By Barbara Stängl

Socialism

Some history and the problem:

Socialism is an idea that has as its basis equality pertaining to property being shared by all and distributed equally. Unfortunately, when the idea was first put into practice by a British man called Owen in the US State of Indiana in 1825 on the huge property he bought and called New Harmony, it ultimately failed. This was not due to the fundamentals of the idea of socialism as such, but due to the organization of the distribution of the produce, the fact that the land was not owned by the residents themselves and in part in consequence to this, there was a lack of self-responsibility as to the cultivation of the land, the workforce needed to maintain self-sufficiency, and finally, due to the nature of the people that it attracted. Though the people who chose to live in New Harmony on the basis of the shared idea of socialism that received the tinge of its founder Robert Owen, were open-minded and socially oriented, they were very theoretically and philosophically minded. This set of characters and personalities gave the experiment a bias that ultimately tipped it toward being marked as not sustainable. However, Owen implemented a set of social rules to live by, such as no public drinking, personal cleanliness, emptying trash at specific intervals, free education in which the human character was to be developed in more fortunate ways and having to make time for family, he granted sick pay and shortened working hours. All of which were directed at changing human nature and optimizing the conditions of living together.

The idea was recast by two philosophers Engels and Marx later, who considered socialism to be humankind’s destiny which was considered to become a triumph over capitalism. It was thus directly placed to have a polarity nature toward capitalism, which allowed the idea of Revolution to settle in as a means to drive socialism forward and gain supremacy over capitalism. This was adopted as a point of self-identification that amounted to demonic obsession which found its most extreme manifestation and expression under the dictatorship of Stalin in the USSR. Here the term socialism was actually abused to cover up and, where not possible, to justify the atrocities against its population and the antagonists of the ideology. Socialism had been turned into communism, though the term was still used by the ruling figures to benefit from the moral appeal that true socialism had among large parts of the general world population.

The ‘other side of the polarity’, the capitalistic states, the ‘States of Freedom’ as they were contrasted to socialistic states, used the label of socialism as a propaganda operation also but for the opposite reason, namely to defame socialism by way of association with this miserable and rapacious tyranny.

Socialism, as the core notion of working people being in control of production and of their own lives basically, on the principle of equality with respect to property and distribution of goods, has been evacuated of content over the last century, due to the Soviet Union being called a socialist society as a propagandistic means of directing the world to suit the vested interests of the elite by keeping the masses enslaved. It seems the few at the top are doing their best that nobody would be able to easily pick up the idea of socialism and try to establish a working structure on that basis for the common good of man.

Solution

As a solution it is necessary to distinguish between the socialistic/communistic ulcerations of true socialism. The collapse of the Soviet Union can actually be counted as a small victory for socialism as such, because it has been freed of the radical revolution aspect as well as the aspect of tyranny and debasement toward the working class. The latter will have to be solidly embraced within the term of communism and within that, of course, dictatorship. Along those lines the term nationalization and nationalistic should be looked at and stripped of its associations with fascist developments and resulting atrocities of Nazi Germany leading to and in World War II. The pros and cons of the Israeli kibbutzim are to be investigated, and seen that these are said to have worked until they were ridden into a debt crisis in the middle of the 1980’s from which they weren’t able to recover. One must ask who is pulling the strings here and why. It is pretty obvious that they simply weren’t supposed to work in the public eye.

The solution to humanity’s demise should not be found in an idea or ideology, as that can be used within polarity and undermined, but within a living principle, that does not have to be named socialism or capitalism or democracy. It’s certainly not about the name or the idea.

Of course at first there must be something communicable as the name for a solution presented, such as a democracy on a real people-basis, a form of direct democracy, as has been proposed by the platform of Living Income Guaranteed. The realization must be fostered that life can only strive on earth – we can only strive, or even simply survive – when we give to the other what we ourselves would like to receive, on an equal and one basis. If we do not see that we are already equal on the basis of the substance of Life and are killing ourselves and others by not acknowledging and living this principle, we will perish.

One must realize that socialism is just a word – we are the ones who must take care of our reactions, associations, prejudices and fears within it and as it, and allow ourselves to establish a groundwork that supports all — as the sounding and individual letters of the word suggest: so-see-I-all-is-m(e)

We must turn to Life lived on the principle of equality and incorporate the lived realization of oneness, as we are all of and as Life here.

The reward is a state, where competition exacted on the basis of live or die / grow or perish will be of the past; where we implement our realization that we are able to stand as the living principle of equality and oneness and give to the other what we want for ourselves and our children, which is the kind of socialism that has not been compromised through fear and desire for control, greed and power. Giving to the other as one would wish for oneself means to distribute resources fairly and adequately, as required by each and on the basis of ensuring that everything used can be reconstituted and replenished, that resources are sustainable. This will provide for real, actual support of all equally resulting in peace and dignity. Responsibility will be more readily lived because there won’t be the point of ‘it’s not my responsibility – I don’t have a say anyway, I’m just a small keg in a big machine’ when equality is lived on principality.

We will see truly happy children that are able to play and enjoy themselves because they are cared for on a steady basis from the start with actual equal opportunity within education, good nourishment, and a stable social environment. One will find the ability to truly trust oneself and others within a trustworthy, self-responsible society that is not self-incapacitated through the allowance and acceptance of a maniac Elite that irrespective of the whole pulls the strings in utter self-interest. There will be no one to polarize to ‘defend’ a status of self-interested accumulation of wealth on the basis of democracy vs. socialism/communism when the principle of equality is truly implemented and lived.

Investigate the Living Income Guaranteed Proposal and Join us for discussion .

Photo credits

‘New Harmony’

Massacres

Vested Interest