Editor's note
International Internet Magazine. Baltic States news & analytics
Thursday, 28.03.2024, 16:50
“Post-pandemic”: political outcomes
The dominating
ideology after pandemic crisis with “all eyes on social needs” would evidently
be turning to the “forgotten instances” of socialism. I do imagine the horrors
of “iron capitalists” reading these lines; but don’t be afraid of “socialism”!
At various stages of people’s existence, which we presently call social
transformations, certain types of socialist’s ideology have been in minds of
numerous thinkers, starting from the utopian socialism’s fonder the English
humanist Sir Thomas More with his Utopia as far away as 1516.
Hence, socialism
has had rich traditions in political thought and practice, with a number of
views and theories, often different in various continents and many empirical
implementations. From its inception in England in 1833, it has acquired several different meanings. It used to refer to a
system of social organization in which private property and the distribution of
income are subject to social control, although the concept of that control
varied.
The term of
socialism has had a widely different interpretation (including some forms of social
cooperation through trade unions and cooperative businesses initiated by Robert
Owen in his “new Harmony”, 1825), ranging from statist to libertarian, from
Marxist to liberal capitalism, from Nazi’s “national socialism” to China’s
model of a one-party “communist-growth” strategy, which has been quite
successful, as we can see.
In modern time,
the so-called “pure socialism” has been rarely present in political
discussions: far more common have been such connotations as social democracy and democratic
socialism, in which extensive state regulation (with limited state
ownership) has been used by democratically elected governments. Numerous positive
examples are visualized in the European Nordic states, i.e. Sweden, Norway and
Denmark; their interpretation of socialism has shown that such system resulted
in much fairer distribution of income without impairing economic growth.
See for example: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/socialism/
Strong
socialist’s traditions still survive in European integration model: even in the
European Parliament, EP among seven political groups there is a “Progressive Alliance of Socialists and
Democrats”, S&D the second largest (!) in the EP with 147 members (out
of 705) from 25 EU states; with two members from each of the 3 Baltic States’
social-democratic parties. The biggest representation is from Spain-21, Italy-18,
Germany-16, Romania-10, Portugal -9 and Poland-8. Besides, socialist movement
has a separate “continental organisation”, the Party of European Socialists,
PES.
Therefore, there is nothing wrong in the ideas of socialism; they
often refer to a system of governance
concerning the distribution of public income (in a broader sense) subject to an
effective social control. In this
regard, democratic socialism refers not to an economic system but
to a system of governance in which supreme power is vested in the people and
exercised through a system of direct/indirect representation which is decided
through periodic free elections.
Reference to: “Socialism.”
Merriam-Webster.com Dictionary, Merriam-Webster, in: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/socialism.
As socialists argue,
“true freedom and true equality” require social control over existing natural
and human resources that provide the basis for prosperity in any society. Karl
Marx and Friedrich Engels made this point in Manifesto of
the Communist Party (1848) when they proclaimed that in a socialist
society “the condition for the free development of each is the free development
of all”. Therefore it makes sense to put the society’s economic arrangements in
the hands of its most knowledgeable and progressive members, so that they may
direct economic production for the benefit of all.
Source: https://www.britannica.com/topic/socialism
The biggest puzzle, however, is that production, services
and corporate activities are primarily oriented towards capital accumulation
(i.e. production is primarily oriented to profit and secondly to the satisfaction
of human needs). Even in modern multi-party electoral systems, members of the “ruling
class” and elites (despite being a minority of the population) have
significantly more influence than other population’s groups. Governing
institutions have a tendency to adapt their agendas to the “wishes of elites”,
as they depend on their political and economic influence in fiscal policies to
finance the development of national socio-economic policies.
Post-pandemic lessons
Socialists argue that reducing inequality in decision-making
(concerning mainly socio-economic spheres) was significant both “instrumentally”,
i.e. to reduce inequality in governance and also “inherently”, to increase
people’s self-determination in their role as the major “economic agents”.
Therefore, most socialists call for resolving the conflict between democracy
and governance by extending democratic principles into political economy.
Only socialism is expected to provide for a plausible rationale
in all forces of production and services that would satisfy increasing societal
needs rather than to strive for profit’s maximization. Thus, when a conflict
arises between the increase in material production aimed at consumption and people’s
off-work time (i.e. leisure and externalities with nature and environmental
protection) is unavoidable, the present governing structures of “liberal
capitalism” cannot resolve the dilemma due to the essential drive for profit; specifically
when an economy has already reached a high level of “material productivity”.
Hence, the
importance of resolving such key issues as participatory planning (or
participatory economy) through a formulation of a nation-wide socio-economic
priorities and closer cooperation of politics and economics for the benefit of
all…
The primary aim of socialism is to “arrange and assemble”
citizens in a democratic public “space”; however, in modern political and
economic structures this notion’s implementation (although normatively
appealing) is facing serious difficulties; practical “democratic spheres” are
intensely disabled by numerous kind of social and economic inequalities, which socialists
want to overcome. There are already approved means, for example, by introducing
an universal basic income for all, by a significant expansion of public
services (contrary to often corrupt private), or by some other mechanisms that
secure for everybody minimally dignified socio-economic conditions independent
of their position in society and/or in labor market.
Even presently in
the US, a vanguard of modern capitalism, the prospect of socialism has
been an issue during recent presidential election campaign, primarily through
Sen. Bernie Sanders, who was seeking democratic party's nomination.
Source: Fox
News, “As CPAC opens, Rep. Dan Crenshaw releases video attacking
socialism”, 27 Feb. 2020; and https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/socialism/
The erosion of capitalism has been seen in numerous states
and in all continents through its inability both to predict and to tackle the recent
pandemic. The often suggested “institutional transformation” as an answer to
the “post-pandemic” period cannot be either accepted or practically used: only
fundamental changes in existing politico-economic structures suggested by
socialists shall be the proper and necessary means to overcome the present and
all other critical instances.