “environmentalism of the poor” combining ecological awareness and social justice has also become prominent. Pepper critiqued the current approach of many within green politics, particularly deep ecologists.
Many green parties around the world such as the Dutch Green Left Party (GroenLinks) employ eco-socialist elements. Radical red-green alliances have been formed in many countries by eco-socialists, radical greens and other radical left groups. In Denmark, the Red-Green Alliance was formed as a coalition of numerous radical parties. Within the European Parliament, a number of leftist parties from Northern Europe have organised themselves into the Nordic Green Left Alliance.
Syndicalism operates through industrial trade unions. It rejects state socialism and the use of establishment politics. Syndicalists reject state power in favour of strategies such as the general strike. Syndicalists advocate a socialist economy based on federated unions or syndicates of workers who own and manage the means of production. Some Marxist currents advocate syndicalism, such as De Leonism. Anarcho-syndicalism views syndicalism as a method for workers in capitalist society to gain control of an economy. The Spanish Revolution was largely orchestrated by the anarcho-syndicalist trade union CNT. The International Workers’ Association is an international federation of anarcho-syndicalist labour unions and initiatives.
Socialism is criticized in terms of its models of economic organization as well as its political and social implications. Other critiques are directed at the socialist movement, parties or existing states. Some criticisms occupy theoretical grounds (such as in the economic calculation problem and the socialist calculation debate) while others support their criticism by examining historical attempts to establish socialist societies. Because of socialism’s many varieties, most critiques focused on a specific approach. Proponents of one approach typically criticize others.
- Anarchism and socialism
- List of anti-capitalist and communist parties with national parliamentary representation
- List of communist ideologies
- List of socialist economists
- List of socialist songs
- List of socialist states
- Socialism by country
- Busky, Donald F. (2000). Democratic Socialism: A Global Survey. Praeger. p. 2. ISBN 978-0-275-96886-1.
Socialism may be defined as movements for social ownership and control of the economy. It is this idea that is the common element found in the many forms of socialism.
- Sinclair, Upton (1 January 1918). Upton Sinclair’s: A Monthly Magazine: for Social Justice, by Peaceful Means If Possible.
Socialism, you see, is a bird with two wings. The definition is ‘social ownership and democratic control of the instruments and means of production.’
- Arnold, N. Scott (1998). The Philosophy and Economics of Market Socialism: A Critical Study. Oxford University Press. p. 8. “What else does a socialist economic system involve? Those who favor socialism generally speak of social ownership, social control, or socialization of the means of production as the distinctive positive feature of a socialist economic system.”
- Rosser, Mariana V. and J Barkley Jr. (23 July 2003). Comparative Economics in a Transforming World Economy. MIT Press. p. 53. ISBN 978-0-262-18234-8.
Socialism is an economic system characterised by state or collective ownership of the means of production, land, and capital.
- Bertrand Badie; Dirk Berg-Schlosser; Leonardo Morlino (2011). International Encyclopedia of Political Science. SAGE Publications. p. 2456. ISBN 978-1-4129-5963-6.
Socialist systems are those regimes based on the economic and political theory of socialism, which advocates public ownership and cooperative management of the means of production and allocation of resources.
- Zimbalist, Sherman and Brown, Andrew, Howard J. and Stuart (1988). Comparing Economic Systems: A Political-Economic Approach. Harcourt College Pub. p. 7. ISBN 978-0-15-512403-5.
Pure socialism is defined as a system wherein all of the means of production are owned and run by the government and/or cooperative, nonprofit groups.
- Brus, Wlodzimierz (2015). The Economics and Politics of Socialism. Routledge. p. 87. ISBN 978-0-415-86647-7.
This alteration in the relationship between economy and politics is evident in the very definition of a socialist economic system. The basic characteristic of such a system is generally reckoned to be the predominance of the social ownership of the means of production.
- Nove, Alec. “Socialism”. New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics, Second Edition (2008).
A society may be defined as socialist if the major part of the means of production of goods and services is in some sense socially owned and operated, by state, socialised or cooperative enterprises. The practical issues of socialism comprise the relationships between management and workforce within the enterprise, the interrelationships between production units (plan versus markets), and, if the state owns and operates any part of the economy, who controls it and how.
- Michie, Jonathan (2001). Readers Guide to the Social Sciences. Routledge. p. 1516. ISBN 978-1-57958-091-9.
Just as private ownership defines capitalism, social ownership defines socialism. The essential characteristic of socialism in theory is that it destroys social hierarchies, and therefore leads to a politically and economically egalitarian society. Two closely related consequences follow. First, every individual is entitled to an equal ownership share that earns an aliquot part of the total social dividend…Second, in order to eliminate social hierarchy in the workplace, enterprises are run by those employed, and not by the representatives of private or state capital. Thus, the well-known historical tendency of the divorce between ownership and management is brought to an end. The society—i.e. every individual equally—owns capital and those who work are entitled to manage their own economic affairs.
- “Socialism”. The Free Dictionary. “2. (Government, Politics & Diplomacy) any of various social or political theories or movements in which the common welfare is to be achieved through the establishment of a socialist economic system”. Retrieved 27 January 2020.
- O’Hara, Phillip (2003). Encyclopedia of Political Economy, Volume 2. Routledge. p. 71. ISBN 978-0-415-24187-8.
In order of increasing decentralisation (at least) three forms of socialised ownership can be distinguished: state-owned firms, employee-owned (or socially) owned firms, and citizen ownership of equity.
- Lamb & Docherty 2006, p. 1
- Arnold, Scott (1994). The Philosophy and Economics of Market Socialism: A Critical Study. Oxford University Press. pp. 7–8. ISBN 978-0-19-508827-4.
This term is harder to define, since socialists disagree among themselves about what socialism ‘really is.’ It would seem that everyone (socialists and nonsocialists alike) could at least agree that it is not a system in which there is widespread private ownership of the means of production…To be a socialist is not just to believe in certain ends, goals, values, or ideals. It also requires a belief in a certain institutional means to achieve those ends; whatever that may mean in positive terms, it certainly presupposes, at a minimum, the belief that these ends and values cannot be achieved in an economic system in which there is widespread private ownership of the means of production…Those who favor socialism generally speak of social ownership, social control, or socialization of the means of production as the distinctive positive feature of a socialist economic system.
- Hastings, Mason and Pyper, Adrian, Alistair and Hugh (21 December 2000). The Oxford Companion to Christian Thought. Oxford University Press. p. 677. ISBN 978-0-19-860024-4.
Socialists have always recognized that there are many possible forms of social ownership of which co-operative ownership is one…Nevertheless, socialism has throughout its history been inseparable from some form of common ownership. By its very nature it involves the abolition of private ownership of capital; bringing the means of production, distribution, and exchange into public ownership and control is central to its philosophy. It is difficult to see how it can survive, in theory or practice, without this central idea.
- Kolb, Robert (19 October 2007). Encyclopedia of Business Ethics and Society, First Edition. SAGE Publications, Inc. p. 1345. ISBN 978-1412916523.
There are many forms of socialism, all of which eliminate private ownership of capital and replace it with collective ownership. These many forms, all focused on advancing distributive justice for long-term social welfare, can be divided into two broad types of socialism: nonmarket and market.
- Bockman, Johanna (2011). Markets in the name of Socialism: The Left-Wing origins of Neoliberalism. Stanford University Press. p. 20. ISBN 978-0-8047-7566-3.
socialism would function without capitalist economic categories—such as money, prices, interest, profits and rent—and thus would function according to laws other than those described by current economic science. While some socialists recognised the need for money and prices at least during the transition from capitalism to socialism, socialists more commonly believed that the socialist economy would soon administratively mobilise the economy in physical units without the use of prices or money.
- Steele, David Ramsay (1999). From Marx to Mises: Post Capitalist Society and the Challenge of Economic Calculation. Open Court. pp. 175–177. ISBN 978-0-87548-449-5.
Especially before the 1930s, many socialists and anti-socialists implicitly accepted some form of the following for the incompatibility of state-owned industry and factor markets. A market transaction is an exchange of property titles between two independent transactors. Thus internal market exchanges cease when all of industry is brought into the ownership of a single entity, whether the state or some other organization, […] the discussion applies equally to any form of social or community ownership, where the owning entity is conceived as a single organization or administration.
- Is Socialism Dead? A Comment on Market Socialism and Basic Income Capitalism, by Arneson, Richard J. 1992. Ethics, vol. 102, no. 3, pp. 485–511. April 1992: “Marxian socialism is often identified with the call to organize economic activity on a nonmarket basis.”
- Schweickart, David; Lawler, James; Ticktin, Hillel; Ollman, Bertell (1998). Market Socialism: The Debate Among Socialists. “The Difference Between Marxism and Market Socialism”. pp. 61–63. “More fundamentally, a socialist society must be one in which the economy is run on the principle of the direct satisfaction of human needs. […] Exchange-value, prices and so money are goals in themselves in a capitalist society or in any market. There is no necessary connection between the accumulation of capital or sums of money and human welfare. Under conditions of backwardness, the spur of money and the accumulation of wealth has led to a massive growth in industry and technology […]. It seems an odd argument to say that a capitalist will only be efficient in producing use-value of a good quality when trying to make more money than the next capitalist. It would seem easier to rely on the planning of use-values in a rational way, which because there is no duplication, would be produced more cheaply and be of a higher quality.”
- The Economics of Feasible Socialism Revisited, by Nove, Alexander. 1991. p. 13: “Under socialism, by definition, it (private property and factor markets) would be eliminated. There would then be something like ‘scientific management’, ‘the science of socially organized production’, but it would not be economics.”
- Kotz, David M. “Socialism and Capitalism: Are They Qualitatively Different Socioeconomic Systems?” (PDF). University of Massachusetts. Retrieved 19 February 2011. “This understanding of socialism was held not just by revolutionary Marxist socialists but also by evolutionary socialists, Christian socialists, and even anarchists. At that time, there was also wide agreement about the basic institutions of the future socialist system: public ownership instead of private ownership of the means of production, economic planning instead of market forces, production for use instead of for profit.”
- Weisskopf, Thomas E. (1992). “Toward a Socialism for the Future, in the Wake of the Demise of the Socialism of the Past”. Review of Radical Political Economics. 24 (3–4): 1–28. doi:10.1177/048661349202400302. “Socialism has historically been committed to the improvement of people’s material standards of living. Indeed, in earlier days many socialists saw the promotion of improving material living standards as the primary basis for socialism’s claim to superiority over capitalism, for socialism was to overcome the irrationality and inefficiency seen as endemic to a capitalist system of economic organization.” (p. 2).
- Prychito, David L. (2002). Markets, Planning, and Democracy: Essays After the Collapse of Communism. Edward Elgar Publishing. p. 12. ISBN 978-1-84064-519-4.
Socialism is a system based upon de facto public or social ownership of the means of production, the abolition of a hierarchical division of labor in the enterprise, a consciously organized social division of labor. Under socialism, money, competitive pricing, and profit-loss accounting would be destroyed.
- Von Mises, Ludwig (1990). Economic calculation in the Socialist Commonwealth (PDF). Mises Institute. Retrieved 11 November2019.
- Hayek, Friedrich (1935). “The Nature and History of the Problem”; “The Present State of the Debate”. Collectivist Economic Planning. pp. 1–40, 201–243.
- Durlauf, Steven N.; Blume, Lawrence E., ed. (1987). The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics Online. Palgrave Macmillan. Retrieved 2 February 2013. doi:10.1057/9780230226203.1570.
- Biddle, Jeff; Samuels, Warren; Davis, John (2006). A Companion to the History of Economic Thought, Wiley-Blackwell. p. 319. “What became known as the socialist calculation debate started when von Mises (1935 ) launched a critique of socialism”.
- Levy, David M.; Peart, Sandra J. (2008). “socialist calculation debate”. The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics. Second Edition. Palgrave Macmillan.
- Marangos, John (Fall 2004). “Social Dividend versus Basic Income Guarantee in Market Socialism”. International Journal of Political Economy. Taylor & Francis. 34 (3): 20–40. JSTOR 40470892.
- O’Hara, Phillip (2000). Encyclopedia of Political Economy, Volume 2. Routledge. p. 71. ISBN 978-0-415-24187-8.
Market socialism is the general designation for a number of models of economic systems. On the one hand, the market mechanism is utilized to distribute economic output, to organize production and to allocate factor inputs. On the other hand, the economic surplus accrues to society at large rather than to a class of private (capitalist) owners, through some form of collective, public or social ownership of capital.
- Pierson, Christopher (1995). Socialism After Communism: The New Market Socialism. Pennsylvania State Univ Press. p. 96. ISBN 978-0-271-01478-4.
At the heart of the market socialist model is the abolition of the large-scale private ownership of capital and its replacement by some form of ‘social ownership’. Even the most conservative accounts of market socialism insist that this abolition of large-scale holdings of private capital is essential. This requirement is fully consistent with the market socialists’ general claim that the vices of market capitalism lie not with the institutions of the market but with (the consequences of) the private ownership of capital […].
- Newman, Michael (2005). Socialism: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford University Press. p. 2. “In fact, socialism has been both centralist and local; organized from above and built from below; visionary and pragmatic; revolutionary and reformist; anti-state and statist; internationalist and nationalist; harnessed to political parties and shunning them; an outgrowth of trade unionism and independent of it; a feature of rich industrialized countries and poor peasant-based communities”.
- Ely, Richard T. (1883). French and German Socialism in Modern Times. New York: Harper and Brothers. pp. 204—205. “Social democrats forms the extreme wing of the socialists […] inclined to lay so much stress on equality of enjoyment, regardless of the value of one’s labor, that they might, perhaps, more properly be called communists. […] They have two distinguishing characteristics. The vast majority of them are laborers, and, as a rule, they expect the violent overthrow of existing institutions by revolution to precede the introduction of the socialistic state. I would not, by any means, say that they are all revolutionists, but the most of them undoubtedly are. […] The most general demands of the social democrats are the following: The state should exist exclusively for the laborers; land and capital must become collective property, and production be carried on unitedly. Private competition, in the ordinary sense of the term, is to cease.”
- Merkel, Wolfgang; Petring, Alexander; Henkes, Christian; Egle, Christoph (2008). Social Democracy in Power: The Capacity to Reform. Routledge Research in Comparative Politics. London: Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-43820-9.
- Heywood, Andrew (2012). Political Ideologies: An Introduction(5th ed.). Basingstoke, England: Palgrave Macmillan. p. 128. ISBN 978-0-230-36725-8.
Social democracy is an ideological stance that supports a broad balance between market capitalism, on the one hand, and state intervention, on the other hand. Being based on a compromise between the market and the state, social democracy lacks a systematic underlying theory and is, arguably, inherently vague. It is nevertheless associated with the following views: (1) capitalism is the only reliable means of generating wealth, but it is a morally defective means of distributing wealth because of its tendency towards poverty and inequality; (2) the defects of the capitalist system can be rectified through economic and social intervention, the state being the custodian of the public interest […].
- Roemer, John E. (1994). A Future for Socialism. “The long term and the short term”. Harvard University Press. pp. 25–27. ISBN 978-0-6743-3946-0.
- Berman, Sheri (1998). The Social Democratic Moment. Harvard University Press. p. 57. “Over the long term, however, democratizing Sweden’s political system was seen to be important not merely as a means but also as an end in itself. Achieving democracy was crucial not only because it would increase the power of the SAP in the Swedish political system but also because it was the form socialism would take once it arrived. Political, economic, and social equality went hand in hand, according to the SAP, and were all equally important characteristics of the future socialist society.” ISBN 978-0-6744-4261-0.
- Busky, Donald F. (20 July 2000). Democratic Socialism: A Global Survey. Praeger. pp. 7–8. ISBN 978-0-2759-6886-1.
- Bailey, David J. (2009). The Political Economy of European Social Democracy: A Critical Realist Approach. Routledge. p. 77. “[…] Giorgio Napolitano launched a medium-term programme, ‘which tended to justify the governmental deflationary policies, and asked for the understanding of the workers, since any economic recovery would be linked with the long-term goal of an advance towards democratic socialism'”. ISBN 978-0-4156-0425-3.
- Lamb, Peter (2015). Historical Dictionary of Socialism (3rd ed.). Rowman & Littlefield. p. 415. ISBN 978-1-4422-5826-6.
- Badie, Bertrand; Berg-Schlosser, Dirk; Morlino, Leonardo, eds. (2011). “Social Democracy”. International Encyclopedia of Political Science. 8. SAGE Publications. p. 2423. “Social democracy refers to a political tendency resting on three fundamental features: (1) democracy (e.g., equal rights to vote and form parties), (2) an economy partly regulated by the state (e.g., through Keynesianism), and (3) a welfare state offering social support to those in need (e.g., equal rights to education, health service, employment and pensions). ISBN 978-1-4129-5963-6.
- Smith, J. W. (2005). Economic Democracy: The Political Struggle for the 21st century. Radford: Institute for Economic Democracy Press. ISBN 1-933567-01-5.
- Gasper, Phillip (October 2005). The Communist Manifesto: A Road Map to History’s Most Important Political Document. Haymarket Books. p. 24. ISBN 978-1-931859-25-7.
As the nineteenth century progressed, “socialist” came to signify not only concern with the social question, but opposition to capitalism and support for some form of social ownership.
- Anthony Giddens. Beyond Left and Right: The Future of Radical Politics. 1998 edition. Cambridge, England, UK: Polity Press, 1994, 1998. p. 71.
- “Chapter 1 looks at the foundations of the doctrine by examining the contribution made by various traditions of socialism in the period between the early 19th century and the aftermath of the First World War. The two forms that emerged as dominant by the early 1920s were social democracy and communism.” Michael Newman. Socialism: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford University Press. 2005. p. 5.
- Kurian, George Thomas Kurian, ed. (2011). The Encyclopedia of Political Science. Washington, D.C.: CQ Press. p. 1554.
- Garrett Ward Sheldon. Encyclopedia of Political Thought. Fact on File. Inc. 2001. p. 280.
- Chomsky, Noam (1986). “The Soviet Union Versus Socialism”. Chomsky.info. Retrieved 29 January 2020.
- Howard, M. C.; King, J. E. (2001). “‘State Capitalism’ in the Soviet Union”. History of Economics Review. 34 (1): 110–126. doi:10.1080/10370196.2001.11733360.
- Wolff, Richard D. (27 June 2015). “Socialism Means Abolishing the Distinction Between Bosses and Employees”. Truthout.Retrieved 29 January 2020.
- Wilhelm, John Howard (1985). “The Soviet Union Has an Administered, Not a Planned, Economy”. Soviet Studies. 37 (1): 118–130. doi:10.1080/09668138508411571.
- Ellman, Michael (2007). “The Rise and Fall of Socialist Planning”. In Estrin, Saul; Kołodko, Grzegorz W.; Uvalić, Milica (eds.). Transition and Beyond: Essays in Honour of Mario Nuti. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. p. 22. ISBN 978-0-230-54697-4.
In the USSR in the late 1980s the system was normally referred to as the ‘administrative-command’ economy. What was fundamental to this system was not the plan but the role of administrative hierarchies at all levels of decision making; the absence of control over decision making by the population […].
- Barrett, William, ed. (1 April 1978). “Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy: A Symposium”. Commentary. Retrieved 14 June 2020. “If we were to extend the definition of socialism to include Labor Britain or socialist Sweden, there would be no difficulty in refuting the connection between capitalism and democracy.”
- Heilbroner, Robert L. (Winter 1991). “From Sweden to Socialism: A Small Symposium on Big Questions”. Dissident. Barkan, Joanne; Brand, Horst; Cohen, Mitchell; Coser, Lewis; Denitch, Bogdan; Fehèr, Ferenc; Heller, Agnès; Horvat, Branko; Tyler, Gus. pp. 96–110. Retrieved 17 April 2020.
- Kendall, Diana (2011). Sociology in Our Time: The Essentials. Cengage Learning. pp. 125–127. ISBN 9781111305505. “Sweden, Great Britain, and France have mixed economies, sometimes referred to as democratic socialism—an economic and political system that combines private ownership of some of the means of production, governmental distribution of some essential goods and services, and free elections. For example, government ownership in Sweden is limited primarily to railroads, mineral resources, a public bank, and liquor and tobacco operations.”
- Li, He (2015). Political Thought and China’s Transformation: Ideas Shaping Reform in Post-Mao China. Springer. pp. 60–69. ISBN 9781137427816. “The scholars in camp of democratic socialism believe that China should draw on the Sweden experience, which is suitable not only for the West but also for China. In the post-Mao China, the Chinese intellectuals are confronted with a variety of models. The liberals favor the American model and share the view that the Soviet model has become archaic and should be totally abandoned. Meanwhile, democratic socialism in Sweden provided an alternative model. Its sustained economic development and extensive welfare programs fascinated many. Numerous scholars within the democratic socialist camp argue that China should model itself politically and economically on Sweden, which is viewed as more genuinely socialist than China. There is a growing consensus among them that in the Nordic countries the welfare state has been extraordinarily successful in eliminating poverty.”
- Andrew Vincent. Modern political ideologies. Wiley-Blackwell publishing. 2010. p. 83
- Marvin Perry, Myrna Chase, Margaret Jacob, James R. Jacob. Western Civilization: Ideas, Politics, and Society – From 1600, Volume 2. Ninth Edition. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company, 2009. p. 540.
- Gregory, Paul; Stuart, Robert (2013). The Global Economy and its Economic Systems. South-Western College Publishing. p. 159. ISBN 978-1-285-05535-0.
Socialist writers of the nineteenth century proposed socialist arrangements for sharing as a response to the inequality and poverty of the industrial revolution. English socialist Robert Owen proposed that ownership and production take place in cooperatives, where all members shared equally. French socialist Henri Saint-Simon proposed to the contrary: socialism meant solving economic problems by means of state administration and planning, and taking advantage of new advances in science.
- Leroux: socialism is “the doctrine which would not give up any of the principles of Liberty, Equality, Fraternity” of the French Revolution of 1789. “Individualism and socialism” (1834)
- Oxford English Dictionary, etymology of socialism
- Russell, Bertrand (1972). A History of Western Philosophy. Touchstone. p. 781
- Williams, Raymond (1983). “Socialism”. Keywords: A vocabulary of culture and society, revised edition. Oxford University Press. p. 288. ISBN 978-0-19-520469-8.
Modern usage began to settle from the 1860s, and in spite of the earlier variations and distinctions it was socialist and socialism which came through as the predominant words … Communist, in spite of the distinction that had been made in the 1840s, was very much less used, and parties in the Marxist tradition took some variant of social and socialist as titles.
- Steele, David (1992). From Marx to Mises: Post-Capitalist Society and the Challenge of Economic Calculation. Open Court Publishing Company. p. 43. ISBN 978-0-87548-449-5.
One widespread distinction was that socialism socialised production only while communism socialised production and consumption.
- Steele, David (1992). From Marx to Mises: Post-Capitalist Society and the Challenge of Economic Calculation. Open Court Publishing Company. pp. 44–45. ISBN 978-0-87548-449-5.
By 1888, the term ‘socialism’ was in general use among Marxists, who had dropped ‘communism’, now considered an old fashioned term meaning the same as ‘socialism’. […] At the turn of the century, Marxists called themselves socialists. […] The definition of socialism and communism as successive stages was introduced into Marxist theory by Lenin in 1917. […] the new distinction was helpful to Lenin in defending his party against the traditional Marxist criticism that Russia was too backward for a socialist revolution.
- Busky, Donald F. (2000). Democratic Socialism: A Global Survey. Praeger. p. 9. ISBN 978-0-275-96886-1.
In a modern sense of the word, communism refers to the ideology of Marxism-Leninism.
- Williams, Raymond (1983). “Socialism”. Keywords: A Vocabulary of Culture and Society (revised ed.). Oxford University Press. p. 289. ISBN 978-0-19-520469-8.
The decisive distinction between socialist and communist, as in one sense these terms are now ordinarily used, came with the renaming, in 1918, of the Russian Social-Democratic Labour Party (Bolsheviks) as the All-Russian Communist Party (Bolsheviks). From that time on, a distinction of socialist from communist, often with supporting definitions such as social democrat or democratic socialist, became widely current, although it is significant that all communist parties, in line with earlier usage, continued to describe themselves as socialist and dedicated to socialism.
- Hudis, Peter; Vidal, Matt, Smith, Tony; Rotta, Tomás; Prew, Paul, eds. (September 2018 – June 2019). The Oxford Handbook of Karl Marx. “Marx’s Concept of Socialism”. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0190695545. doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190695545.001.0001.
- Williams, Raymond (1976). Keywords: A Vocabulary of Culture and Society. Fontana. ISBN 978-0-00-633479-8.
- Engels, Frederick, Preface to the 1888 English Edition of the Communist Manifesto, p. 202. Penguin (2002).
- Wilson, Fred. “John Stuart Mill”. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 10 July 2007. Retrieved 2 August 2016.
- “Mill, in contrast, advances a form of liberal democratic socialism for the enlargement of freedom as well as to realise social and distributive justice. He offers a powerful account of economic injustice and justice that is centered on his understanding of freedom and its conditions.” Bruce Baum, “[J. S. Mill and Liberal Socialism]”, Nadia Urbanati and Alex Zacharas, eds., J.S. Mill’s Political Thought: A Bicentennial Reassessment(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007).
- Principles of Political Economy with Some of Their Applications to Social Philosophy, IV.7.21. John Stuart Mill: Political Economy, IV.7.21. “The form of association, however, which if mankind continue to improve, must be expected in the end to predominate, is not that which can exist between a capitalist as chief, and work-people without a voice in the management, but the association of the labourers themselves on terms of equality, collectively owning the capital with which they carry on their operations, and working under managers elected and removable by themselves.”
- Robert Gildea, “1848 in European Collective Memory”, in Evans and Strandmann, eds. The Revolutions in Europe, 1848–1849 pp. 207–235.
- Roger Boesche (2003). The First Great Political Realist: Kautilya and His Arthashastra. Lexington Books. p. 67. ISBN 9780739106075.
- Radhakumud Mookerji. Chandragupta Maurya and His Times. Motilal Banarsidass. p. 102.
Kautiliya polity was based on a considerable amount of socialism and nationalisation of industries.
- pp. 276–77, A.E. Taylor, Plato: The Man and His Work, Dover 2001.
- p. 257, W. D. Ross, Aristotle, 6th ed.
- A Short History of the World. Progress Publishers. Moscow, 1974
- Oxford Encyclopedia of the Modern Islamic World. New York: Oxford University Press. 1995. p. 19. ISBN 978-0-19-506613-5. OCLC 94030758.
- “Abu Dharr al-Ghifari”. Oxford Islamic Studies Online. Retrieved 23 January 2010.
- And Once Again Abu Dharr. Retrieved 15 August 2011.
- Hanna, Sami A.; George H. Gardner (1969). Arab Socialism: A Documentary Survey. Leiden: E.J. Brill. pp. 273–74.
- Hanna, Sami A. (1969). “al-Takaful al-Ijtimai and Islamic Socialism”. The Muslim World. 59 (3–4): 275–86. doi:10.1111/j.1478-1913.1969.tb02639.x. Archived from the original on 13 September 2010.
- The Gospels, by Terry Eagleton, 2007
- “Labour revives faith in Christian Socialism”. 21 May 1994.
- Thomas Kurian (ed). The Encyclopedia of Political ScienceCQ Press. Washington D.c. 2011. p. 1555
- Paine, Thomas (2004). Common sense [with] Agrarian justice. Penguin. ISBN 0-14-101890-9. pp. 92–93.
- Blaug, Mark (1986). Who’s Who in Economics: A Biographical Dictionary of Major Economists 1700–1986. The MIT Press. p. 358. ISBN 978-0-262-02256-9.
- Bonnett, Alastair (2007). “The Other Rights of Man: The Revolutionary Plan of Thomas Spence”. History Today. 57 (9): 42–48.
- Andrew Vincent. Modern political ideologies. Wiley-Blackwell publishing. 2010. p. 88.
- Nik Brandal, Øivind Bratberg and Dag Einar Thorsen. The Nordic Model of Social Democracy. Pallgrave-Macmillan. 2013. p. 20.
- “socialism”. Encyclopedia Britannica.
- “Socialism”. Encyclopedia Britannica Online. “The origins of socialism as a political movement lie in the Industrial Revolution.”
- “Adam Smith”. Fsmitha.com. Retrieved 2 June 2010.
- “2: Birth of the Socialist Idea”. Anu.edu.au. Archived from the original on 7 August 2006. Retrieved 2 June 2010.
- Newman, Michael. (2005) Socialism: A Very Short Introduction, Oxford University Press, ISBN 0-19-280431-6
- “In Fourier’s system of Harmony all creative activity including industry, craft, agriculture, etc. will arise from liberated passion—this is the famous theory of “attractive labour.” Fourier sexualises work itself—the life of the Phalanstery is a continual orgy of intense feeling, intellection, & activity, a society of lovers & wild enthusiasts….The Harmonian does not live with some 1600 people under one roof because of compulsion or altruism, but because of the sheer pleasure of all the social, sexual, economic, “gastrosophic,” cultural, & creative relations this association allows & encourages”.“The Lemonade Ocean & Modern Times A Position Paper by Hakim Bey
- Rougerie, Jacques, La Commune de Paris. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France. ISBN 978-2-13-062078-5.
- Milza, Pierre, La Commune.
- Blin, Arnaud (2007). The History of Terrorism. Berkeley: University of California Press. p. 116. ISBN 978-0-520-24709-3.
- “It is unnecessary to repeat the accounts of the Geneva and Hague Congresses of the International in which the issues between Marx and Bakunin were fought out and the organisation itself split apart into the dying Marxist rump centered around the New York General Council and the anti-authoritarian majority centred around the Bakuninist Jura Federation. But it is desirable to consider some of the factors underlying the final emergence of a predominantly anarchist International in 1872.” George Woodcock. Anarchism: A History of Libertarian Ideas and Movements (1962). p. 243.
- Errico Malatesta. “A Talk About Anarchist Communism Between Two Workers”. Anarchy Archives. Archived from the originalon 10 January 2010. Retrieved 14 April 2016.
- Nunzio Pernicone, “Italian Anarchism 1864–1892”, pp. 111–13, AK Press 2009.
- James Guillaume, “Michael Bakunin – A Biographical Sketch”
- “Socialism” at Encyclopedia Britannica
- “Syndicalism – Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary”. merriam-webster.com.
- Wiarda, Howard J. Corporatism and comparative politics. M.E. Sharpe, 1996. pp. 65–66, 156.
- Rocker, Rudolf. Anarcho-Syndicalism: Theory and Practice. AK Press (2004) p. 73
- Cole, Margaret (1961). The Story of Fabian Socialism. Stanford University Press. ISBN 978-0-8047-0091-7.
- Discovering Imperialism: Social Democracy to World War I, 25 November 2011. (p. 249): “the pro-imperialist majority, led by Sidney Webb and George Bernard Shaw, advanced an intellectual justification for central control by the British Empire, arguing that existing institutions should simply work more ‘efficiently’.”
- “Guild Socialism”. Encyclopedia Britannica.
- Hewes, Amy (1922). “Guild Socialism: A Two Years’ Test”. The American Economic Review. 12 (2): 209–237. ISSN 0002-8282. JSTOR 1802623.
- The Second (Socialist) International 1889–1923. Retrieved 12 July 2007.
- George Woodcock. Anarchism: A History of Libertarian Ideas and Movements (1962). pp. 263–64
- Marx, Engels, Communist Manifesto, Selected Works, p. 52
- Rubio, José Luis. Las internacionales obreras en América. Madrid: 1971. p. 49
- Kowalski, Werner. Geschichte der sozialistischen arbeiter-internationale: 1923 – 19. Berlin: Dt. Verl. d. Wissenschaften, 1985. p. 286
- Rhodes, Campbell (30 April 2013). “A perfect picture of the statesman: John Christian Watson”. Museum of Australian Democracy. Retrieved 1 March 2020.
- “Adult Children of the Dream”. The Jerusalem Post – JPost.com.
- James C. Docherty. Historical dictionary of socialism. The Scarecrow Press Inc. London 1997. p. 144
- Lamb & Docherty 2006, p. 52
- “Commanding Heights: Lenin’s Critique of Global Capitalism”. Pbs.org. Retrieved 30 November 2010.
- Lenin, Vladimir. Meeting of the Petrograd Soviet of workers and soldiers’ deputies 25 January 1918, Collected works, Vol 26, p. 239. Lawrence and Wishart, (1964)
- Lenin, Vladimir. To workers Soldiers and Peasants, Collected works, Vol 26, p. 247. Lawrence and Wishart, (1964)
- Lenin, Vladimir. Collected Works, Vol 26, pp. 264–65. Lawrence and Wishart (1964)
- Caplan, Brian. “Lenin and the First Communist Revolutions, IV”. George Mason University. Retrieved 14 February 2008.Strictly, the Right Socialist Revolutionaries won whereas the Left Socialist Revolutionaries were in alliance with the Bolsheviks.
- Declaration of the RSDLP (Bolsheviks) group at the Constituent Assembly meeting 5 January 1918 Lenin, Collected Works, Vol 26, p. 429. Lawrence and Wishart (1964)
- Draft Decree on the Dissolution of the Constituent AssemblyLenin, Collected Works, Vol 26, p. 434. Lawrence and Wishart (1964)
- Payne, Robert; “The Life and Death of Lenin”, Grafton: paperback, pp. 425–40
- Lamb & Docherty 2006, p. 77
- Lamb & Docherty 2006, p. 177
- Lamb & Docherty 2006, p. 197
- Carr, E.H. – The Bolshevik Revolution 1917–1923. W.W. Norton & Company 1985.
- Avrich, Paul. “Russian Anarchists and the Civil War”, Russian Review, Vol. 27, No. 3 (Jul. 1968), pp. 296–306. Blackwell Publishing
- Guttridge, Leonard F. (2006). Mutiny: A History of Naval Insurrection. Naval Institute Press. p. 174. ISBN 978-1-59114-348-2.
- Smele, Jonathan (2006). The Russian Revolution and Civil War 1917–1921: An Annotated Bibliography. Continuum. p. 336. ISBN 978-1-59114-348-2.
- Avrich, Paul (1970). Kronstadt 1921. Princeton University Press. ISBN 978-0-691-08721-4.
- Noel-Schwartz, Heather. The Makhnovists & The Russian Revolution – Organization, Peasantry and Anarchism. Archived on Internet Archive. Accessed October 2010.
- Peter Marshall, Demanding the Impossible, PM Press (2010), p. 473.
- Skirda, Alexandre, Nestor Makhno: Anarchy’s Cossack. AK Press, 2004, p. 34
- Bertil, Hessel, Introduction, Theses, Resolutions and Manifestos of the first four congresses of the Third International, pxiii, Ink Links (1980)
- “We have always proclaimed, and repeated, this elementary truth of Marxism, that the victory of socialism requires the joint efforts of workers in a number of advanced countries.” Lenin, Sochineniya (Works), 5th ed. Vol. XLIV, p. 418, February 1922. (Quoted by Mosche Lewin in Lenin’s Last Struggle, p. 4. Pluto (1975))
- “The Munich Soviet (or “Council Republic”) of 1919 exhibited certain features of the TAZ, even though—like most revolutions—its stated goals were not exactly “temporary”. Gustav Landauer’s participation as Minister of Culture, along with Silvio Gesell as Minister of Economics and other anti-authoritarian and extreme libertarian socialists such as the poet/playwrights Erich Mühsam and Ernst Toller, and Ret Marut (the novelist B. Traven), gave the Soviet a distinct anarchist flavor.” Hakim Bey. “T.A.Z.: The Temporary Autonomous Zone, Ontological Anarchy, Poetic Terrorism”
- Gaab, Jeffrey S. (2006). Munich: Hofbräuhaus & History : Beer, Culture, & Politics. Peter Lang. p. 59. ISBN 978-0-8204-8606-2.
- p. 365 Taylor, Edumund The Fall of the Dynasties: The Collapse of Old Order 1963 Weidenfeld & Nicolson
- Paul Werner (Paul Frölich), Die Bayerische Räterepublik. Tatsachen und Kritik, p. 144
- Brunella Dalla Casa, Composizione di classe, rivendicazioni e professionalità nelle lotte del “biennio rosso” a Bologna, in: AA. VV, Bologna 1920; le origini del fascismo, a cura di Luciano Casali, Cappelli, Bologna 1982, p. 179.
- “1918–1921: The Italian factory occupations and Biennio Rosso”. libcom.org. Archived from the original on 5 November 2011.
- The Unione Sindacale Italiana “grew to 800,000 members and the influence of the Italian Anarchist Union (20,000 members plus Umanita Nova, its daily paper) grew accordingly … Anarchists were the first to suggest occupying workplaces.” “1918–1921: The Italian factory occupations – Biennio Rosso” Archived 5 November 2011 at the Wayback Machine on libcom.org
- “Soviet history: NEPmen”. Soviethistory.org. Archived from the original on 22 July 2011. Retrieved 2 June 2010.
- Mattson, Kevin. 2002. Intellectuals in Action: The Origins of the New Left and Radical Liberalism, 1945–1970. University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University Press, 2002. p. 34
- Memoirs of a Revolutionist: Essays in Political Criticism (1960). This was later republished with the title Politics Past.
- Goldman, Emma. “Trotsky Protests Too Much” – via Wikisource.
- Serge, Victor, From Lenin to Stalin, p. 55.
- Serge, Victor, From Lenin to Stalin, p. 52.
- Brinton, Maurice (1975). “The Bolsheviks and Workers’ Control 1917–1921 : The State and Counter-revolution”. Solidarity. Archived from the original on 20 December 2006. Retrieved 22 January 2007.[self-published source]
- Beevor, Antony (2006). The Battle for Spain: The Spanish Civil War 1936–1939. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson. p. 46. ISBN 978-0-297-84832-5.
- Bolloten, Burnett (1984). The Spanish Civil War: Revolution and Counterrevolution. University of North Carolina Press. p. 1107. ISBN 978-0-8078-1906-7.
- Sam Dolgoff. The Anarchist Collectives Workers’ Self-management in the Spanish Revolution 1936–1939. Free Life Editions; 1st edition (1974), pp. 6–7
- The Transitional Program. Retrieved 5 November 2008.
- Lamb & Docherty 2006, p. 320
- “Les trente glorieuses: 1945–1975”. Sund.ac.uk. Archived from the original on 28 September 2007. Retrieved 30 October2011.
- “Nationalisation of Anglo-Iranian Oil Company, 1951”. Yourarchives.nationalarchives.gov.uk. 11 June 2007. Retrieved 30 October 2011.
- Crosland, Anthony, The Future of Socialism, pp. 9, 89. (Constable, 2006)
- “The New Commanding Height: Labour Party Policy on North Sea Oil and Gas, 1964–74” in Contemporary British History, vol., Issue 1, Spring 2002, pp. 89–118.
- “UK steel : EEF”. UK steel. 12 September 2013. Archived from the original on 23 January 2008. Retrieved 11 October2013.
- Bevan, Aneurin, In Place of Fear, 2nd ed. (MacGibbon and Kee, 1961), p. 104
- Beckett, Francis, Clem Attlee (Politico’s, 2007) p. 247.
- Globalization and Taxation: Challenges to the Swedish Welfare State. By Sven Steinmo.
- Giverholt, Helge (19 November 2018), “Tage Erlander”, Store norske leksikon (in Norwegian), retrieved 30 November 2019,
Erlander satt lenger som statsminister enn noen annen i et parlamentarisk system, og han mer enn noen annen politiker preget Sveriges utvikling de første tiårene etter andre verdenskrig. Spesielt er hans navn knyttet til utviklingen av det moderne velferdssamfunnet og Sveriges nøytralitet i etterkrigstiden.
- Palme, Olof (1982). “Därför är jag demokratisk socialist”. Speech at the 1982 congress of the Swedish Social Democratic Party.
- Linderborg, Åsa (28 February 2006). “Detta borde vara vårt arv”. Archived 10 March 2006 at the Wayback MachineAftonbladet. Retrieved 14 November 2019.
- Tvedt, Knut Are; Bull, Edvard; Garvik, Olav (14 September 2019), “Arbeiderpartiet”, Store norske leksikon (in Norwegian), retrieved 30 November 2019
- Esping-Andersen, G. (1991). The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
- “Norges Kommunistiske Parti”.
- Fog, Mogens; Kragh, Jens, Larsen, Aksel, Moltke, Kai; Petersen, Gert (1977). Folkesocialisme. SP Forl.
- “Arbeidernes Kommunistparti” [“Workers’ Communist Party”]. Store norske leksikon (in Norwegian). Retrieved 5 August 2020.
- Schmitt, John; Zipperer, Ben (2006). “Is the U.S. a Good Model for Reducing Social Exclusion in Europe?”. The Post-autistic Economics Review. 40 (1).
- Newman, Michael (25 July 2005). Socialism: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford University Press.
- Berman, Sheri (2006). The Primacy of Politics: Social Democracy and the Making of Europe’s Twentieth Century. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- “Sosialdemokratiske partier”, Store norske leksikon (in Norwegian), 26 November 2018, retrieved 30 November 2019
- Thorsen, Dag Einar (29 June 2019), “sosialdemokrati”, Store norske leksikon (in Norwegian), retrieved 30 November 2019,
Det forekommer også at land eller politiske systemer omtales som sosialdemokratiske, dersom slike partier har vært toneangivende i politikkutformingen over lengre tid.
- Ferragina, Emanuele; Seeleib-Kaiser, Martin (October 2011). “Welfare Regime Debate: Past, Present, Futures?” Policy and Politics. Policy Press. 39 (4): 583–611. doi:10.1332/030557311X603592. Retrieved 5 August 2020.
- Dølvik, Jon Erik; Tone Fløtten; Jon M. Hippe; Bård Jordfald (2014). “Den nordiske modellen mot 2030. Et nytt kapittel?Fafo-rapport 2014:46” (in Norwegian Bokmål). Fafo. Retrieved 30 November 2019.
- Brandal, Nik; Bratberg, Øivind; Thorsen, Dag (2013). The Nordic model of social democracy. Springer.
- Moene, Karl Ove; Wallerstein, Michael (2006). “Social democracy as a development strategy”. In Pranab K. Bardhan; Samuel Bowles; Michael Wallerstein (eds.). Globalization and egalitarian redistribution. pp. 148–168.
- Byrkjeflot, Haldor (2001). “The Nordic model of democracy and management.” The democratic challenge to capitalism: Management and democracy in the Nordic countries. pp. 19–45.
- Pontusson, Jonas (24 August 2011). “Once Again A Model: Nordic Social Democracy in a Globalized World”. In Shoch, James; Ross, George W.; Cronin, James E. (eds.). What’s Left of the Left: Democrats and Social Democrats in Challenging Times. Duke University Press. pp. 89–115. ISBN 9780199322510.
- Hernes, Gudmund (1978): “Makt, blandingsøkonomi og blandingsadministrasjon”. In Gudmund Hernes, ed., Forhandlingsøkonomi og blandingsadministrasjon. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.
- Mæland, John Gunnar; Hatland, Aksel; Pedersen, Axel West (14 October 2019), “folketrygden”, Store norske leksikon (in Norwegian Bokmål), retrieved 19 August 2020
- Jenssen, Dag (2005). “Fra union til sosialdemokrati”. Nytt Norsk Tidsskrift (in Norwegian). 22 (04): 459–463. ISSN 1504-3053.
- Mjøset, L., & Cappelen, Å. (2011). The integration of the Norwegian oil economy into the world economy. In The Nordic varieties of capitalism. Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
- Hall, Peter A.; Gingerich, Daniel W. (2009). “Varieties of Capitalism and Institutional Complementarities in the Political Economy: An Empirical Analysis”. British Journal of Political Science. 39 (3): 449–482. ISSN 0007-1234.
- Ther, Philipp (2016). Europe since 1989: A History. Princeton University Press. p. 132. ISBN 9780691167374.
As a result of communist modernization, living standards in Eastern Europe rose.
- Hirsch, Donald; Kett, Joseph F.; Trefil, James S. (2002), The New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy, Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, p. 316, ISBN 978-0-618-22647-4,
Eastern Bloc. The name applied to the former communist states of eastern Europe, including Yugoslavia and Albania, as well as the countries of the Warsaw Pact
- Satyendra, Kush (2003), Encyclopaedic dictionary of political science, Sarup & Sons, p. 65, ISBN 978-81-7890-071-1,
the countries of Eastern Europe under communism
- Compare: Janzen, Jörg; Taraschewski, Thomas (2009). Shahshahānī, Suhaylā (ed.). Cities of Pilgrimage. Iuaes-series. 4. Münster: LIT Verlag. p. 190. ISBN 978-3-8258-1618-6. Retrieved 21 December 2012.
Until 1990, despite being a formally independent state, Mongolia had de facto been an integral part of the Soviet dominated Eastern Bloc.
- John Rettie, “The day Khrushchev denounced Stalin”, BBC, 18 February 2006.
- Within the Italian Communist Party (PCI) a split ensued: most ordinary members and the Party leadership, including Palmiro Togliatti and Giorgio Napolitano, regarded the Hungarian insurgents as counter-revolutionaries, as reported in l’Unità, the official PCI newspaper. The following are references in English on the conflicting positions of l’Unità, Antonio Giolitti and party boss Palmiro Togliatti, Giuseppe Di Vittorio and Pietro Nenni.
- However, Giuseppe Di Vittorio (chief of the Communist trade union CGIL) repudiated the leadership position as did the prominent party members Antonio Giolitti, Loris Fortuna and many other influential communist intellectuals, who later were expelled or left the party. Pietro Nenni, the national secretary of the Italian Socialist Party, a close ally of the PCI, opposed the Soviet intervention as well. Napolitano, elected in 2006 as President of the Italian Republic, wrote in his 2005 political autobiography that he regretted his justification of Soviet action in Hungary and that at the time he believed in party unity and the international leadership of Soviet communism.Napolitano, Giorgio (2005). Dal Pci al socialismo europeo. Un’autobiografia politica (From the Communist Party to European Socialism. A political autobiography) (in Italian). Laterza. ISBN 978-88-420-7715-2.
- Within the Communist Party of Great Britain (CPGB), dissent that began with the repudiation of Stalin by John Saville and E.P. Thompson, influential historians and members of the Communist Party Historians Group, culminated in a loss of thousands of party members as events unfolded in Hungary. Peter Fryer, correspondent for the CPGB newspaper The Daily Worker, reported accurately on the violent suppression of the uprising, but his dispatches were heavily censored; Fryer resigned from the paper upon his return, and was later expelled from the Communist Party. Fryer, Peter (1957). Hungarian Tragedy. London: D. Dobson. Chapter 9 (The Second Soviet Intervention). ASIN B0007J7674.
- In France, moderate Communists, such as historian Emmanuel Le Roy Ladurie, resigned, questioning the policy of supporting Soviet actions by the French Communist Party. The French anarchist philosopher and writer Albert Camus wrote an open letter, The Blood of the Hungarians, criticising the West’s lack of action. Even Jean-Paul Sartre, still a determined Communist Party member, criticised the Soviets in his article Le Fantôme de Staline, in Situations VII. Sartre, Jean-Paul (1956), L’intellectuel et les communistes français (in French)[permanent dead link] Le Web de l’Humanite, 21 June 2005. Retrieved 24 October 2006.
- Dirlik, Arif (2005). The Marxism in the Chinese revolution. Rowman & Littlefield. p. 20. ISBN 978-0-7425-3069-0.
- School of Politics and International Relations, University of Southern California, Von KleinSmid Institute of International Affairs (1988). Studies in Comparative Communism. 21. Butterworth-Heinemann. p. 134.
- Friedland, William; Rosberg Jr., Carl (1964). African Socialism. California: Stanford University Press. p. 3.
- “Cuba Marks 50 Years Since ‘Triumphant Revolution'”. Jason Beaubien. NPR. 1 January 2009. Retrieved 9 July 2013.
- Robinson, Geoffrey B. (2018). The Killing Season: A History of the Indonesian Massacres, 1965–66. Princeton University Press. p. 203. ISBN 978-1-4008-8886-3.
[…] a US Embassy official in Jakarta, Robert Martens, had supplied the Indonesian Army with lists containing the names of thousands of PKI officials in the months after the alleged coup attempt. According to the journalist Kathy Kadane, ‘As many as 5,000 names were furnished over a period of months to the Army there, and the Americans later checked off the names of those who had been killed or captured.’ Despite Martens later denials of any such intent, these actions almost certainly aided in the death or detention of many innocent people. They also sent a powerful message that the US government agreed with and supported the army’s campaign against the PKI, even as that campaign took its terrible toll in human lives.
- Mehr, Nathaniel (2009). Constructive Bloodbath in Indonesia: The United States, Great Britain and the Mass Killings of 1965–1966. Spokesman Books. ISBN 0-85124-767-9
- Roosa, John (2006). Pretext for Mass Murder: 30 September Movement and Suharto’s Coup d’État in Indonesia. Madison, Wisconsin: The University of Wisconsin Press. ISBN 978-0-299-22034-1
- Simpson, Bradley (2010). Economists with Guns: Authoritarian Development and U.S.–Indonesian Relations, 1960–1968. Stanford University Press. p. 193. ISBN 978-0-8047-7182-5.
Washington did everything in its power to encourage and facilitate the army-led massacre of alleged PKI members, and U.S. officials worried only that the killing of the party’s unarmed supporters might not go far enough, permitting Sukarno to return to power and frustrate the [Johnson] Administration’s emerging plans for a post-Sukarno Indonesia.
- Mark Aarons (2007). “Justice Betrayed: Post-1945 Responses to Genocide”. In David A. Blumenthal and Timothy L. H. McCormack (eds). The Legacy of Nuremberg: Civilising Influence or Institutionalised Vengeance? (International Humanitarian Law). Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. pp. 80–81. ISBN 90-04-15691-7
- Carmines, Edward G., and Geoffrey C. Layman. 1997. “Issue Evolution in Postwar American Politics.” In Byron Shafer, ed., Present Discontents. NJ:Chatham House Publishers.
- Cynthia Kaufman (2003). Ideas for Action: Relevant Theory for Radical Change. South End Press. p. 275. ISBN 978-0-89608-693-7.
- Todd Gitlin, “The Left’s Lost Universalism”. In Arthur M. Melzer, Jerry Weinberger and M. Richard Zinman, eds., Politics at the Turn of the Century, pp. 3–26 (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2001).
- Farred, Grant (2000). “Endgame Identity? Mapping the New Left Roots of Identity Politics”. New Literary History. 31 (4): 627–48. doi:10.1353/nlh.2000.0045. JSTOR 20057628.
- Jeffrey W. Coker. Confronting American Labor: The New Left Dilemma. Univ of Missouri Press, 2002.
- Pearson, Hugh (1994). In the Shadow of the Panther: Huey Newton and the Price of Black Power in America. Perseus Books. p. 152. ISBN 978-0-201-48341-3.
- Isserman, Maurice (2001). The Other American: The Life of Michael Harrington. Public Affairs. p. 281. ISBN 978-1-58648-036-3.
- “There must be a better distribution of wealth, and maybe America must move toward a democratic socialism.”Franklin, Robert Michael (1990). Liberating Visions: Human Fulfillment and Social Justice in African-American Thought. Fortress Press. p. 125. ISBN 978-0-8006-2392-0.
- Devlin, Kevin. “Western CPs Condemn Invasion, Hail Prague Spring”. Open Society Archives. Retrieved 20 February2008.[dead link]
- Andrew, Mitrokhin (2005), p. 444
- Harvey, David (2005). A Brief History of Neoliberalism. Oxford University Press. p. 7. ISBN 978-0-19-928327-9.
- Richard P. McBrien, Catholicism (Harper Collins, 1994), chapter IV.
- “One manifestation of this connection was liberation theology—sometimes characterised as an attempt to marry Marx and Jesus—which emerged among Roman Catholic theologians in Latin America in the 1960s.” “socialism” at Encyclopedia BritannicaOnline
- “Profile of Salvador Allende”. BBC. 8 September 2003.
- Blakeley, Ruth (2009). State Terrorism and Neoliberalism: The North in the South. Routledge. p. 22 & 23. ISBN 978-0-415-68617-4.
- Mark Aarons (2007). “Justice Betrayed: Post-1945 Responses to Genocide.” In David A. Blumenthal and Timothy L.H. McCormack (eds). The Legacy of Nuremberg: Civilising Influence or Institutionalised Vengeance? (International Humanitarian Law). Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. ISBN 90-04-15691-7 pp. 71
- McSherry, J. Patrice (2011). “Chapter 5: “Industrial repression” and Operation Condor in Latin America”. In Esparza, Marcia; Henry R. Huttenbach; Daniel Feierstein (eds.). State Violence and Genocide in Latin America: The Cold War Years (Critical Terrorism Studies). Routledge. p. 107. ISBN 978-0-415-66457-8.
- Robert Buddan (8 March 2009). “Michael Manley: nation-builder”. Jamaica Gleaner. Archived from the original on 25 January 2012. Retrieved 11 January 2012.
- “Where Would Jamaica Be Without Michael Manley?”. Jamaica Gleaner. 12 August 2012. Retrieved 11 March 2013.
- Louis Proyect, Nicaragua, discusses, among other things, the reforms and the degree to which socialism was intended or achieved.
- “Agrarian Productive Structure in Nicaragua”, SOLÁ MONSERRAT, Roser. 1989. p. 69 and ss.
- Louis Proyect, Nicaragua, about 4/5 of the way down.
- B. Arrien, Juan. “Literacy in Nicaragua” (PDF). UNESCO. Retrieved 1 August 2007.
- Wood, Elizabeth (2003). Insurgent Collective Action and Civil War in El Salvador. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Paolo Virno, Michael Hardt, Radical Thought in Italy: A Potential Politics, Minnesota Press, 2006. ISBN 978-0-8166-4924-2
- Sylvere Lotringer & Christian Marazzi ed. Autonomia: Post-Political Politics, New York: Semiotext(e), 1980, 2007
- James C. Docherty. Historical dictionary of socialism. The Scarecrow Press Inc. London 1997. pp. 181–82
- Webster, Dictionary. “Definition of Eurocommunism”. Dictionary Entry. Webster’s Dictionary. Retrieved 9 April 2013.
- The Dictionary of Contemporary Politics of South America, Routledge, 1989
- Hart-Landsberg, Martin; and Burkett, Paul. “China and Socialism: Market Reforms and Class Struggle”. Monthly Review. Retrieved 30 October 2008.
- Nation bucks trend of global poverty Archived 14 August 2011 at the Wayback Machine. China Daily. 11 July 2003. Retrieved 10 July 2013.
- China’s Average Economic Growth in 90s Ranked 1st in World. People’s Daily. 1 March 2000. Retrieved 10 July 2013.
- Stowe, Judy (28 April 1998). “Obituary: Nguyen Van Linh”. The Independent (London). p. 20.
- Ackland, Len (20 March 1988). “Long after U.S. war, Vietnam is still a mess”. St. Petersburg Times (Florida). p. 2-D.
- Murray, Geoffrey (1997). Vietnam: Dawn of a New Market. New York: St. Martin’s Press. pp. 24–25. ISBN 0-312-17392-X.
- Loan, Hoang Thi Bich (18 April 2007). “Consistently pursuing the socialist orientation in developing the market economy in Vietnam”. Communist Review. TạpchíCộngsản.org.vn. Archived from the original on 10 May 2011.
- Klein, Naomi (2008). The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism. Picador. ISBN 0-312-42799-9 p. 276
- Philip Whyman, Mark Baimbridge and Andrew Mullen (2012). The Political Economy of the European Social Model (Routledge Studies in the European Economy). Routledge. ISBN 0-415-47629-1 p. 108. “In short, Gorbachev aimed to lead the Soviet Union towards the Scandinavian social democratic model.”
- “1990 CIA World Factbook”. Central Intelligence Agency. Retrieved 9 March 2008.
- Oldfield, J.D. (2000) Structural economic change and the natural environment in the Russian Federation. Post-Communist Economies, 12(1): 77–90
- D.J. Peterson (1993). Troubled Lands: The Legacy of Soviet Environmental Destruction (A Rand Research Study). Westview Press. ISBN 978-0-8133-1674-1. Retrieved 3 April 2016.
- Appel, Hilary; Orenstein, Mitchell A. (2018). From Triumph to Crisis: Neoliberal Economic Reform in Postcommunist Countries. Cambridge University Press. p. 3. ISBN 978-1-108-43505-5.
- Scheidel, Walter (2017). The Great Leveler: Violence and the History of Inequality from the Stone Age to the Twenty-First Century. Princeton University Press. pp. 51, 222–23. ISBN 978-0-691-16502-8.
- Privatisation ‘raised death rate’. BBC, 15 January 2009. Retrieved 24 November 2018.
- Rosefielde, Steven (2001). “Premature Deaths: Russia’s Radical Economic Transition in Soviet Perspective”. Europe-Asia Studies. 53 (8): 1159–1176. doi:10.1080/09668130120093174.
- Ghodsee, Kristen (2017). Red Hangover: Legacies of Twentieth-Century Communism. Duke University Press. pp. 63–64. ISBN 978-0-8223-6949-3.
- Appel, Hilary; Orenstein, Mitchell A. (2018). From Triumph to Crisis: Neoliberal Economic Reform in Postcommunist Countries. Cambridge University Press. p. 36. ISBN 978-1-108-43505-5.
- Milanović, Branko (2015). “After the Wall Fell: The Poor Balance Sheet of the Transition to Capitalism”. Challenge. 58 (2): 135–138. doi:10.1080/05775132.2015.1012402.
So, what is the balance sheet of transition? Only three or at most five or six countries could be said to be on the road to becoming a part of the rich and (relatively) stable capitalist world. Many of the other countries are falling behind, and some are so far behind that they cannot aspire to go back to the point where they were when the Wall fell for several decades.
- Ghodsee, Kristen (2017). Red Hangover: Legacies of Twentieth-Century Communism. Duke University Press. pp. xix–xx, 134, 197–200. ISBN 978-0-8223-6949-3.
- Ghodsee, Kristen R.; Sehon, Scott (22 March 2018). “Anti-anti-communism”. Aeon. Retrieved 26 September 2018.
A 2009 poll in eight east European countries asked if the economic situation for ordinary people was ‘better, worse or about the same as it was under communism’. The results stunned observers: 72 per cent of Hungarians, and 62 per cent of both Ukrainians and Bulgarians believed that most people were worse off after 1989. In no country did more than 47 per cent of those surveyed agree that their lives improved after the advent of free markets. Subsequent polls and qualitative research across Russia and eastern Europe confirm the persistence of these sentiments as popular discontent with the failed promises of free-market prosperity has grown, especially among older people.
- “Confidence in Democracy and Capitalism Wanes in Former Soviet Union”. Pew Research Center’s Global Attitudes Project. 5 December 2011. Retrieved 24 November 2018.
- Gary Teeple (2000). Globalization and the Decline of Social Reform: Into the Twenty-first Century. Archived 4 September 2015 at the Wayback Machine. University of Toronto Press. p. 47. ISBN 978-1-55193-026-8
- “Socialist International – Progressive Politics for a Fairer World”. Archived from the original on 22 February 2008.
- Jane Lewis, Rebecca Surender. Welfare State Change: Towards a Third Way?. Oxford University Press, 2004. pp. 3–4, 16.
- “Labour Party Clause Four”. Labour.org.uk. 30 October 2008. Archived from the original on 11 July 2007. Retrieved 2 June2010.
- Ruud van Dijk; William Glenn Gray; Svetlana Savranskaya; Jeremi Suri; Qiang Zhai (2008). Encyclopedia of the Cold War. Taylor & Francis. p. 880. ISBN 978-0-203-88021-0.
- “Frontline: The Tank Man transcript”. Frontline. PBS. 11 April 2006. Retrieved 12 July 2008.
- Andrei Lankov. Review of The Cleanest Race. Far Eastern Economic Review. 4 December 2010.
- Hitchens, Christopher (1 February 2010). “A Nation of Racist Dwarfs”. Fighting Words. Slate. Retrieved 23 December 2012.
- Rank, Michael (10 April 2012). “Lifting the cloak on North Korean secrecy: The Cleanest Race, How North Koreans See Themselves by B R Myers”. Asia Times. Retrieved 13 December 2012.
- Janowitz, Morris (July 1975). “Sociological Theory and Social Control”. American Journal of Sociology. 81 (1): 82–108. doi:10.1086/226035. JSTOR 2777055.
- Gallup, John Luke (2002). “The wage labor market and inequality in Viet Nam in the 1990s”. Ideas.repec.org. Retrieved 7 November 2010.
- “Communist Party of Nepal”. Cpnm.org. 15 February 2010. Retrieved 2 June 2010.
- Wilkin, Sam (17 August 2004). “CountryRisk Maintaining Singapore’s Miracle”. Countryrisk.com. Retrieved 2 June 2010.
- Demetriou, Danielle (17 October 2008). “Japan’s young turn to Communist Party as they decide capitalism has let them down”. Telegraph. London. Retrieved 30 October 2011.
- “Communism on rise in recession-hit Japan”, BBC, 4 May 2009
- “Kibbutz reinvents itself after 100 years of history”. taipeitimes.com.
- Bulletproof Innovation: Kibbutz-Owned Plasan Sasa’s Ikea-Style, Flat-Pack Armor Kits, Nadav Shemer, Fast Company.
- Carolyn Gregoire (10 September 2013). The Happiest Countries In The World (Infographic). The Huffington Post. Retrieved 1 October 2013.
- R Goodin and P Pettit (eds), A Companion to Contemporary political philosophy
- Nordsieck, Wolfram. “Parties and Elections in Europe”. parties-and-elections.eu.
- Hudson, Kate (2012). The New European Left: A Socialism for the Twenty-First Century?. Palgrave Macmillan. p. 46. ISBN 978-1-137-26511-1.
- “Germany’s Left Party woos the SPD”. Wsws.org. 15 February 2008. Retrieved 2 June 2010.
- “Germany: Left makes big gains in poll | Green Left Weekly”. Greenleft.org.au. 10 October 2009. Archived from the originalon 17 December 2009. Retrieved 30 October 2011.
- “Nation and World News – El Paso Times”. 30 May 2012. Archived from the original on 30 May 2012.
- “Danish centre-right wins election”. BBC News. 14 November 2007. Retrieved 30 October 2011.
- “Global Daily – Europe’s political risks”. ABN AMRO Insights.
- Jackson, Patrick (4 May 2013). “Anti-establishment parties defy EU”. BBC News.
- Wheeler, Brian (22 May 2009). “Crow launches NO2EU euro campaign”. BBC News. Retrieved 30 October 2011.
- “Exclusive: Tommy Sheridan to stand for Euro elections”. The Daily Record. 10 March 2009. Archived from the original on 11 January 2012. Retrieved 30 October 2011.
- “Conference: Crisis in Working Class Representation”. RMT. Archived from the original on 27 September 2011. Retrieved 30 October 2011.
- “Launch of Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition”. Socialistparty.org.uk. 12 January 2010. Retrieved 30 October2011.
- Mulholland, Hélène (27 March 2010). “Hard left Tusc coalition to stand against Labour in 40 constituencies”. Guardian. London. Retrieved 30 October 2011.
- “Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition”. TUSC. Retrieved 30 October 2011.
- “How do we vote to stop the cuts?”. Socialist Party. Retrieved 30 October 2011.
- Loach, Ken; Hudson, Kate; Achcar, Gilbert (25 March 2013). “The Labour party has failed us. We need a new party of the left”. The Guardian. Retrieved 4 December 2013.
- Seymour, Richard. “Left Unity: A Report From The Founding Conference”. newleftproject.org. New Left Project. Archived from the original on 2 April 2015. Retrieved 3 March 2015.
- “‘Left Unity’ a New Radical Political Party of the Left”. Retrieved 4 December 2013.
- “RT News reports on Left Unity’s founding conference”. Retrieved 4 December 2013.
- “Jeremy Corbyn’s policies: how will he lead Labour?”. The Week. UK. 12 September 2015.
- “Has France moved to the right?”. Socialism Today. Retrieved 30 October 2011.
- “Le Nouveau parti anticapitaliste d’Olivier Besancenot est lancé”. Agence France-Presse. 29 June 2008. Archived from the original on 13 February 2012. Retrieved 27 November2018.
- Sky news:Spanish voters punish mainstream partiesArchived 9 December 2014 at the Wayback Machine
- “Vote 2014”. BBC.
- Estado, Boletín Oficial del (12 June 2014). “Acuerdo de la Junta Electoral Central, por el que se procede a la publicación de los resultados de las elecciones de Diputados al Parlamento Europeo”.
- “Presidente da República indicou Secretário-Geral do PS para Primeiro-Ministro” (in Portuguese). Presidência da República. 24 November 2015. Retrieved 4 December 2015.
- “Autonomism as a global social movement” by Patrick Cuninghame The Journal of Labor and Society · 1089–7011 · Volume 13 · December 2010 · pp. 451–64
- The Subversion of Politics: European Autonomous Social Movements and the Decolonization of Everyday Life Georgy Katsiaficas, AK Press 2006
- Paul, Ari (19 November 2013). Seattle’s election of Kshama Sawant shows socialism can play in America. The Guardian. Retrieved 9 February 2014.
- Sanders, Bernie (26 May 2013). What Can We Learn From Denmark? The Huffington Post. Retrieved 19 August 2013.
- Sasha Issenberg (9 January 2010). “Sanders a growing force on the far, far left”. Boston Globe. “You go to Scandinavia, and you will find that people have a much higher standard of living, in terms of education, health care, and decent paying jobs.” Retrieved 24 August 2013.
- Vyse, Graham (9 November 2018). “Democratic Socialists Rack Up Wins in States: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Rashida Tlaib made headlines for their congressional wins. But a number of Democratic Socialists also won state-level races this election”. Governing: The States and Localities. Retrieved 19 January 2019.
- Inc, Gallup. “Democrats More Positive About Socialism Than Capitalism”. Gallup.com.
- Gregory, Andy (7 November 2019). “More than a third of millennials approve of communism, YouGov poll indicates”. The Independent. Retrieved 31 December 2019.
- Klar, Rebecca (10 June 2019). “Poll: Socialism gaining in popularity”. The Hill. Retrieved 17 January 2020.
- “Current Party Standings”. www.ourcommons.ca. Archived from the original on 17 December 2019. Retrieved 29 January2020.
- “The failure of American political speech”. The Economist. 6 January 2012. ISSN 0013-0613. Retrieved 2 March 2019.
Socialism is not “the government should provide healthcare” or “the rich should be taxed more” nor any of the other watery social-democratic positions that the American right likes to demonise by calling them “socialist”—and granted, it is chiefly the right that does so, but the fact that rightists are so rarely confronted and ridiculed for it means that they have successfully muddied the political discourse to the point where an awful lot of Americans have only the flimsiest grasp of what socialism is. And that, in a country that sent tens of thousands of men to die fighting socialism, is frankly an insult to those dead soldiers’ memories.
- Cf. Carlos Baraibar & José Bayardi: “Foro de San Pablo ¿qué es y cuál es su historia?”, 23 August 2000, “Archived copy”. Archived from the original on 9 March 2016. Retrieved 13 February 2014.
- “Many Venezuelans Uncertain About Chávez’ ’21st century Socialism’ “. Archived from the original on 12 July 2007.
- “Nicolas Maduro sworn in as new Venezuelan president”. BBC News. 19 April 2013. Retrieved 19 April 2013.
- Gross, Neil (14 January 2007). “The many stripes of anti-Americanism – The Boston Globe”. Boston.com. Retrieved 30 October 2011.
- “South America’s leftward sweep”. BBC News. 2 March 2005. Retrieved 30 October 2011.
- McNickle, Colin (6 March 2005). “Latin America’s ‘pragmatic’ pink tide – Pittsburgh Tribune-Review”. Pittsburghlive.com. Archived from the original on 16 May 2016. Retrieved 30 October 2011.
- Lopes, Arthur (Spring 2016). “¿Viva la Contrarrevolución? South America’s Left Begins to Wave Goodbye”. Harvard International Review. 37 (3): 12–14.
South America, a historical bastion of populism, has always had a penchant for the left, but the continent’s predilection for unsustainable welfarism might be approaching a dramatic end. … This “pink tide” also included the rise of populist ideologies in some of these countries, such as Kirchnerismo in Argentina, Chavismo in Venezuela, and Lulopetismo in Brazil.
- Lopes, Dawisson Belém; de Faria, Carlos Aurélio Pimenta (January–April 2016). “When Foreign Policy Meets Social Demands in Latin America”. Contexto Internacional (Literature review). Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio de Janeiro. 38(1): 11–53. doi:10.1590/S0102-8529.2016380100001.
The wrong left, by contrast, was said to be populist, old-fashioned, and irresponsible …
- Bello (5 September 2019). “Will South America’s “pink tide” return?”. The Economist. Retrieved 28 October 2019.
- García Linera, Álvaro (20 October 2019). “Latin America’s Pink Tide Isn’t Over”. Jacobin. Retrieved 2 December 2019.
- Isbester, Katherine (2011). The Paradox of Democracy in Latin America: Ten Country Studies of Division and Resilience. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. p. xiii. ISBN 978-1442601802.
… the populous of Latin America are voting in the Pink Tide governments that struggle with reform while being prone to populism and authoritarianism.
- Boyle, Peter (22 June 2018). “Poll shows 58% of ‘Millennials’ in Australia favourable to socialism”. Green Left Wiki. Retrieved 22 August 2018.
- Franks and McAloon 2016, pp. 24–74.
- Aimer, Peter (1 June 2015). “Labour Party – Origins of the Labour Party”. Te Ara – The Encyclopedia of New Zealand. Ministry for Culture and Heritage. Retrieved 16 September 2019.
- Franks and McAloon 2016, pp. 87–105.
- Aimer, Peter (1 June 2015). “Page 2. First Labour government, 1935 to 1949”. Te Ara – The Encyclopedia of New Zealand. Ministry for Culture and Heritage. Retrieved 16 September 2019.
- Aimer, Peter (1 June 2015). “Page 4. Fourth, fifth and sixth Labour governments”. Te Ara – The Encyclopedia of New Zealand. Ministry for Culture and Heritage. Retrieved 16 September 2019.
- Kirk, Stacey (1 August 2017). “Jacinda Ardern says she can handle it and her path to the top would suggest she’s right”. The Dominion Post. Stuff.co.nz. Retrieved 15 August 2017.
- Murphy, Tim (30 August 2020). “What Jacinda Ardern wants”. Newsroom. Archived from the original on 16 August 2017. Retrieved 15 August 2017.
- Baynes, Chris (21 October 2017). “New Zealand’s new prime minister calls capitalism a ‘blatant failure‘“. The Independent. Retrieved 16 September 2019.
- “Basic document | Progressive Alliance”. Progressive-alliance.info. Retrieved 23 May 2013.
- “Archived copy” (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF)on 4 March 2014. Retrieved 23 May 2013.
- Andrew Vincent. Modern political ideologies. Wiley-Blackwell publishing. 2010. pp. 87–88
- “Socialism during its “mature phase““. Science Encyclopedia. 2013.
- Socialism and the Market: The Socialist Calculation Debate Revisited. Routledge Library of 20th Century Economics, 2000. p. 12. ISBN 978-0-415-19586-7.
- Claessens, August (2009). The logic of socialism. Kessinger Publishing, LLC. p. 15. ISBN 978-1-104-23840-7.
The individual is largely a product of his environment and much of his conduct and behavior is the reflex of getting a living in a particular stage of society.
- Ferri, Enrico, “Socialism and Modern Science”, in Evolution and Socialism (1912), p. 79. “Upon what point are orthodox political economy and socialism in absolute conflict? Political economy has held and holds that the economic laws governing the production and distribution of wealth which it has established are natural laws … not in the sense that they are laws naturally determined by the condition of the social organism (which would be correct), but that they are absolute laws, that is to say that they apply to humanity at all times and in all places, and consequently, that they are immutable in their principal points, though they may be subject to modification in details. Scientific socialism holds, the contrary, that the laws established by classical political economy, since the time of Adam Smith, are laws peculiar to the present period in the history of civilized humanity, and that they are, consequently, laws essentially relative to the period of their analysis and discovery.”
- Russell, Bertrand (1932). “In Praise of Idleness”.
- Bhargava. Political Theory: An Introduction. Pearson Education India, 2008. p. 249.
- Marx, Karl (1857–1861). “The Grundrisse”.
The free development of individualities, and hence not the reduction of necessary labour time so as to posit surplus labour, but rather the general reduction of the necessary labour of society to a minimum, which then corresponds to the artistic, scientific etc. development of the individuals in the time set free, and with the means created, for all of them.
- “Let’s produce for use, not profit”. Archived 16 July 2010 at the Wayback Machine
- Magdoff, Fred; Yates, Michael D. (November 2009). “What Needs To Be Done: A Socialist View”. Monthly Review. Retrieved 23 February 2014.
- “Let’s produce for use, not profit”. Archived from the originalon 16 July 2010. Retrieved 18 August 2015.
- “Economic Crisis from a Socialist Perspective | Professor Richard D. Wolff”. Rdwolff.com. 29 June 2009. Archived from the original on 28 February 2014. Retrieved 23 February 2014.
- Engels, Fredrich. Socialism: Utopian and Scientific. Retrieved 30 October 2010, from Marxists.org. “The bourgeoisie demonstrated to be a superfluous class. All its social functions are now performed by salaried employees.”
- The Political Economy of Socialism, by Horvat, Branko. 1982. Chapter 1: Capitalism, The General Pattern of Capitalist Development. pp. 15–20
- Marx and Engels Selected Works, Lawrence and Wishart, 1968, p. 40. Capitalist property relations put a “fetter” on the productive forces.
- The Political Economy of Socialism, by Horvat, Branko. 1982. p. 197
- The Political Economy of Socialism, by Horvat, Branko. 1982. (pp. 197–98)
- Market Socialism: The Debate Among Socialists, 1998. pp. 60–61″
- in Encyclopædia Britannica (2009). Retrieved 14 October 2009, from Encyclopædia Britannica Online: http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/551569/socialism, “Main” summary: “Socialists complain that capitalism necessarily leads to unfair and exploitative concentrations of wealth and power in the hands of the relative few who emerge victorious from free-market competition—people who then use their wealth and power to reinforce their dominance in society.”
- Karl Marx, Preface to A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy, 1859
- Comparing Economic Systems in the Twenty-First Century, 2003, by Gregory and Stuart. p. 62, Marx’s Theory of Change. ISBN 0-618-26181-8.
- Schaff, Kory (2001). Philosophy and the Problems of Work: A Reader. Lanham, Md: Rowman & Littlefield. p. 224. ISBN 978-0-7425-0795-1.
- Walicki, Andrzej (1995). Marxism and the leap to the kingdom of freedom: the rise and fall of the Communist utopia. Stanford, Calif: Stanford University Press. p. 95. ISBN 978-0-8047-2384-8.
- Berlau 1949, p. 21.
- Screpanti and Zamagni (2005). An Outline on the History of Economic Thought (2nd ed.). Oxford.
It should not be forgotten, however, that in the period of the Second International, some of the reformist currents of Marxism, as well as some of the extreme left-wing ones, not to speak of the anarchist groups, had already criticised the view that State ownership and central planning is the best road to socialism. But with the victory of Leninism in Russia, all dissent was silenced, and socialism became identified with ‘democratic centralism’, ‘central planning’, and State ownership of the means of production.
- Schumpeter, Joseph (2008). Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy. Harper Perennial. p. 169. ISBN 978-0-06-156161-0.
But there are still others (concepts and institutions) which by virtue of their nature cannot stand transplantation and always carry the flavor of a particular institutional framework. It is extremely dangerous, in fact it amounts to a distortion of historical description, to use them beyond the social world or culture whose denizens they are. Now ownership or property—also, so I believe, taxation—are such denizens of the world of commercial society, exactly as knights and fiefs are denizens of the feudal world. But so is the state (a denizen of commercial society).
- “Heaven on Earth: The Rise and Fall of Socialism”. Public Broadcasting System. Retrieved 15 December 2011.
- Draper, Hal (1990). Karl Marx’s Theory of Revolution, Volume IV: Critique of Other Socialisms. New York: Monthly Review Press. pp. 1–21. ISBN 978-0-85345-798-5.
- Marx and Engels, The Communist Manifesto.
- “The Leninist Concept of the Revolutionary Vanguard Party”. WRG. Retrieved 9 December 2013.
- Schaff, Adam, ‘Marxist Theory on Revolution and Violence’, p. 263. in Journal of the history of ideas, Vol 34, no. 2 (April–June 1973)
- Parker, Stan (March 2002). “Reformism – or socialism?”. Socialist Standard. Retrieved 26 December 2019.
- Hallas, Duncan (January 1973). “Do We Support Reformist Demands?”. Controversy: Do We Support Reformist Demands?. International Socialism. Retrieved 26 December2019.
- Clifton, Lois (November 2011). “Do we need reform of revolution?”. Socialist Review. Retrieved 26 December 2019.
- Bockman, Johanna (2011). Markets in the name of Socialism: The Left-Wing origins of Neoliberalism. Stanford University Press. p. 20. ISBN 978-0-8047-7566-3.
According to nineteenth-century socialist views, socialism would function without capitalist economic categories—such as money, prices, interest, profits and rent—and thus would function according to laws other than those described by current economic science. While some socialists recognised the need for money and prices at least during the transition from capitalism to socialism, socialists more commonly believed that the socialist economy would soon administratively mobilise the economy in physical units without the use of prices or money.
- Gregory and Stuart, Paul and Robert (2004). Comparing Economic Systems in the Twenty-First Century, Seventh Edition: “Socialist Economy”. George Hoffman. p. 117. ISBN 978-0-618-26181-9.
In such a setting, information problems are not serious, and engineers rather than economists can resolve the issue of factor proportions.
- O’Hara, Phillip (2003). Encyclopedia of Political Economy, Volume 2. Routledge. p. 70. ISBN 978-0-415-24187-8.
Market socialism is a general designation for a number of models of economic systems. On the one hand, the market mechanism is utilised to distribute economic output, to organise production and to allocate factor inputs. On the other hand, the economic surplus accrues to society at large rather than to a class of private (capitalist) owners, through some form of collective, public or social ownership of capital.
- Stiglitz, Joseph (1996). Whither Socialism?. The MIT Press. ISBN 978-0-262-69182-6.
- Mancur Olson, Jr., 1965, 2nd ed., 1971. The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups, Harvard University Press, Description, Table of Contents, and preview.
- “Excerpt from Commanding Heights”. Retrieved 30 November2010.
- “On Milton Friedman, MGR & Annaism”. Sangam.org. Retrieved 30 October 2011.
- Bellamy, Richard (2003). The Cambridge History of Twentieth-Century Political Thought. Cambridge University Press. p. 60. ISBN 978-0-521-56354-3.
- The Political Economy of Socialism, by Horvat, Branko. 1982. (p. 197): “The sandglass (socialist) model is based on the observation that there are two fundamentally different spheres of activity or decision making. The first is concerned with value judgments, and consequently each individual counts as one in this sphere. In the second, technical decisions are made on the basis of technical competence and expertise. The decisions of the first sphere are policy directives; those of the second, technical directives. The former are based on political authority as exercised by all members of the organisation; the latter, on professional authority specific to each member and growing out of the division of labour. Such an organisation involves a clearly defined coordinating hierarchy but eliminates a power hierarchy.”
- Ludwig Von Mises, Socialism, p. 119
- Von Mises, Ludwig (1990). Economic calculation in the Socialist Commonwealth (PDF). Ludwig von Mises Institute. Retrieved 8 September 2008.
- Leon Trotsky: The Revolution Betrayed (1936). Full Text. Chapter 4: “Having lost its ability to bring happiness or trample men in the dust, money will turn into mere bookkeeping receipts for the convenience of statisticians and for planning purposes. In the still more distant future, probably these receipts will not be needed.”
- Why Socialism? by Albert Einstein, Monthly Review, May 1949
- Gregory and Stuart, Paul and Robert (2004). Comparing Economic Systems in the Twenty-First Century, Seventh Edition. George Hoffman. pp. 120–21. ISBN 978-0-618-26181-9.
- Ericson, Richard E. “Command Economy” (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 25 November 2011. Retrieved 9 March 2012.
- Nove, Alec (1991). The Economics of Feasible Socialism, Revisited. Routledge. p. 78. ISBN 978-0-04-335049-2.
Several authors of the most diverse political views have stated that there is in fact no planning in the Soviet Union: Eugene Zaleski, J. Wilhelm, Hillel Ticktin. They all in their very different ways note the fact that plans are often (usually) unfulfilled, that information flows are distorted, that plan-instructions are the subject of bargaining, that there are many distortions and inconsistencies, indeed that (as many sources attest) plans are frequently altered within the period to which they are supposed to apply […̟].
- Writings 1932–33, p. 96, Leon Trotsky.
- F. A. Hayek, (1935), “The Nature and History of the Problem” and “The Present State of the Debate,” om in F. A. Hayek, ed. Collectivist Economic Planning, pp. 1–40, 201–43.
- O’Hara, Phillip (2003). Encyclopedia of Political Economy, Volume 2. Routledge. pp. 8–9. ISBN 978-0-415-24187-8.
One finds favorable opinions of cooperatives also among other great economists of the past, such as, for example, John Stuart Mill and Alfred Marshall…In eliminating the domination of capital over labour, firms run by workers eliminate capitalist exploitation and reduce alienation.
- “Guild Socialism”. Britannica.com. Retrieved 11 October2013.
- Vanek, Jaroslav, The Participatory Economy (Ithaca, NY.: Cornell University Press, 1971).
- “CYBERSYN/Cybernetic Synergy”. Cybersyn.cl. Retrieved 30 October 2011.
- Michael Albert and Robin Hahnel, The Political Economy of Participatory Economics (Princeton, NJ.: Princeton University Press, 1991).
- “Participatory Planning Through Negotiated Coordination”(PDF). Retrieved 30 October 2011.
- “The Political Economy of Peer Production”. CTheory. 12 January 2005.
- Alan James Mayne (1999). From Politics Past to Politics Future: An Integrated Analysis of Current and Emergent Paradigms. Greenwood Publishing Group. p. 131. ISBN 978-0-275-96151-0.
- Anarchism for Know-It-Alls. Filiquarian Publishing. 2008. ISBN 978-1-59986-218-7.
- Dolgoff, S. (1974), The Anarchist Collectives: Workers’ Self-Management in the Spanish Revolution, ISBN 978-0-914156-03-1
- Estrin, Saul. 1991. “Yugoslavia: The Case of Self-Managing Market Socialism.” Journal of Economic Perspectives, 5(4): 187–94.
- Wolff, Richard D. (2012). Democracy at Work: A Cure for Capitalism. Haymarket Books. ISBN 1-60846-247-1. pp. 13–14. “The disappearances of slaves and masters and lords and serfs would now be replicated by the disappearance of capitalists and workers. Such oppositional categories would no longer apply to the relationships of production, Instead, workers would become their own collective bosses. The two categories—employer and employee—would be integrated in the same individuals.”
- Wolff, Richard (24 June 2012). Yes, there is an alternative to capitalism: Mondragon shows the way. The Guardian.Retrieved 12 August 2013.
- Beckett, Francis, Clem Attlee, (2007) Politico’s.
- Socialist Party of Great Britain (1985). The Strike Weapon: Lessons of the Miners’ Strike (PDF). London: Socialist Party of Great Britain. Archived from the original (PDF) on 14 June 2007. Retrieved 28 April 2007.
- Hardcastle, Edgar (1947). “The Nationalisation of the Railways”. Socialist Standard. 43 (1). Retrieved 28 April 2007.
- Comparing Economic Systems in the Twenty-First Century, 2003, by Gregory and Stuart. ISBN 0-618-26181-8. p. 142: “It is an economic system that combines social ownership of capital with market allocation of capital…The state owns the means of production, and returns accrue to society at large.”
- Bockman, Johanna (2011). Markets in the name of Socialism: The Left-Wing origins of Neoliberalism. Stanford University Press. p. 21. ISBN 978-0-8047-7566-3.
For Walras, socialism would provide the necessary institutions for free competition and social justice. Socialism, in Walras’s view, entailed state ownership of land and natural resources and the abolition of income taxes. As owner of land and natural resources, the state could then lease these resources to many individuals and groups, which would eliminate monopolies and thus enable free competition. The leasing of land and natural resources would also provide enough state revenue to make income taxes unnecessary, allowing a worker to invest his savings and become ‘an owner or capitalist at the same time that he remains a worker.
- “Introduction”. Mutualist.org. Retrieved 29 April 2010.
- Miller, David. 1987. “Mutualism.” The Blackwell Encyclopedia of Political Thought. Blackwell Publishing. p. 11
- Tandy, Francis D., 1896, Voluntary Socialism, chapter 6, paragraph 15.
- “China names key industries for absolute state control”. China Daily. 19 December 2006. Retrieved 2 June 2010.
- English@peopledaily.com.cn (13 July 2005). “People’s Daily Online – China has socialist market economy in place”. English.people.com.cn. Retrieved 2 June 2010.
- “China and the OECD” (PDF). May 2006. Archived from the original (PDF) on 10 October 2008. Retrieved 2 June 2010.
- Talent, Jim. “10 China Myths for the New Decade | The Heritage Foundation”. Heritage.org. Archived from the original on 10 September 2010. Retrieved 2 June 2010.
- “Reassessing China’s State-Owned Enterprises”. Forbes. 8 July 2008. Retrieved 2 June 2010.
- “InfoViewer: China’s champions: Why state ownership is no longer proving a dead hand”. Us.ft.com. 28 August 2003. Archived from the original on 11 July 2011. Retrieved 2 June2010.
- “Archived copy” (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF)on 20 July 2011. Retrieved 18 November 2009.
- “China grows faster amid worries”. BBC News. 16 July 2009. Retrieved 7 April 2010.
- “VN Embassy : Socialist-oriented market economy: concept and development soluti”. Vietnamembassy-usa.org. 17 November 2003. Retrieved 2 June 2010.
- Lamb & Docherty 2006, pp. 1–3
- Lamb & Docherty 2006, pp. 1–2
- Lamb & Docherty 2006, p. 2
- “ANARCHISM, a social philosophy that rejects authoritarian government and maintains that voluntary institutions are best suited to express man’s natural social tendencies.” George Woodcock. “Anarchism” at The Encyclopedia of Philosophy
- “In a society developed on these lines, the voluntary associations which already now begin to cover all the fields of human activity would take a still greater extension so as to substitute themselves for the state in all its functions.” Peter Kropotkin. “Anarchism” from the Encyclopædia BritannicaArchived 6 January 2012 at the Wayback Machine
- “Anarchism.” The Shorter Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 2005. p. 14 “Anarchism is the view that a society without the state, or government, is both possible and desirable.”
- Sheehan, Sean. Anarchism, London: Reaktion Books Ltd., 2004. p. 85
- “IAF principles”. International of Anarchist Federations. Archived from the original on 5 January 2012.
The IAF – IFA fights for : the abolition of all forms of authority whether economical, political, social, religious, cultural or sexual.
- “as many anarchists have stressed, it is not government as such that they find objectionable, but the hierarchical forms of government associated with the nation state.” Judith Suissa. Anarchism and Education: a Philosophical Perspective. Routledge. New York. 2006. p. 7
- “That is why Anarchy, when it works to destroy authority in all its aspects, when it demands the abrogation of laws and the abolition of the mechanism that serves to impose them, when it refuses all hierarchical organisation and preaches free agreement—at the same time strives to maintain and enlarge the precious kernel of social customs without which no human or animal society can exist.” Peter Kropotkin. “Anarchism: its philosophy and ideal”. Archived 18 March 2012 at the Wayback Machine.
- “anarchists are opposed to irrational (e.g., illegitimate) authority, in other words, hierarchy—hierarchy being the institutionalisation of authority within a society.” “B.1 Why are anarchists against authority and hierarchy?” Archived 15 June 2012 at the Wayback Machine. In An Anarchist FAQ.
- Malatesta, Errico. “Towards Anarchism”. MAN!. OCLC 3930443. Archived from the original on 7 November 2012. Agrell, Siri (14 May 2007). “Working for The Man”. The Globe and Mail. Archived from the original on 16 May 2007. Retrieved 14 April 2008. “Anarchism”. Encyclopædia Britannica. Encyclopædia Britannica Premium Service. 2006. Archived from the original on 14 December 2006. Retrieved 29 August 2006.“Anarchism”. The Shorter Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy: 14. 2005.
Anarchism is the view that a society without the state, or government, is both possible and desirable.The following sources cite anarchism as a political philosophy: Mclaughlin, Paul (2007). Anarchism and Authority. Aldershot: Ashgate. p. 59. ISBN 978-0-7546-6196-2. Johnston, R. (2000). The Dictionary of Human Geography. Cambridge: Blackwell Publishers. p. 24. ISBN 978-0-631-20561-6.
- Slevin, Carl. “Anarchism.” The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Politics. Ed. Iain McLean and Alistair McMillan. Oxford University Press, 2003.
- “Anarchists do reject the state, as we will see. But to claim that this central aspect of anarchism is definitive is to sell anarchism short.”Anarchism and Authority: A Philosophical Introduction to Classical Anarchism by Paul McLaughlin. AshGate. 2007. p. 28
- “Anarchism, then, really stands for the liberation of the human mind from the dominion of religion; the liberation of the human body from the dominion of property; liberation from the shackles and restraint of government. Anarchism stands for a social order based on the free grouping of individuals for the purpose of producing real social wealth; an order that will guarantee to every human being free access to the earth and full enjoyment of the necessities of life, according to individual desires, tastes, and inclinations.” Emma Goldman. “What it Really Stands for Anarchy” in Anarchism and Other Essays.
- Ward, Colin (1966). “Anarchism as a Theory of Organization”. Archived from the original on 25 March 2010. Retrieved 1 March 2010.
- Brown, L. Susan (2002). “Anarchism as a Political Philosophy of Existential Individualism: Implications for Feminism”. The Politics of Individualism: Liberalism, Liberal Feminism and Anarchism. Black Rose Books Ltd. Publishing. p. 106.
- “Authority is defined in terms of the right to exercise social control (as explored in the “sociology of power”) and the correlative duty to obey (as explored in the “philosophy of practical reason”). Anarchism is distinguished, philosophically, by its scepticism towards such moral relations—by its questioning of the claims made for such normative power—and, practically, by its challenge to those “authoritative” powers which cannot justify their claims and which are therefore deemed illegitimate or without moral foundation.”Anarchism and Authority: A Philosophical Introduction to Classical Anarchism by Paul McLaughlin. AshGate. 2007. p. 1
- Individualist anarchist Benjamin Tucker defined anarchism as opposition to authority as follows “They found that they must turn either to the right or to the left,—follow either the path of Authority or the path of Liberty. Marx went one way; Warren and Proudhon the other. Thus were born State Socialism and Anarchism … Authority, takes many shapes, but, broadly speaking, her enemies divide themselves into three classes: first, those who abhor her both as a means and as an end of progress, opposing her openly, avowedly, sincerely, consistently, universally; second, those who profess to believe in her as a means of progress, but who accept her only so far as they think she will subserve their own selfish interests, denying her and her blessings to the rest of the world; third, those who distrust her as a means of progress, believing in her only as an end to be obtained by first trampling upon, violating, and outraging her. These three phases of opposition to Liberty are met in almost every sphere of thought and human activity. Good representatives of the first are seen in the Catholic Church and the Russian autocracy; of the second, in the Protestant Church and the Manchester school of politics and political economy; of the third, in the atheism of Gambetta and the socialism of Karl Marx.” Benjamin Tucker. Individual Liberty.
- Anarchist historian George Woodcock report of Mikhail Bakunin‘s anti-authoritarianism and shows opposition to both state and non-state forms of authority as follows: “All anarchists deny authority; many of them fight against it.” (p. 9) … Bakunin did not convert the League’s central committee to his full program, but he did persuade them to accept a remarkably radical recommendation to the Bern Congress of September 1868, demanding economic equality and implicitly attacking authority in both Church and State.”
- McKay, Iain, ed. (2008). “Isn’t libertarian socialism an oxymoron?”. An Anarchist FAQ. I. Stirling: AK Press. ISBN 978-1-902593-90-6. OCLC 182529204.
- Hahnel, Robin (2005). Economic Justice and Democracy. Routledge Press. p. 138. ISBN 0-415-93344-7.
- Lesigne (1887). “Socialistic Letters”. Le Radical. Retrieved 20 June 2020.
- Tucker, Benjamin (1911) . State Socialism and Anarchism: How Far They Agree and Wherein They Differ. Fifield.
- Tucker, Benjamin (1893). Instead of a Book by a Man Too Busy to Write One. pp. 363–364.
- Brown, Susan Love (1997). “The Free Market as Salvation from Government”. In Carrier, James G., ed. Meanings of the Market: The Free Market in Western Culture. Berg Publishers. p. 107. ISBN 9781859731499.
- Newman, Michael (2005). Socialism: A Very Short Introduction. p. 15. Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780192804310.
- Marshall, Peter (1992). Demanding the Impossible: A History of Anarchism. London: Harper Collins. p. 641. ISBN 9780002178556.
- Franklin, Robert Michael (1990). Liberating Visions: Human Fulfillment and Social Justice in African-American Thought. Fortress Press. p. 125. ISBN 978-0-8006-2392-0.
- Peter Dreier (20 January 2014). Martin Luther King Was a Radical, Not a Saint. Truthout. Retrieved 20 January 2014.
- Osagyefo Uhuru Sekou (20 January 2014). The radical gospel of Martin Luther King. Al Jazeera America. Retrieved 20 January 2014.
- This definition is captured in this statement by Anthony Crosland, who “argued that the socialisms of the pre-war world (not just that of the Marxists, but of the democratic socialists too) were now increasingly irrelevant”. Pierson, Chris (June 2005). “Lost property: What the Third Way lacks”. Journal of Political Ideologies. 10 (2): 145–63. doi:10.1080/13569310500097265.Other texts which use the terms democratic socialism in this way include Malcolm Hamilton Democratic Socialism in Britain and Sweden (St Martin’s Press 1989).
- Pierson, Christopher (1995). Socialism After Communism: The New Market Socialism. University Park, Pennsylvania: Penn State Press. p. 71. ISBN 9780271014791.
- Eatwell, Roger; Wright, Anthony (1999). Contemporary Political Ideologies (2nd ed.). London: Continuum. pp. 80–103. ISBN 9781855676053.
- Newman, Michael (2005). Socialism: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford University Press. p. 5. ISBN 9780192804310.
- Raza, Syed Ali. Social Democratic System. Global Peace Trust. p. 86. ISBN 978-969-9757-00-6.
- O’Reilly, David (12 April 2007). The New Progressive Dilemma: Australia and Tony Blair’s Legacy. Springer. p. 91. ISBN 978-0-230-62547-1.
- Gage, Beverly (17 July 2018). “America Can Never Sort Out Whether ‘Socialism’ Is Marginal or Rising”. The New York Times. Retrieved 17 September 2018.
- Brandal, Nik. (2013). The Nordic model of social democracy. Palgrave Macmillan. p. 7. ISBN 978-1-137-01327-9. OCLC 964790706.
- Busky, Donald F. (2000). Democratic Socialism: A Global Survey. Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Publishing Group. p. 8.
- Sejersted, Francis, 1936– (2011). The age of social democracy : Norway and Sweden in the twentieth century. Princeton University Press. ISBN 978-0-691-14774-1. OCLC 762965992.
- Mander, Jerry (2012). The Capitalism Papers: Fatal Flaws of an Obsolete System. Counterpoint. pp. 213–217. ISBN 978-1582437170.
- Brown, Andrew (12 September 2014). “Who are Europe’s happiest people – progressives or conservatives? | Andrew Brown”. The Guardian. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved 20 April2020.
- Eskow, Richard (15 October 2014). “New Study Finds Big Government Makes People Happy, “Free Markets” Don’t”. OurFuture.org by People’s Action. Retrieved 20 April 2020.
- Radcliff, Benjamin. “Opinion: Social safety net makes people happier”. CNN. Retrieved 20 April 2020.
- “World’s Happiest Countries? Social Democracies”. Common Dreams. Retrieved 20 April 2020.
- “Social democracy”. Britannica.com. Retrieved 12 October2013.
- Michael Newman (2005). Socialism: A Very Short Introduction. OUP Oxford. p. 74. ISBN 978-0-19-157789-5.
- Colby, Ira C. (Colby, Ira Christopher), (ed.) Dulmus, Catherine N., (ed.) Sowers, Karen M. (Sowers, Karen Marlaine), (ed.) (2013). Connecting social welfare policy to fields of practice. John Wiley & Sons. p. 29. ISBN 978-1-118-17700-6. OCLC 827894277.
- Upchurch, Martin, 1951– (2016). The crisis of social democratic trade unionism in Western Europe : the search for alternatives. Routledge. p. 51. ISBN 978-1-315-61514-1. OCLC 948604973.
- Berman, Sheri (2006). The Primacy of Politics: Social Democracy and the Making of Europe’s Twentieth Century. Cambridge University Press. p. 153. ISBN 9780521817998.
- Schweickart, David (2006). “Democratic Socialism”. Encyclopedia of Activism and Social Justice. Archived from the original on 17 June 2012. “Social democrats supported and tried to strengthen the basic institutions of the welfare state—pensions for all, public health care, public education, unemployment insurance. They supported and tried to strengthen the labour movement. The latter, as socialists, argued that capitalism could never be sufficiently humanised, and that trying to suppress the economic contradictions in one area would only see them emerge in a different guise elsewhere. (E.g., if you push unemployment too low, you’ll get inflation; if job security is too strong, labour discipline breaks down; etc.)”
- Thompson 2006, pp. 52, 58–59.
- Orlow 2000, p. 190; Tansey & Jackson 2008, p. 97.
- Gaus & Kukathas 2004, p. 420.
- Adams, Ian (1998). Ideology and Politics in Britain Today. Manchester University Press. p. 127. ISBN 978-0-7190-5056-5.
- Pugliese, Stanislao G., 1965- (1999). Carlo Rosselli : socialist heretic and antifascist exile. Harvard University Press. p. 99. OCLC 1029276342.
- Thompson, Noel W. (2006). Political economy and the Labour Party : the economics of democratic socialism 1884–2005. Routledge. pp. 60–61. OCLC 300363066.
- Lamb & Docherty 2006, pp. 1–2.
- Bartlett, Roland W. (1970). The success of modern private enterprise. The Interstate Printers and Publishers. p. 32. OCLC 878037469.
Liberal socialism, for example, is unequivocally in favour of the free market economy and of freedom of action for the individual and recognizes in legalistic and artificial monopolies the real evils of capitalism.
- Bastow, Steve. (2003). Third way discourse : European ideologies in the twentieth century. Edinburgh University Press. ISBN 0-7486-1560-1. OCLC 899035345.
- Urbinati, Nadia, 1955– Zakaras, Alex, 1976– (2007). J.S. Mill’s political thought : a bicentennial reassessment. Cambridge University Press. p. 101. ISBN 978-0-511-27472-5. OCLC 252535635.
- WisdomSupreme.com definition of Blanquism Archived 29 June 2017 at the Wayback Machine, last retrieved 25 April 2007
- NewYouth.com entry for Blanquism Archived 21 August 2008 at the Wayback Machine, last retrieved 25 April 2007
- Lenin (1917). “The State and Revolution”.
- Rosa Luxemburg as part of a longer section on Blanquism in her “Organizational Questions of Russian Social Democracy” (later published as “Leninism or Marxism?”), writes: “For Lenin, the difference between the Social democracy and Blanquism is reduced to the observation that in place of a handful of conspirators we have a class-conscious proletariat. He forgets that this difference implies a complete revision of our ideas on organisation and, therefore, an entirely different conception of centralism and the relations existing between the party and the struggle itself. Blanquism did not count on the direct action of the working class. It, therefore, did not need to organise the people for the revolution. The people were expected to play their part only at the moment of revolution. Preparation for the revolution concerned only the little group of revolutionists armed for the coup. Indeed, to assure the success of the revolutionary conspiracy, it was considered wiser to keep the mass at some distance from the conspirators.Rosa Luxemburg, Leninism or Marxism? Archived 27 September 2011 at the Wayback Machine, Marx.org Archived 28 September 2011 at the Wayback Machine, last retrieved 25 April 2007
- Marxism–Leninism. The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition. Houghton Mifflin Company.
- Draper, Hal (1970) . Two Souls of Socialism (revised ed.). Highland Park, Michigan: International Socialists. Archived from the original on 20 January 2016. Retrieved 20 January2016.
- Young, James D. (1988). Socialism Since 1889: A Biographical History. Totowa: Barnes & Noble Books. ISBN 978-0-389-20813-6.
- Young, James D. (1988). Socialism Since 1889: A Biographical History. Totowa: Barnes & Noble Books. ISBN 978-0-389-20813-6.
- Draper, Hal (1970) . Two Souls of Socialism (revised ed.). Highland Park, Michigan: International Socialists. Archived from the original on 20 January 2016. Retrieved 20 January2016.
We have mentioned several cases of this conviction that socialism is the business of a new ruling minority, non-capitalist in nature and therefore guaranteed pure, imposing its own domination either temporarily (for a mere historical era) or even permanently. In either case, this new ruling class is likely to see its goal as an Education Dictatorship over the masses — to Do Them Good, of course — the dictatorship being exercised by an elite party which suppresses all control from below, or by benevolent despots or Savior-Leaders of some kind, or by Shaw’s “Supermen,” by eugenic manipulators, by Proudhon’s “anarchist” managers or Saint-Simon’s technocrats or their more modern equivalents — with up-to-date terms and new verbal screens which can be hailed as fresh social theory as against “nineteenth-century Marxism.
- Lipow, Arthur (1991). Authoritarian Socialism in America: Edward Bellamy and the Nationalist Movement. University of California Press. p. 1. ISBN 9780520075436.
- “150 years of Libertarian”. theanarchistlibrary.org.
- Joseph Déjacque, De l’être-humain mâle et femelle – Lettre à P.J. Proudhon par Joseph Déjacque (in French)
- Bookchin, Murray and Janet Biehl. The Murray Bookchin Reader. Cassell, 1997. p. 170 ISBN 0-304-33873-7
- Hicks, Steven V. and Daniel E. Shannon. The American journal of economics and sociolology. Blackwell Pub, 2003. p. 612
- Ostergaard, Geoffrey. “Anarchism”. A Dictionary of Marxist Thought. Blackwell Publishing, 1991. p. 21.
- Chomsky, Noam (2004). Language and Politics. In Otero, Carlos Peregrín. AK Press. p. 739
- Miller, Wilbur R. (2012). The social history of crime and punishment in America. An encyclopedia. 5 vols. London: Sage Publications. p. 1007. ISBN 1-4129-8876-4. “There exist three major camps in libertarian thought: right-libertarianism, socialist libertarianism, and …”
- “It implies a classless and anti-authoritarian (i.e. libertarian) society in which people manage their own affairs” I.1 Isn’t libertarian socialism an oxymoron? Archived 16 November 2017 at the Wayback Machine at An Anarchist FAQ
- “unlike other socialists, they tend to see (to various different degrees, depending on the thinker) to be skeptical of centralised state intervention as the solution to capitalist exploitation…” Roderick T. Long. “Toward a libertarian theory of class.” Social Philosophy and Policy. Volume 15. Issue 02. Summer 1998. Pg. 305
- “Therefore, rather than being an oxymoron, “libertarian socialism” indicates that true socialism must be libertarian and that a libertarian who is not a socialist is a phoney. As true socialists oppose wage labour, they must also oppose the state for the same reasons. Similarly, libertarians must oppose wage labour for the same reasons they must oppose the state.” “I1. Isn´t libertarian socialism an oxymoron”. Archived 16 November 2017 at the Wayback Machine. In An Anarchist FAQ.
- “So, libertarian socialism rejects the idea of state ownership and control of the economy, along with the state as such. Through workers’ self-management it proposes to bring an end to authority, exploitation, and hierarchy in production.” “I1. Isn´t libertarian socialism an oxymoron” in Archived 16 November 2017 at the Wayback Machine An Anarchist FAQ
- ” …preferring a system of popular self governance via networks of decentralized, local voluntary, participatory, cooperative associations. Roderick T. Long. “Toward a libertarian theory of class.” Social Philosophy and Policy. Volume 15. Issue 02. Summer 1998. Pg. 305
- Mendes, Silva. Socialismo Libertário ou Anarchismo Vol. 1 (1896): “Society should be free through mankind’s spontaneous federative affiliation to life, based on the community of land and tools of the trade; meaning: Anarchy will be equality by abolition of private property (while retaining respect for personal property) and liberty by abolition of authority“.
- “…preferring a system of popular self governance via networks of decentralized, local, voluntary, participatory, cooperative associations-sometimes as a complement to and check on state power…”
- Rocker, Rudolf (2004). Anarcho-Syndicalism: Theory and Practice. AK Press. p. 65. ISBN 978-1-902593-92-0.
- Leval, Gaston (1959). “Libertarian Socialism: A Practical Outline”. Libcom.org. Retrieved 22 August 2020.
- “LibSoc share with LibCap an aversion to any interference to freedom of thought, expression or choice of lifestyle.” Roderick T. Long. “Toward a libertarian theory of class.” Social Philosophy and Policy. Volume 15. Issue 02. Summer 1998. p 305
- “What is implied by the term ‘libertarian socialism’?: The idea that socialism is first and foremost about freedom and therefore about overcoming the domination, repression, and alienation that block the free flow of human creativity, thought, and action…An approach to socialism that incorporates cultural revolution, women’s and children’s liberation, and the critique and transformation of daily life, as well as the more traditional concerns of socialist politics. A politics that is completely revolutionary because it seeks to transform all of reality. We do not think that capturing the economy and the state lead automatically to the transformation of the rest of social being, nor do we equate liberation with changing our life-styles and our heads. Capitalism is a total system that invades all areas of life: socialism must be the overcoming of capitalist reality in its entirety, or it is nothing.” “What is Libertarian Socialism?” by Ulli Diemer. Volume 2, Number 1 (Summer 1997 issue) of The Red Menace.
- “The Soviet Union Versus Socialism”. chomsky.info. Retrieved 22 November 2015.
Libertarian socialism, furthermore, does not limit its aims to democratic control by producers over production, but seeks to abolish all forms of domination and hierarchy in every aspect of social and personal life, an unending struggle, since progress in achieving a more just society will lead to new insight and understanding of forms of oppression that may be concealed in traditional practice and consciousness.
- “Authority is defined in terms of the right to exercise social control (as explored in the “sociology of power”) and the correlative duty to obey (as explred in the “philosophy of practical reason”). Anarchism is distinguished, philosophically, by its scepticism towards such moral relations—by its questioning of the claims made for such normative power—and, practically, by its challenge to those “authoritative” powers which cannot justify their claims and which are therefore deemed illegitimate or without moral foundation. “Anarchism and Authority: A Philosophical Introduction to Classical Anarchism by Paul McLaughlin. AshGate. 2007. p. 1
- “It is forgotten that the early defenders of commercial society like [Adam] Smith were as much concerned with criticising the associational blocks to mobile labour represented by guilds as they were to the activities of the state. The history of socialist thought includes a long associational and anti-statist tradition prior to the political victory of the Bolshevism in the east and varieties of Fabianism in the west. John O´Neil.” The Market: Ethics, knowledge and politics. Routledge. 1998. p. 3
- Sims, Franwa (2006). The Anacostia Diaries As It Is. Lulu Press. p. 160.
- “(Benjamin) Tucker referred to himself many times as a socialist and considered his philosophy to be “Anarchistic socialism.” An Anarchist FAQ by Various Authors
- French individualist anarchist Émile Armand shows clearly opposition to capitalism and centralised economies when he said that the individualist anarchist “inwardly he remains refractory—fatally refractory—morally, intellectually, economically (The capitalist economy and the directed economy, the speculators and the fabricators of single are equally repugnant to him.)”“Anarchist Individualism as a Life and Activity” by Emile Armand
- Anarchist Peter Sabatini reports that in the United States “of early to mid-19th century, there appeared an array of communal and “utopian” counterculture groups (including the so-called free love movement). William Godwin’s anarchism exerted an ideological influence on some of this, but more so the socialism of Robert Owen and Charles Fourier. After success of his British venture, Owen himself established a cooperative community within the United States at New Harmony, Indiana during 1825. One member of this commune was Josiah Warren (1798–1874), considered to be the first individualist anarchist”Peter Sabatini. “Libertarianism: Bogus Anarchy”
- “A.4. Are Mutalists Socialists?”. mutualist.org. Archived from the original on 9 June 2009.
- Murray Bookchin, Ghost of Anarcho-Syndicalism; Robert Graham, The General Idea of Proudhon’s Revolution
- Kent Bromley, in his preface to Peter Kropotkin’s book The Conquest of Bread, considered early French utopian socialist Charles Fourier to be the founder of the libertarian branch of socialist thought, as opposed to the authoritarian socialist ideas of [François-Noël] Babeuf and [Philippe] Buonarroti]].” Kropotkin, Peter. The Conquest of Bread, preface by Kent Bromley, New York and London, G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1906.
- “What is Socialist Feminism? – The Feminist eZine”. www.feministezine.com. Retrieved 20 April 2020.
- “Acknowledgments”. Journal of Homosexuality. 45 (2–4): xxvii–xxviii. 23 September 2003. doi:10.1300/j082v45n02_a. ISSN 0091-8369.
- Stokes, John (2000). Eleanor Marx (1855–1898): Life, Work, Contacts. Aldershot: Ashgate. ISBN 978-0-7546-0113-5.
- “Clara Zetkin: On a Bourgeois Feminist Petition”. www.marxists.org. Retrieved 20 April 2020.
- “Clara Zetkin: Lenin on the Women’s Question – 1”. www.marxists.org. Retrieved 20 April 2020.
- “The Social Basis of the Woman Question by Alexandra Kollontai 1909”. www.marxists.org. Retrieved 20 April 2020.
- “Women Workers Struggle For Their Rights by Alexandra Kollontai 1919”. www.marxists.org. Retrieved 20 April 2020.
- Dark Star Collective. (2012). Dunbar-Ortiz, Roxanne (ed.). Quiet rumours: an anarcha-feminist reader. AK Press/Dark Star. p. 9. ISBN 978-1-84935-103-4. OCLC 835894204.
- Ackelsberg, Martha A. (2005). Free Women of Spain : anarchism and the struggle for the emancipation of women. AK Press. ISBN 1-902593-96-0. OCLC 884001264.
- Davenport, Sue; Strobel, Margaret (1999). “The Chicago Women’s Liberation Union: An Introduction”. The CWLU Herstory Website. University of Illinois. Archived from the original on 4 November 2011. Retrieved 25 November 2011.
- Desbazeille, Michèle Madonna (1990). “Le Nouveau Monde amoureux de Charles Fourier : une écriture passionnée de la rencontre”. Romantisme. 20 (68): 97–110. doi:10.3406/roman.1990.6129. ISSN 0048-8593.
- Charles Fourier, Le Nouveau Monde amoureux (written 1816–18, not published widely until 1967: Paris: Éditions Anthropos). pp. 389, 391, 429, 458, 459, 462, and 463.
- McKenna, Neil (5 March 2009). The Secret Life of Oscar Wilde. Basic Books. ISBN 978-0-7867-3492-4. According to McKenna, Wilde was part of a secret organisation that aimed to legalise homosexuality, and was known among the group as a leader of “the Cause”.
- Flood, Michael, 19..- … (2013). International encyclopedia of men and masculinities. Routledge. p. 315. ISBN 978-0-415-86454-1. OCLC 897581763.
- Russell, Paul (2002). The Gay 100: A Ranking of the Most Influential Gay Men and Lesbians, Past and Present. Kensington Publishing Corporation. p. 124. ISBN 978-0-7582-0100-3.
- “Mattachine Society at Dynes, Wayne R. (ed.)” (PDF). Encyclopedia of Homosexuality. Archived from the original(PDF) on 19 April 2012. Retrieved 10 March 2014.
- Gay movement boosted by ’79 march on Washington, Lou Chabarro 2004 for the Washington Blade.
- “Gay Liberation Front: Manifesto. London”. 1978 .
- Kovel, J.; Löwy, M. (2001). An ecosocialist manifesto.
- Eckersley, Robyn (1 January 1992). Environmentalism and Political Theory: Toward an Ecocentric Approach. SUNY Press. ISBN 978-0-7914-1013-4.
- Clark, John P. (1984). The Anarchist Moment: Reflections on Culture, Nature, and Power. Black Rose Books. ISBN 978-0-920057-08-7.
- Benton, Ted (1996). The greening of marxism. The Guilford Press. ISBN 1-57230-119-8. OCLC 468837567.
- Kovel, Joel. (2013). The Enemy of Nature : the End of Capitalism or the End of the World?. Zed Books. ISBN 978-1-84813-659-5. OCLC 960164995.
- Marx, Karl, 1818–1883. (1981). Capital: a critique of political economy. Vol. 3. Penguin in association with New Left Review. ISBN 0-14-022116-6. OCLC 24235898.
- Wall, Derek. (2010). The no-nonsense guide to green politics. New Internationalist. ISBN 978-1-906523-58-9. OCLC 776590485.
- “Green Left”. greenleft.org.uk. Archived from the original on 5 April 2016. Retrieved 3 April 2016.
- Diez, Xavier (26 May 2006). “La Insumisión voluntaria. El Anarquismo individualista Español durante la Dictadura i la Segunda República (1923–1938)”. Archived from the originalon 26 May 2006. Retrieved 20 April 2020.
Su obra más representativa es Walden, aparecida en 1854, aunque redactada entre 1845 y 1847, cuando Thoreau decide instalarse en el aislamiento de una cabaña en el bosque, y vivir en íntimo contacto con la naturaleza, en una vida de soledad y sobriedad. De esta experiencia, su filosofía trata de transmitirnos la idea que resulta necesario un retorno respetuoso a la naturaleza, y que la felicidad es sobre todo fruto de la riqueza interior y de la armonía de los individuos con el entorno natural. Muchos han visto en Thoreau a uno de los precursores del ecologismo y del anarquismo primitivista representado en la actualidad por John Zerzan. Para George Woodcock, esta actitud puede estar también motivada por una cierta idea de resistencia al progreso y de rechazo al materialismo creciente que caracteriza la sociedad norteamericana de mediados de siglo XIX.
- “Archived copy”. Archived from the original on 25 October 2012. Retrieved 11 October 2013.
- “A.3 What types of anarchism are there?”. Anarchist Writers.
- RA forum. “R.A. Forum > SHAFFER, Kirwin R. Anarchism and countercultural politics in early twentieth-century Cuba”. raforum.info. Archived from the original on 12 October 2013.
- “La Insumisión voluntaria. El Anarquismo individualista Español durante la Dictadura i la Segunda República (1923–1938) by Xavier Diez”. Archived from the original on 26 May 2006.
- “A Short Biography of Murray Bookchin by Janet Biehl”. Dwardmac.pitzer.edu. Retrieved 11 May 2012.
- “Ecology and Revolution”. Dwardmac.pitzer.edu. 16 June 2004. Retrieved 11 May 2012.
- Commoner, Barry (12 February 2020). The closing circle : nature, man, and technology. ISBN 978-0-486-84624-8. OCLC 1141422712.
- Mellor, Mary. (1992). Breaking the boundaries : towards a feminist green socialism. Virago Press. ISBN 1-85381-200-5. OCLC 728578769.
- Salleh, Ariel, 1944- author. (2017). Ecofeminism as politics : nature, Marx and the postmodern. ISBN 978-1-78699-097-6. OCLC 951936453.
- Guha, Ramachandra (2013). Varieties of Environmentalism Essays North and South. Taylor and Francis. ISBN 978-1-134-17334-1. OCLC 964049036.
- Pepper, David (26 September 2002). Eco-Socialism. doi:10.4324/9780203423363. ISBN 9780203423363.
- Sam Dolgoff. The Anarchist Collectives Workers’ Self-management in the Spanish Revolution 1936–1939. Free Life Editions; 1st edition (1974)
- Berlau, A Joseph (1949), The German Social Democratic Party, 1914–1921, New York: Columbia University Press.
- Lamb, Peter; Docherty, J. C. (2006). Historical Dictionary of Socialism (2nd ed.). Lanham: The Scarecrow Press. ISBN 978-0-8108-5560-1.
- Meyer, Thomas (2013). The Theory of Social Democracy. Wiley. ISBN 978-0-7456-7352-3. OCLC 843638352.
- Gaus, Gerald F.; Kukathas, Chandran (21 August 2004). Handbook of Political Theory. SAGE. ISBN 978-0-7619-6787-3.
- Beckett, Francis, Clem Attlee, Politico’s (2007) ISBN 978-1-84275-192-3.
- Nik Brandal, Øivind Bratberg, Dag Einar Thorsen. The Nordic Model of Social Democracy (2013) Pallgrave MacMillan. ISBN 1-137-01326-5.
- Gerald Cohen. Why Not Socialism? Princeton University Press, 2009. ISBN 0-691-14361-7.
- G. D. H. Cole, History of Socialist Thought, in 7 volumes, Macmillan and St. Martin’s Press, 1965; Palgrave Macmillan, 2003 reprint; 7 volumes, hardcover, 3160 pages, ISBN 1-4039-0264-X.
- Cole, George Douglas Howard (1922). Encyclopædia Britannica (12th ed.). London & New York: The Encyclopædia Britannica Company. . In Chisholm, Hugh (ed.).
- Michael Ellman (2014). Socialist Planning. Cambridge University Press; 3 edition. ISBN 1-107-42732-0.
- Frank, Peter; McAloon, Jim (2016). Labour: The New Zealand Labour Party, 1916–2016. Wellington, New Zealand: Victoria University Press. ISBN 9781776560745. Retrieved 16 September 2019.
- Albert Fried and Ronald Sanders, eds., Socialist Thought: A Documentary History, Garden City, NY: Doubleday Anchor, 1964. LCCN 64-11312.
- Michael Harrington, Socialism, New York: Bantam, 1972. LCCN 76-154260.
- Michael Harrington. Socialism: Past and Future. Arcade Publishing, 2011. ISBN 1-61145-335-6.
- Hayes, Carlton J. H. “The History of German Socialism Reconsidered,” American Historical Review (1917). 23 (1): 62–101 online.
- Imlay., Talbot. The Practice of Socialist Internationalism: European Socialists and International Politics, 1914–1960 (Oxford University Press, 2018)
- Makoto Itoh, Political Economy of Socialism. London: Macmillan, 1995. ISBN 0-333-55337-3.
- Kitching, Gavin (1983). Rethinking Socialism. Meuthen. ISBN 978-0-416-35840-7.
- Oskar Lange, On the Economic Theory of Socialism, Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press, 1938. LCCN 38-12882.
- Michael Lebowitz, Build It Now: Socialism for the 21st century, Monthly Review Press, 2006. ISBN 1-58367-145-5.
- George Lichtheim, A Short History of Socialism. Praeger Publishers, 1970.
- Alan Maass. The Case for Socialism. Haymarket Books, 2010 (Updated Edition). ISBN 1-60846-073-8.
- Marx, Engels, Selected works in one volume, Lawrence and Wishart (1968) ISBN 978-0-85315-181-4.
- Joshua Muravchik, Heaven on Earth: The Rise and Fall of Socialism, San Francisco: Encounter Books, 2002. ISBN 1-893554-45-7.
- Michael Newman, Socialism: A Very Short Introduction, Oxford University Press, 2005. ISBN 0-19-280431-6.
- Bertell Ollman, ed., Market Socialism: The Debate among Socialists, Routledge, 1998. ISBN 0-415-91967-3.
- Leo Panitch, Renewing Socialism: Democracy, Strategy, and Imagination. ISBN 0-8133-9821-5.
- Emile Perreau-Saussine, What remains of socialism?, in Patrick Riordan (dir.), Values in Public life: aspects of common goods (Berlin, LIT Verlag, 2007), pp. 11–34.
- Richard Pipes, Property and Freedom, Vintage, 2000. ISBN 0-375-70447-7.
- Maximilien Rubel and John Crump, Non-Market Socialism in the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries. ISBN 0-312-00524-5.
- Sassoon, Donald. One Hundred Years of Socialism: The West European Left in the Twentieth Century. New Press. 1998. ISBN 1-56584-486-6.
- Bhaskar Sunkara (editor), The ABCs of Socialism. Verso, 2016. ISBN 978-1-78478-726-4.
- Katherine Verdery, What Was Socialism, What Comes Next, Princeton. 1996. ISBN 0-691-01132-X.
- Webb, Sidney (1889). “The Basis of Socialism – Historic”. Library of Economics and Liberty.
- James Weinstein, Long Detour: The History and Future of the American Left, Westview Press, 2003, hardcover, 272 pages. ISBN 0-8133-4104-3.
- Peter Wilberg, Deep Socialism: A New Manifesto of Marxist Ethics and Economics, 2003. ISBN 1-904519-02-4.
- Socialism — entry at Encyclopædia Britannica
- Socialism at Curlie
- “Socialism”. Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
- Cuban Socialism from the Dean Peter Krogh Foreign Affairs Digital Archives.
- Cole, G. D. H. (1922). . Encyclopædia Britannica (12th ed.).Ely, Richard T.; Adams, Thomas Sewall (1905). . New International Encyclopedia.
Greetings I am Stan,
Reporter For Source. I find the truth in all the lies! The internet is an amazing place, Unfotiantly it is filled with as many lies at it is truths. It is my job to sort out the truth from all the lies. I do this to the best of my ability. Its so easy to get caught up in all the information it can be hard to sort things. I dig deep and use the horses mouth when ever possible. If its a apple call it a apple
I am also part of the Area Control Network