| Part ofa series on | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Marxism | ||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Outline | ||||||||||||||||||||
Foundations | ||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||
Related topics
| ||||||||||||||||||||
Thesocialist mode of production, also known associalism, is a specific historical phase ofbase and superstructural development and its corresponding set ofsocial relations that emerge fromcapitalism in the schema ofhistorical materialism withinMarxist theory.Communist states that claimed to have established socialist material relations claimed to have establishedsocialist states.
TheMarxist definition of socialism is that of production foruse-value (i.e., abolition of commodity production, direct satisfaction of human needs, or economic demands), therefore thelaw of value no longer directs economic activity. Marxistproduction for use is coordinated through consciouseconomic planning. According to Marx, distribution of products is based on the principle of "to each according to his needs";[1]Soviet models often distributed products based on the principle of "to each according to his contribution".[2] Marx characterized the social relations of communism, the first stage of which is now called socialism, by the abolition of class distinctions and the common ownership of themeans of production.[3] As classes are abolished, the state withers away. Later self-titled communist states revised this definition of socialism and used the term more loosely as a rough equivalent to thedictatorship of the proletariat.[4]
TheMarxian conception ofsocialism stands in contrast to other early conceptions of socialism, most notably early forms ofmarket socialism based onclassical economics such asmutualism andRicardian socialism. Unlike the Marxian conception, these conceptions of socialism retained commodity exchange (markets) for labour and the means of production seeking to perfect the market process.[5] The Marxist idea of socialism was also heavily opposed toutopian socialism. Although Marx and Engels wrote very little on socialism and neglected to provide any details on how it might be organized,[6] numerous social scientists andneoclassical economists have used Marx's theory as a basis for developing their own models ofsocialist economic systems. The Marxist view of socialism served as a point of reference during thesocialist calculation debate.
Marx himself did not use the termsocialism to refer to this development. Instead, Marx called it a communist society that has not yet reached its higher-stage.[7] The termsocialism was popularized during theRussian Revolution byVladimir Lenin. This view is consistent with and helped to inform early concepts of socialism in which the law of value no longer directs economic activity. Monetary relations in the form ofexchange-value,profit,interest andwage labour would not operate and apply to Marxist socialism.[8]
Karl Marx described a socialist society as such:
What we have to deal with here is a communist society, not as it has developed on its own foundations, but, on the contrary, just as it emerges from capitalist society; which is thus in every respect, economically, morally, and intellectually, still stamped with the birthmarks of the old society from whose womb it emerges. Accordingly, the individual producer receives back from society – after the deductions have been made – exactly what he gives to it. What he has given to it is his individual quantum of labor. For example, the social working day consists of the sum of the individual hours of work; the individual labor time of the individual producer is the part of the social working day contributed by him, his share in it. He receives a certificate from society that he has furnished such-and-such an amount of labor (after deducting his labor for the common funds); and with this certificate, he draws from the social stock of means of consumption as much as the same amount of labor cost. The same amount of labor which he has given to society in one form, he receives back in another.[7]
In Marxist theory,Socialism, referred to by Marx as the first stage of communism, is a classless, post-commodity economic system in which production is carried out to directly produceuse-value rather than to generateprofit. According to Marx and Engels, it is what follows after the transitionary period of theDictatorship of the Proletariat.[9] Private ownership andaccumulation of capital have been abolished along with class distinctions as a whole and production is carried out in a planned fashion according to the needs of society. In hisCritique of the Gotha Programme, Marx suggested that in the first stage of communism people would receive labor vouchers according to the hours they work, but with subtractions, a sort of taxation, made for social services. With these vouchers one would be able to "buy" the goods produced by society (i.e. produced using the commonly ownedmeans of production) valued according to the labor hours needed for their production, so that one only takes as much as one has contributed. There is no extraction ofsurplus value and thus noexploitation in such a system. The higher stage of communism differs from the lower stage of communism in some aspects. To quote Marx:
In a higher phase of communist society, after the enslaving subordination of the individual to the division of labor, and therewith also the antithesis between mental and physical labor, has vanished; after labor has become not only a means of life but life's prime want; after the productive forces have also increased with the all-around development of the individual, and all the springs of co-operative wealth flow more abundantly – only then can the narrow horizon of bourgeois right be crossed in its entirety and society inscribe on its banners: From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs![7]
The prerequisite of the higher phase of communism is a long period of growth within the first phase, during which all imprints left from the old capitalist society gradually disappear. Tremendous development of technology and productive capacity allow for fully automated production, resulting in a superabundance ofgoods andservices. Thispost-scarcity economy, along with the cultural development resulting in the widespread disappearance of individualism and exploitation, allow for goods to be distributed based on need rather than merit.
The fundamental goal of socialism from the view ofKarl Marx andFriedrich Engels was the realization ofhuman freedom andindividual autonomy. Specifically, this refers tofreedom from thealienation imposed uponindividuals in the form of coercivesocial relations as well as materialscarcity, whereby the individual is compelled to engage in activities merely to survive to reproduce his or herself. The aim of socialism is to provide an environment whereby individuals are free to express their genuine interests, creative freedom and desires unhindered by forms of social control that force individuals to work for a class of owners who expropriate and live off thesurplus product.[10]
As a set of social relations, socialism is defined by the degree to which economic activity in society is planned by theassociated producers so that the surplus product produced by socialized assets is controlled by a majority of the population throughmarxist-democratic processes. Complete socialism, the first phase of communism, means the abolition of class distinctions and the control over production by society as a whole. The sale oflabour power would be abolished so that every individual participates in running their institution as stakeholders or members with no one having coercive power over anyone else in a vertical socialdivision of labour which is to be distinguished from a non-social, technical division of labour which would still exist in socialism.[11] The incentive structure changes in a socialist society given the change in the social environment so that an individual labourers' work becomes increasingly autonomous and creative, creating a sense of responsibility for his or her institution as a stakeholder.
In Marxist theory, thestate is "the institution of organised violence which is used by theruling class of a country to maintain the conditions of its rule. Thus, it is only in a society which is divided between hostile social classes that the state exists".[12] The state is seen as a mechanism dominated by the interests of the ruling class. It subjugates other classes, to protect and legitimize the existingeconomic system.
After aproletarian revolution, the state would initially become the instrument of theproletariat. Conquest of the state by the proletariat is a prerequisite to establishing a socialist system. As socialism is built, the role and scope of the state changes. Class distinctions, based on ownership of the means of production, gradually deteriorate. The concentration of means of production increasingly falls into state hands. Once all means of production become state property, class distinctions are no more and socialism, the first stage of communism is achieved, the primary function of the state changes. Political rule via coercion over men diminishes through the creation and enforcement of laws, scientific administration and the direction of the processes of production. As a result, the state becomes an entity of economic coordination rather than a mechanism of class or political control and is no longer a state in the Marxian sense.[13]
Marx and Engels never speculated on the detailed organization of a future socialist or communist society. The key task for them was building a movement to overthrow capitalism. If and when that movement was successful, it would be up to the members of the new society to decide democratically how it was to be organized, in the concrete historical circumstances in which they found themselves.
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 recognized 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 mobilize the economy in physical units without the use of prices or money.
