Here are the central ideas of
my current interpretation of Socialism, largely influenced by
The Ragged Trousered Philanthropists.
Firstly, people need some things to
live a basic
life (e.g.
food,
clothes,
houses; called the
Necessities of life in
TRTP). There are then products that make
life 'better' such as
TVs,
music and improved standards of
clothes and
food; these are named the
Benefits of Civilization in
TRTP.
There are different ways of looking at
deprivation. When
Marxism/Socialism developed,
deprivation of both kinds of product was obviously very common all over the
world - only a miniscule percentage of
people enjoyed the
Benefits of Civilization. These Days it seems that the situation in the
Western World is better: nearly everyone in the
United Kingdom has
life's
basics and most indulge in some '
luxuries'. However, one may or may not choose to take the
world view and see that the large proportion of the
world's billions who remain
impoverished dwarves the
people of the
West who are benefiting from '
progress'.
Back to the
theory: All that is needed for the
production of any of the
products, at a basic level, are the following
- Raw materials / land - There is no real world (or national) shortage of these as yet.
- Tools of production - There is no shortage of these and more could easily be made.
- Labour - Most 'developed' nations have millions seeking work and looking back to the world view, well, you get the picture. Socialists would also point out here that a massive proportion of the workforce are employed in unnecessary work. This takes the form either of work that is completely unhelpful in producing and distributing products (e.g. Insurance) or jobs that are only necessary because of the inefficient system of Capitalism, where hundreds of companies compete to carry out the same tasks.
So, there is no shortage of the things
essential for
production of the
Stuff that
people need. However, due to the
Capitalist system (should I go into technicalities?) neither the Necessities nor Benefits are produced in sufficient quantities. Furthermore, the very people who do the
work are deprived of the full '
fruits of their
labour'. Those that are
employed (think of them as a whole
group) produce the Stuff (same again) and are
paid enough
money to
buy back just enough of their
products to
live a relatively
miserable existence. The level of this
existence of course depends on when, who at and where in the
world you look: Think late
19th Century Industrial Britain,
Sweat Shops or
fishermen in the '
second world'.
Under Socialism there would be a phenomenally more
efficient system of
rational planning and all
land and
tools are owned by the
People. Every
citizen has a
responsibility to do their
fair share of
work and a
right to have all the
Benefits of Civilization as well as, of course, the
Necessities of Life. Due to the overwhelming
superiority of the new
system to
Capitalism all of these
products would be in such
abundance that every
person would have everything they want, while only having to
work for a relatively small proportion of their
time.
Remember Marx, like Jesus, cannot be held responsible for actions taken in his name This is an inaccurate
quotation of
Tony Benn.
Please see Socialism Today