- 27 Feb 2017 04:21
#14780411
in two videos:
After reading and watching Wolff's websites and videos, my own summary would be as follows, -and this may make the reader aware of the depth and thoroughness of the indoctrination and propaganda we in the U.S. receive on the subject.
Socialism is "the dictatorship of the proletariat" in Marxian language. All this means is that, in socialism, the working class stops the capitalist class from practicing capitalism and from developing supports for capitalism.
In practical terms, socialism is an economic system in which the relationship between the worker and those who plan and direct and manage the work done by the worker is identity: they are one and the same. The workers own and operate the means of production. They are the ones who decide what to produce, how to produce it, where to produce it, when to produce it, how much to sell it for, and where to sell it and what to do with the proceeds of sale. Again, this is socialism.
There have been different paths taken in the effort to establish socialism in different countries. In the earliest days, socialism was attempted by violent revolution in Russia and China most notably. There was a reason for this. In both cases the country was engaged in war, and the revolutionaries saw their national weakness produced by war as an opportunity to seize power by force. They saw that it could not have been done in peacetime but the military effort had weakened the country and the additional stress of a revolution would make success possible.
However the relative speed with which the seizing of power happened, plus the violent nature of the process, made it necessary for the revolutionaries to quickly take control of the productive capacity of the entire country. And the only practical way of doing this was to control production from within the centralized government. Managers of industries were established and assigned government positions from which they oversaw management of the factories and businesses.
But this didn't put workers in control of their own jobs and production. Instead, it substituted government bureaucrats for CEOs and private owners of businesses. The relationship between workers and those who ran the businesses had not substantially changed. Workers still took orders from "above". Since this did not change the capitalist relationships experienced by the workers, this has come to be called "state capitalism". And because the managers had a privileged position, in time the situation devolved and degenerated into more and more capitalism. This is how the Russian and Chinese economies got to what they are today.
To avoid such revision to capitalism it is preferable to bring about the change to socialism gradually and peacefully. The method would be to work to establish worker-directed socialist enterprises (WDSEs) or co-ops. An excellent example of this would be the Mondragon Corporation in Spain that was established in 1956.
There are also some very good examples of such businesses in the U.S. Some minor research can locate them.
During the period of the establishment of socialism in a capitalist country, for some time there would be socialist and capitalist enterprises operating "side-by-side". This stage is called "Democratic Socialism" or "Social Democracy". But throughout this stage the co-ops must be on guard against sliding more and more into capitalist structures as it will be constantly encouraged from all sides by "outside" capitalist influences. Unfortunately, this reversion back into capitalism is underway today in several European social-democratic countries. The economic crisis is creating an opportunity for capitalist-roaders to realize greater success. And it could go either way. That is up to the workers of the co-ops largely.
But what about communism? Didn't Russia and China establish communism briefly?
No. They didn't. "Communist China" was a country in which a Party whose ultimate goal was the achievement of communism was called "the communist party". But communism was never established. And a look at what communism actually is according to Marx, Engels, and Lenin will reveal why it never existed.
In Marxist-Leninist theory, communism is the end-game. It is a society and economy that will be stateless and classless. There will be no state apparatus to run the country because none will be needed, and there will be no classes because the "bourgeoisie" (capitalists) will have long ago given up all hope of private enterprises. Again, in Marxian terminology, the state will have "withered away". Communism cannot be imposed, then. People cannot be forced to give up their hope for a private business with private profits so classes cannot be ended by edict. And the state apparatus cannot reasonable be dismantled and eliminated by edict or decision. it all must naturally evolve. The state and class identity must "wither away."
All this and more can be found in Prof. Richard Wolff's collection of videos and articles available on the web. Professor Wolff received his Bachelor's Degree in economics at Harvard, his Masters at Princeton, and his PhD. in economics at Yale University.
After reading and watching Wolff's websites and videos, my own summary would be as follows, -and this may make the reader aware of the depth and thoroughness of the indoctrination and propaganda we in the U.S. receive on the subject.
Socialism is "the dictatorship of the proletariat" in Marxian language. All this means is that, in socialism, the working class stops the capitalist class from practicing capitalism and from developing supports for capitalism.
In practical terms, socialism is an economic system in which the relationship between the worker and those who plan and direct and manage the work done by the worker is identity: they are one and the same. The workers own and operate the means of production. They are the ones who decide what to produce, how to produce it, where to produce it, when to produce it, how much to sell it for, and where to sell it and what to do with the proceeds of sale. Again, this is socialism.
There have been different paths taken in the effort to establish socialism in different countries. In the earliest days, socialism was attempted by violent revolution in Russia and China most notably. There was a reason for this. In both cases the country was engaged in war, and the revolutionaries saw their national weakness produced by war as an opportunity to seize power by force. They saw that it could not have been done in peacetime but the military effort had weakened the country and the additional stress of a revolution would make success possible.
However the relative speed with which the seizing of power happened, plus the violent nature of the process, made it necessary for the revolutionaries to quickly take control of the productive capacity of the entire country. And the only practical way of doing this was to control production from within the centralized government. Managers of industries were established and assigned government positions from which they oversaw management of the factories and businesses.
But this didn't put workers in control of their own jobs and production. Instead, it substituted government bureaucrats for CEOs and private owners of businesses. The relationship between workers and those who ran the businesses had not substantially changed. Workers still took orders from "above". Since this did not change the capitalist relationships experienced by the workers, this has come to be called "state capitalism". And because the managers had a privileged position, in time the situation devolved and degenerated into more and more capitalism. This is how the Russian and Chinese economies got to what they are today.
To avoid such revision to capitalism it is preferable to bring about the change to socialism gradually and peacefully. The method would be to work to establish worker-directed socialist enterprises (WDSEs) or co-ops. An excellent example of this would be the Mondragon Corporation in Spain that was established in 1956.
There are also some very good examples of such businesses in the U.S. Some minor research can locate them.
During the period of the establishment of socialism in a capitalist country, for some time there would be socialist and capitalist enterprises operating "side-by-side". This stage is called "Democratic Socialism" or "Social Democracy". But throughout this stage the co-ops must be on guard against sliding more and more into capitalist structures as it will be constantly encouraged from all sides by "outside" capitalist influences. Unfortunately, this reversion back into capitalism is underway today in several European social-democratic countries. The economic crisis is creating an opportunity for capitalist-roaders to realize greater success. And it could go either way. That is up to the workers of the co-ops largely.
But what about communism? Didn't Russia and China establish communism briefly?
No. They didn't. "Communist China" was a country in which a Party whose ultimate goal was the achievement of communism was called "the communist party". But communism was never established. And a look at what communism actually is according to Marx, Engels, and Lenin will reveal why it never existed.
In Marxist-Leninist theory, communism is the end-game. It is a society and economy that will be stateless and classless. There will be no state apparatus to run the country because none will be needed, and there will be no classes because the "bourgeoisie" (capitalists) will have long ago given up all hope of private enterprises. Again, in Marxian terminology, the state will have "withered away". Communism cannot be imposed, then. People cannot be forced to give up their hope for a private business with private profits so classes cannot be ended by edict. And the state apparatus cannot reasonable be dismantled and eliminated by edict or decision. it all must naturally evolve. The state and class identity must "wither away."
All this and more can be found in Prof. Richard Wolff's collection of videos and articles available on the web. Professor Wolff received his Bachelor's Degree in economics at Harvard, his Masters at Princeton, and his PhD. in economics at Yale University.
Government is properly for people, and money is not a form of speech.