Socialism - Revision history

imported>Azadsingh: Typo

2025-10-09T06:02:17Z

Typo

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:02, 9 October 2025
Line 1:		Line 1:
	'''Socialism''' is the to the Social Question which has as the object of politics society itself.		'''Socialism''' is the answer to the Social Question which has as the object of politics society itself.

	Socialism is not premised on a subjective definition or injunction; rather, it was a real phenomenon only later given this name.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pbu-AAlqDJg&list=PLAJIhnd1mbiCVeVI3Pu8NihIZzfWMhg5h&index=5 The New Era of Socialism] this article draws heavily on this Infrared Vision video</ref> Socialism was initially the spontaneous response of consciousness to an objective apocalypse of traditional order and meaning in every sense which took place in late 18th and 19th century Europe. Concretely, this apocalypse took dual form as the Industrial Revolution in England and the political revolution in France. This gave rise to the '''Social Question'''. As the "feudal, patriarchal, idyllic relations" which formed the fabric of ''Ancien'' life were torn asunder, the cold brutality of all against all, dog eat dog, and every man for himself took their place. Socialism was simply the practical recognition of this fact and some corresponding program to remedy it. Production had to be reconciled with the majority of people's actual lives, serving social ends to guarantee a minimum of dignified, human life.		Socialism is not premised on a subjective definition or injunction; rather, it was a real phenomenon only later given this name.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pbu-AAlqDJg&list=PLAJIhnd1mbiCVeVI3Pu8NihIZzfWMhg5h&index=5 The New Era of Socialism] this article draws heavily on this Infrared Vision video</ref> Socialism was initially the spontaneous response of consciousness to an objective apocalypse of traditional order and meaning in every sense which took place in late 18th and 19th century Europe. Concretely, this apocalypse took dual form as the Industrial Revolution in England and the political revolution in France. This gave rise to the '''Social Question'''. As the "feudal, patriarchal, idyllic relations" which formed the fabric of ''Ancien'' life were torn asunder, the cold brutality of all against all, dog eat dog, and every man for himself took their place. Socialism was simply the practical recognition of this fact and some corresponding program to remedy it. Production had to be reconciled with the majority of people's actual lives, serving social ends to guarantee a minimum of dignified, human life.

imported>Prolekultur at 20:44, 27 May 2025

2025-05-27T20:44:37Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:44, 27 May 2025
Line 1:		Line 1:
	'''Socialism''' ~~was never~~ premised on a subjective definition or injunction; rather, it was a real phenomenon only later given this name.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pbu-AAlqDJg&list=PLAJIhnd1mbiCVeVI3Pu8NihIZzfWMhg5h&index=5 The New Era of Socialism] this article draws heavily on this Infrared Vision video</ref> Socialism was the spontaneous response of consciousness to an objective apocalypse of traditional order and meaning in every sense which took place in late 18th and 19th century Europe. Concretely, this apocalypse took dual form as the Industrial Revolution in England and the political revolution in France. This gave rise to the '''Social Question'''. As the "feudal, patriarchal, idyllic relations" which formed the fabric of ''Ancien'' life were torn asunder, the cold brutality of all against all, dog eat dog, and every man for himself took their place. Socialism was simply the practical recognition of this fact and some corresponding program to remedy it. Production had to be reconciled with the majority of people's actual lives, serving social ends to guarantee a minimum of dignified, human life.		'''Socialism''' is the to the Social Question which has as the object of politics society itself.

			Socialism is not premised on a subjective definition or injunction; rather, it was a real phenomenon only later given this name.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pbu-AAlqDJg&list=PLAJIhnd1mbiCVeVI3Pu8NihIZzfWMhg5h&index=5 The New Era of Socialism] this article draws heavily on this Infrared Vision video</ref> Socialism was initially the spontaneous response of consciousness to an objective apocalypse of traditional order and meaning in every sense which took place in late 18th and 19th century Europe. Concretely, this apocalypse took dual form as the Industrial Revolution in England and the political revolution in France. This gave rise to the '''Social Question'''. As the "feudal, patriarchal, idyllic relations" which formed the fabric of ''Ancien'' life were torn asunder, the cold brutality of all against all, dog eat dog, and every man for himself took their place. Socialism was simply the practical recognition of this fact and some corresponding program to remedy it. Production had to be reconciled with the majority of people's actual lives, serving social ends to guarantee a minimum of dignified, human life.

	For [[Utopian socialism\|Utopians]] like '''Simon''' and '''Fourier''', this was an intellectual problem, one which they considered themselves to have solved. Marx departs with the simple premise that capitalism would never voluntarily annihilate itself in service of better angels, as the Utopians suggested, that instead it would ''involuntarily but automatically'' annihilate itself as a mode of production due to objective contradictions essential to its very process of reproduction. Circulation of commodities at exchange value would lead to a falling rate of profit and economic crises which trigger the consolidation of capital under fewer and fewer firms. Somewhere along the line this process would no longer be sustainable as a free system without intervention. Socialism is therefore the sublation of Capitalism in the precise Hegelian sense: ''in preservation'' (cartels setting prices, central banks ordering the economy) ''it passes away'' (competition ceases, property becomes hereditary and institutional). <ref>“just where it fancies it is pursuing its own self-preservation and particular interest, is in fact doing the very opposite, is an activity that results in its own dissolution, and makes itself a moment of the whole.” (Preface to the Phenomenology, ($54))</ref>		For [[Utopian socialism\|Utopians]] like '''Simon''' and '''Fourier''', this was an intellectual problem, one which they considered themselves to have solved. Marx departs with the simple premise that capitalism would never voluntarily annihilate itself in service of better angels, as the Utopians suggested, that instead it would ''involuntarily but automatically'' annihilate itself as a mode of production due to objective contradictions essential to its very process of reproduction. Circulation of commodities at exchange value would lead to a falling rate of profit and economic crises which trigger the consolidation of capital under fewer and fewer firms. Somewhere along the line this process would no longer be sustainable as a free system without intervention. Socialism is therefore the sublation of Capitalism in the precise Hegelian sense: ''in preservation'' (cartels setting prices, central banks ordering the economy) ''it passes away'' (competition ceases, property becomes hereditary and institutional). <ref>“just where it fancies it is pursuing its own self-preservation and particular interest, is in fact doing the very opposite, is an activity that results in its own dissolution, and makes itself a moment of the whole.” (Preface to the Phenomenology, ($54))</ref>

imported>SullivanGLavish at 19:51, 19 December 2024

2024-12-19T19:51:19Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:51, 19 December 2024
Line 1:		Line 1:
	Socialism was never premised on a subjective definition or injunction; rather, it was a real phenomenon only later given this name.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pbu-AAlqDJg&list=PLAJIhnd1mbiCVeVI3Pu8NihIZzfWMhg5h&index=5 The New Era of Socialism] this article draws heavily on this Infrared Vision video</ref> Socialism was the spontaneous response of consciousness to an objective apocalypse of traditional order and meaning in every sense which took place in late 18th and 19th century Europe. Concretely, this apocalypse took dual form as the Industrial Revolution in England and the political revolution in France. This gave rise to the '''Social Question'''. As the "feudal, patriarchal, idyllic relations" which formed the fabric of ''Ancien'' life were torn asunder, the cold brutality of all against all, dog eat dog, and every man for himself took their place. Socialism was simply the practical recognition of this fact and some corresponding program to remedy it. Production had to be reconciled with the majority of people's actual lives, serving social ends to guarantee a minimum of dignified, human life.		'''Socialism''' was never premised on a subjective definition or injunction; rather, it was a real phenomenon only later given this name.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pbu-AAlqDJg&list=PLAJIhnd1mbiCVeVI3Pu8NihIZzfWMhg5h&index=5 The New Era of Socialism] this article draws heavily on this Infrared Vision video</ref> Socialism was the spontaneous response of consciousness to an objective apocalypse of traditional order and meaning in every sense which took place in late 18th and 19th century Europe. Concretely, this apocalypse took dual form as the Industrial Revolution in England and the political revolution in France. This gave rise to the '''Social Question'''. As the "feudal, patriarchal, idyllic relations" which formed the fabric of ''Ancien'' life were torn asunder, the cold brutality of all against all, dog eat dog, and every man for himself took their place. Socialism was simply the practical recognition of this fact and some corresponding program to remedy it. Production had to be reconciled with the majority of people's actual lives, serving social ends to guarantee a minimum of dignified, human life.

	For [[Utopian socialism\|Utopians]] like '''Simon''' and '''Fourier''', this was an intellectual problem, one which they considered themselves to have solved. Marx departs with the simple premise that capitalism would never voluntarily annihilate itself in service of better angels, as the Utopians suggested, that instead it would ''involuntarily but automatically'' annihilate itself as a mode of production due to objective contradictions essential to its very process of reproduction. Circulation of commodities at exchange value would lead to a falling rate of profit and economic crises which trigger the consolidation of capital under fewer and fewer firms. Somewhere along the line this process would no longer be sustainable as a free system without intervention. Socialism is therefore the sublation of Capitalism in the precise Hegelian sense: ''in preservation'' (cartels setting prices, central banks ordering the economy) ''it passes away'' (competition ceases, property becomes hereditary and institutional). <ref>“just where it fancies it is pursuing its own self-preservation and particular interest, is in fact doing the very opposite, is an activity that results in its own dissolution, and makes itself a moment of the whole.” (Preface to the Phenomenology, ($54))</ref>		For [[Utopian socialism\|Utopians]] like '''Simon''' and '''Fourier''', this was an intellectual problem, one which they considered themselves to have solved. Marx departs with the simple premise that capitalism would never voluntarily annihilate itself in service of better angels, as the Utopians suggested, that instead it would ''involuntarily but automatically'' annihilate itself as a mode of production due to objective contradictions essential to its very process of reproduction. Circulation of commodities at exchange value would lead to a falling rate of profit and economic crises which trigger the consolidation of capital under fewer and fewer firms. Somewhere along the line this process would no longer be sustainable as a free system without intervention. Socialism is therefore the sublation of Capitalism in the precise Hegelian sense: ''in preservation'' (cartels setting prices, central banks ordering the economy) ''it passes away'' (competition ceases, property becomes hereditary and institutional). <ref>“just where it fancies it is pursuing its own self-preservation and particular interest, is in fact doing the very opposite, is an activity that results in its own dissolution, and makes itself a moment of the whole.” (Preface to the Phenomenology, ($54))</ref>

imported>Calvin at 05:43, 15 September 2024

2024-09-15T05:43:11Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:43, 15 September 2024
Line 57:		Line 57:

	Marx calls this precisely the abolition of the capitalist mode of production within the capitalist mode of production itself, and hence a self-abolishing contradiction, which presents itself as a mere point of transition to a ''new form of production''.<ref>Capital Volume III (Penguin), p. 569.</ref>		Marx calls this precisely the abolition of the capitalist mode of production within the capitalist mode of production itself, and hence a self-abolishing contradiction, which presents itself as a mere point of transition to a ''new form of production''.<ref>Capital Volume III (Penguin), p. 569.</ref>

	~~=== The Transitory Nature of Capitalism ===~~

	==Notable socialist states==		==Notable socialist states==

imported>Calvin at 05:39, 15 September 2024

2024-09-15T05:39:40Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:39, 15 September 2024
Line 45:		Line 45:
	(2) The organization of labor itself as social labor through cooperation, the division of labor, and fusing of labor with the natural sciences.		(2) The organization of labor itself as social labor through cooperation, the division of labor, and fusing of labor with the natural sciences.

	Marx then notes that on both accounts (1) and (2), the capitalist mode of production ''abolishes'' private property and private labor, ''even if in antithetical forms''.<ref>Capital Volume III (Penguin), p. 375.</ref>		Marx then notes that on both accounts (1) and (2), the capitalist mode of production ''abolishes'' private property and private labor, ''even if in antithetical forms''.<ref>Capital Volume III (Penguin), p. 375.</ref>

			Marxism understands the capitalist development of the productive forces of social labor as its ''historic mission'' and ''justification''. For that very reason, it unwittingly creates the material conditions for a higher form of production. Capitalist production is not an absolute, but only a ''historical'' mode of production, corresponding to a ''specific'' and ''limited'' epoch. Marx's scientific analysis of the capitalist mode of production shows that it is a mode of production of a ''particular'' kind and a specific ''historical determinacy''; of its ''historically transitory character''. <ref>Capital, Volume III (Penguin), pp. 365-8, 1018.</ref>

	=== The Formation of Joint-Stock Companies ===		=== The Formation of Joint-Stock Companies ===
Line 52:		Line 54:
	(1) Tremendous expansion in the scale of production at enterprises which would be other impossible for individual capitalists (read ''development of productive forces'').		(1) Tremendous expansion in the scale of production at enterprises which would be other impossible for individual capitalists (read ''development of productive forces'').

	(2) At the same time, capital, which is inherently based on a social mode of production and presupposes a social concentration of means of production and labor-power, ~~bow~~ receives the ''form'' ''of'' ''social capital'' (this is what a joint-stock company is, i.e. a public company) in contrast to private capital, and its enterprises appear as ''social enterprises'' ''as opposed to private ones.'' This is the ''abolition of capital as private property within the confines (context) of the capitalist mode of production itself''.		(2) At the same time, capital, which is inherently based on a social mode of production and presupposes a social concentration of means of production and labor-power, now receives the ''form'' ''of'' ''social capital'' (this is what a joint-stock company is, i.e. a public company) in contrast to private capital, and its enterprises appear as ''social enterprises'' ''as opposed to private ones.'' This is the ''abolition of capital as private property within the confines (context) of the capitalist mode of production itself''.

	Marx calls this precisely the abolition of the capitalist mode of production within the capitalist mode of production itself, and hence a self-abolishing contradiction, which presents itself as a mere point of transition to a ''new form of production''.<ref>Capital Volume III (Penguin), p. 569.</ref>		Marx calls this precisely the abolition of the capitalist mode of production within the capitalist mode of production itself, and hence a self-abolishing contradiction, which presents itself as a mere point of transition to a ''new form of production''.<ref>Capital Volume III (Penguin), p. 569.</ref>

			=== The Transitory Nature of Capitalism ===

	==Notable socialist states==		==Notable socialist states==

imported>Calvin: /* The Formation of Joint-Stock Companies and the Credit System */

2024-09-14T13:04:45Z

The Formation of Joint-Stock Companies and the Credit System

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:04, 14 September 2024
Line 47:		Line 47:
	Marx then notes that on both accounts (1) and (2), the capitalist mode of production ''abolishes'' private property and private labor, ''even if in antithetical forms''.<ref>Capital Volume III (Penguin), p. 375.</ref>		Marx then notes that on both accounts (1) and (2), the capitalist mode of production ''abolishes'' private property and private labor, ''even if in antithetical forms''.<ref>Capital Volume III (Penguin), p. 375.</ref>

	=== The Formation of Joint-Stock Companies ~~and the Credit System~~ ===		=== The Formation of Joint-Stock Companies ===
	Marx & Engels saw in the emergence of joint-stock companies the following:		Marx & Engels saw in the emergence of joint-stock companies the following:

imported>Calvin: Necessity of socialism, formation of joint-stock companies. Marx.

2024-09-14T13:03:37Z

Necessity of socialism, formation of joint-stock companies. Marx.

@@ Line 35: / Line 35: @@
 In 2021, [[Haz Al-Din]] put forth the theory that [[''We already live in socialism''|we already live in socialism]], stating that we have already transitioned into an incipient socialist mode of production, but that this is not reflected by society's institutions, which are characterized by the continued rule of the now dynastic and semi-hereditary capitalist class who accumulate derivative profits from a more or less centrally planned economy.
 ==Notable socialist states==
@@ Line 42: / Line 62: @@
 *[[Cuba|Republic of Cuba]] (1959- )
 *[[Laos|Lao Democratic People's Republic]] (1975- )
-* [[Polish People's Republic]] (1947-1989)
+*[[Polish People's Republic]] (1947-1989)
-* [[Socialist Republic of Romania]] (1947-1989)
+*[[Socialist Republic of Romania]] (1947-1989)
 *[[Yugoslavia|Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia]] (1945-1992)
 *[[East Germany|German Democratic Republic]] (1949-1990)

imported>MaGCommuniST: Fixed mistakes.

2024-08-22T23:30:32Z

Fixed mistakes.

imported>All that is Solid at 03:10, 18 February 2024

2024-02-18T03:10:13Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:10, 18 February 2024
Line 1:		Line 1:
	Socialism was never premised on a subjective definition or injunction; rather, it was a real phenomenon only later given this name.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pbu-AAlqDJg&list=PLAJIhnd1mbiCVeVI3Pu8NihIZzfWMhg5h&index=5 The New Era of Socialism] this article draws heavily on this Infrared Vision video</ref> Socialism was the spontaneous response of consciousness to an objective apocalypse of traditional order and meaning in every sense which took place in late 18th and 19th century Europe. Concretely, this apocalypse took dual form as the Industrial Revolution in England and the political revolution in France. This gave rise to the '''Social Question'''. As the "feudal, patriarchal, idyllic relations" which formed the fabric of ''Ancien'' life were torn asunder, the cold brutality of all against all, dog eat dog, and every man for himself took their place. Socialism was simply the practical recognition of this fact and some corresponding program to remedy it. Production had to be reconciled with the majority of people's actual lives, serving social ends to guarantee a minimum of dignified, human life.		Socialism was never premised on a subjective definition or injunction; rather, it was a real phenomenon only later given this name.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pbu-AAlqDJg&list=PLAJIhnd1mbiCVeVI3Pu8NihIZzfWMhg5h&index=5 The New Era of Socialism] this article draws heavily on this Infrared Vision video</ref> Socialism was the spontaneous response of consciousness to an objective apocalypse of traditional order and meaning in every sense which took place in late 18th and 19th century Europe. Concretely, this apocalypse took dual form as the Industrial Revolution in England and the political revolution in France. This gave rise to the '''Social Question'''. As the "feudal, patriarchal, idyllic relations" which formed the fabric of ''Ancien'' life were torn asunder, the cold brutality of all against all, dog eat dog, and every man for himself took their place. Socialism was simply the practical recognition of this fact and some corresponding program to remedy it. Production had to be reconciled with the majority of people's actual lives, serving social ends to guarantee a minimum of dignified, human life.

	For [[Utopian socialism\|Utopians]] like '''Simon''' and '''Fourier''', this was an intellectual problem, one which they considered themselves to have solved. Marx departs with the simple premise that capitalism would never voluntarily annihilate itself in service of better angels, as the Utopians suggested, that instead it would ''involuntarily but automatically'' annihilate itself as a mode of production due to objective contradictions essential to its very process of reproduction. Circulation of commodities at exchange value would lead to a falling rate of profit and economic crises which trigger the consolidation of capital under fewer and fewer firms. Somewhere along the line this process would no longer be sustainable as a free system without intervention. Socialism is therefore the sublation of Capitalism in the precise Hegelian sense: ''in preservation'' (cartels setting prices, central banks ordering the economy) ''it passes away'' (competition ceases, property becomes hereditary and institutional). <ref>[“just where it fancies it is pursuing its own self-preservation and particular interest, is in fact doing the very opposite, is an activity that results in its own dissolution, and makes itself a moment of the whole.” (Preface to the Phenomenology, ($54))]		For [[Utopian socialism\|Utopians]] like '''Simon''' and '''Fourier''', this was an intellectual problem, one which they considered themselves to have solved. Marx departs with the simple premise that capitalism would never voluntarily annihilate itself in service of better angels, as the Utopians suggested, that instead it would ''involuntarily but automatically'' annihilate itself as a mode of production due to objective contradictions essential to its very process of reproduction. Circulation of commodities at exchange value would lead to a falling rate of profit and economic crises which trigger the consolidation of capital under fewer and fewer firms. Somewhere along the line this process would no longer be sustainable as a free system without intervention. Socialism is therefore the sublation of Capitalism in the precise Hegelian sense: ''in preservation'' (cartels setting prices, central banks ordering the economy) ''it passes away'' (competition ceases, property becomes hereditary and institutional). <ref>“just where it fancies it is pursuing its own self-preservation and particular interest, is in fact doing the very opposite, is an activity that results in its own dissolution, and makes itself a moment of the whole.” (Preface to the Phenomenology, ($54))</ref>

	Marx and Engels recognized capitalism as a force of disruption and immiseration, but in it they recognized also the forces which would lead to socialism. Never did they assert this trajectory as voluntaristic, self-conscious construction of a new system by individuals subjectively opposed to capitalism. Rather, socialism was the inevitable conclusion of tendencies integral to capitalism itself. '''Capitalism was for them the process by which Socialism constructed itself, ''independent of any individual subjective will.'' [[Communism]]''' is the real movement which gives discursive and political recognition to this fact.		Marx and Engels recognized capitalism as a force of disruption and immiseration, but in it they recognized also the forces which would lead to socialism. Never did they assert this trajectory as voluntaristic, self-conscious construction of a new system by individuals subjectively opposed to capitalism. Rather, socialism was the inevitable conclusion of tendencies integral to capitalism itself. '''Capitalism was for them the process by which Socialism constructed itself, ''independent of any individual subjective will.'' [[Communism]]''' is the real movement which gives discursive and political recognition to this fact.

imported>All that is Solid at 03:09, 18 February 2024

2024-02-18T03:09:01Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:09, 18 February 2024
Line 1:		Line 1:
	Socialism was never premised on a subjective definition or injunction; rather, it was a real phenomenon only later given this name.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pbu-AAlqDJg&list=PLAJIhnd1mbiCVeVI3Pu8NihIZzfWMhg5h&index=5 The New Era of Socialism] this article draws heavily on this Infrared Vision video</ref> Socialism was the spontaneous response of consciousness to an objective apocalypse of traditional order and meaning in every sense which took place in late 18th and 19th century Europe. Concretely, this apocalypse took dual form as the Industrial Revolution in England and the political revolution in France. This gave rise to the '''Social Question'''. As the "feudal, patriarchal, idyllic relations" which formed the fabric of ''Ancien'' life were torn asunder, the cold brutality of all against all, dog eat dog, and every man for himself took their place. Socialism was simply the practical recognition of this fact and some corresponding program to remedy it. Production had to be reconciled with the majority of people's actual lives, serving social ends to guarantee a minimum of dignified, human life.		Socialism was never premised on a subjective definition or injunction; rather, it was a real phenomenon only later given this name.<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pbu-AAlqDJg&list=PLAJIhnd1mbiCVeVI3Pu8NihIZzfWMhg5h&index=5 The New Era of Socialism] this article draws heavily on this Infrared Vision video</ref> Socialism was the spontaneous response of consciousness to an objective apocalypse of traditional order and meaning in every sense which took place in late 18th and 19th century Europe. Concretely, this apocalypse took dual form as the Industrial Revolution in England and the political revolution in France. This gave rise to the '''Social Question'''. As the "feudal, patriarchal, idyllic relations" which formed the fabric of ''Ancien'' life were torn asunder, the cold brutality of all against all, dog eat dog, and every man for himself took their place. Socialism was simply the practical recognition of this fact and some corresponding program to remedy it. Production had to be reconciled with the majority of people's actual lives, serving social ends to guarantee a minimum of dignified, human life.

	For [[Utopian socialism\|Utopians]] like '''Simon''' and '''Fourier''', this was an intellectual problem, one which they considered themselves to have solved. Marx departs with the simple premise that capitalism would never voluntarily annihilate itself in service of better angels, as the Utopians suggested, that instead it would ''involuntarily but automatically'' annihilate itself as a mode of production due to objective contradictions essential to its very process of reproduction. Circulation of commodities at exchange value would lead to a falling rate of profit and economic crises which trigger the consolidation of capital under fewer and fewer firms. Somewhere along the line this process would no longer be sustainable as a free system without intervention. Socialism is therefore the sublation of Capitalism in the precise Hegelian sense: ''in preservation'' (cartels setting prices, central banks ordering the economy) ''it passes away'' (competition ceases, property becomes hereditary and institutional).		For [[Utopian socialism\|Utopians]] like '''Simon''' and '''Fourier''', this was an intellectual problem, one which they considered themselves to have solved. Marx departs with the simple premise that capitalism would never voluntarily annihilate itself in service of better angels, as the Utopians suggested, that instead it would ''involuntarily but automatically'' annihilate itself as a mode of production due to objective contradictions essential to its very process of reproduction. Circulation of commodities at exchange value would lead to a falling rate of profit and economic crises which trigger the consolidation of capital under fewer and fewer firms. Somewhere along the line this process would no longer be sustainable as a free system without intervention. Socialism is therefore the sublation of Capitalism in the precise Hegelian sense: ''in preservation'' (cartels setting prices, central banks ordering the economy) ''it passes away'' (competition ceases, property becomes hereditary and institutional). <ref>[“just where it fancies it is pursuing its own self-preservation and particular interest, is in fact doing the very opposite, is an activity that results in its own dissolution, and makes itself a moment of the whole.” (Preface to the Phenomenology, ($54))]

	Marx and Engels recognized capitalism as a force of disruption and immiseration, but in it they recognized also the forces which would lead to socialism. Never did they assert this trajectory as voluntaristic, self-conscious construction of a new system by individuals subjectively opposed to capitalism. Rather, socialism was the inevitable conclusion of tendencies integral to capitalism itself. '''Capitalism was for them the process by which Socialism constructed itself, ''independent of any individual subjective will.'' [[Communism]]''' is the real movement which gives discursive and political recognition to this fact.		Marx and Engels recognized capitalism as a force of disruption and immiseration, but in it they recognized also the forces which would lead to socialism. Never did they assert this trajectory as voluntaristic, self-conscious construction of a new system by individuals subjectively opposed to capitalism. Rather, socialism was the inevitable conclusion of tendencies integral to capitalism itself. '''Capitalism was for them the process by which Socialism constructed itself, ''independent of any individual subjective will.'' [[Communism]]''' is the real movement which gives discursive and political recognition to this fact.

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:30, 22 August 2024
Line 37:		Line 37:

	==Notable socialist states==		==Notable socialist states==
	*[[Soviet Union]] (~~1917~~-1991)		*[[Soviet Union]] (1922-1991)
	*[[Democratic People's Republic of Korea]] (DPRK), known colloquially as North Korea (1948- )		*[[Democratic People's Republic of Korea]] (DPRK), known colloquially as North Korea (1948- )
	*[[China\|People's Republic of China]] (1949- )		*[[China\|People's Republic of China]] (1949- )
Line 45:		Line 45:
	* [[Socialist Republic of Romania]] (1947-1989)		* [[Socialist Republic of Romania]] (1947-1989)
	*[[Yugoslavia\|Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia]] (1945-1992)		*[[Yugoslavia\|Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia]] (1945-1992)
	*[[East Germany\|German Democratic Republic]] (1949-~~1989~~)		*[[East Germany\|German Democratic Republic]] (1949-1990)
	*[[Green Libya\|Great Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya]] (1969-2011)		*[[Green Libya\|Great Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya]] (1969-2011)
	*[[Syria\|Syrian Arab Republic]] (1963- )		*[[Syria\|Syrian Arab Republic]] (1963- )
Line 51:		Line 51:
	*[[Baathist Iraq\|Republic of Iraq]] (1968-2003)		*[[Baathist Iraq\|Republic of Iraq]] (1968-2003)
	*[[Nasserist Egypt\|United Arab Republic]] (1952-1970)		*[[Nasserist Egypt\|United Arab Republic]] (1952-1970)
	*[[People's Socialist Republic of Albania]] (1946-~~1991~~)		*[[People's Socialist Republic of Albania]] (1946-1992)
	*[[Czechoslovak Socialist Republic]] (1948-~~1989~~)		*[[Czechoslovak Socialist Republic]] (1948-1990)
	*[[Hungarian People's Republic]] (1949-1989)		*[[Hungarian People's Republic]] (1949-1989)
	*[[People's Republic of Bulgaria]] (1946-~~1989~~)		*[[People's Republic of Bulgaria]] (1946-1990)
	*[[Mongolian People's Republic]] (1924-~~1990~~)		*[[Mongolian People's Republic]] (1924-1992)
	*[[Democratic Kampuchea]] (1975-1979)		*[[Democratic Kampuchea]] (1975-1979)
	*[[People's Democratic Republic of Yemen]] (1967-1990)		*[[People's Democratic Republic of Yemen]] (1967-1990)