Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Starry Messenger

(32,380 posts)
12. "Why Socialism?"
Tue Jul 31, 2012, 11:06 AM
Jul 2012

by Albert Einstein

http://monthlyreview.org/2009/05/01/why-socialism



<snip>

For the sake of simplicity, in the discussion that follows I shall call “workers” all those who do not share in the ownership of the means of production—although this does not quite correspond to the customary use of the term. The owner of the means of production is in a position to purchase the labor power of the worker. By using the means of production, the worker produces new goods which become the property of the capitalist. The essential point about this process is the relation between what the worker produces and what he is paid, both measured in terms of real value. Insofar as the labor contract is “free,” what the worker receives is determined not by the real value of the goods he produces, but by his minimum needs and by the capitalists’ requirements for labor power in relation to the number of workers competing for jobs. It is important to understand that even in theory the payment of the worker is not determined by the value of his product.

Private capital tends to become concentrated in few hands, partly because of competition among the capitalists, and partly because technological development and the increasing division of labor encourage the formation of larger units of production at the expense of smaller ones. The result of these developments is an oligarchy of private capital the enormous power of which cannot be effectively checked even by a democratically organized political society. This is true since the members of legislative bodies are selected by political parties, largely financed or otherwise influenced by private capitalists who, for all practical purposes, separate the electorate from the legislature. The consequence is that the representatives of the people do not in fact sufficiently protect the interests of the underprivileged sections of the population. Moreover, under existing conditions, private capitalists inevitably control, directly or indirectly, the main sources of information (press, radio, education). It is thus extremely difficult, and indeed in most cases quite impossible, for the individual citizen to come to objective conclusions and to make intelligent use of his political rights.

The situation prevailing in an economy based on the private ownership of capital is thus characterized by two main principles: first, means of production (capital) are privately owned and the owners dispose of them as they see fit; second, the labor contract is free. Of course, there is no such thing as a pure capitalist society in this sense. In particular, it should be noted that the workers, through long and bitter political struggles, have succeeded in securing a somewhat improved form of the “free labor contract” for certain categories of workers. But taken as a whole, the present day economy does not differ much from “pure” capitalism.

Production is carried on for profit, not for use. There is no provision that all those able and willing to work will always be in a position to find employment; an “army of unemployed” almost always exists. The worker is constantly in fear of losing his job. Since unemployed and poorly paid workers do not provide a profitable market, the production of consumers’ goods is restricted, and great hardship is the consequence. Technological progress frequently results in more unemployment rather than in an easing of the burden of work for all. The profit motive, in conjunction with competition among capitalists, is responsible for an instability in the accumulation and utilization of capital which leads to increasingly severe depressions. Unlimited competition leads to a huge waste of labor, and to that crippling of the social consciousness of individuals which I mentioned before.

This crippling of individuals I consider the worst evil of capitalism. Our whole educational system suffers from this evil. An exaggerated competitive attitude is inculcated into the student, who is trained to worship acquisitive success as a preparation for his future career.

I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals. In such an economy, the means of production are owned by society itself and are utilized in a planned fashion. A planned economy, which adjusts production to the needs of the community, would distribute the work to be done among all those able to work and would guarantee a livelihood to every man, woman, and child. The education of the individual, in addition to promoting his own innate abilities, would attempt to develop in him a sense of responsibility for his fellow men in place of the glorification of power and success in our present society.

<snip>

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

I didn't know there was a Socialist Progressives group on DU. Betsy Ross Jul 2012 #1
This group is pretty lively. limpyhobbler Jul 2012 #2
It is. We have several subscribers too! Starry Messenger Jul 2012 #3
We have over a 100 subscribers I think. We are probably one of the most popular groups here. white_wolf Jul 2012 #5
Oooh, I have the Gungeon trashed, so I can't check, but I'll bet you might be right! Starry Messenger Jul 2012 #6
I just checked on our subscriber numbers........ socialist_n_TN Jul 2012 #9
Hey, good to see you! Starry Messenger Jul 2012 #10
Yes, it seems to be. :^) GreenPartyVoter Jul 2012 #4
Thank you! gopiscrap Jul 2012 #7
you are welcome..! limpyhobbler Jul 2012 #8
Very interesting zzaapp Jul 2012 #11
"Why Socialism?" Starry Messenger Jul 2012 #12
very heavy stuff, thanks can I ask a couple more questions please? zzaapp Jul 2012 #13
The social goals would be determined by working people Starry Messenger Jul 2012 #14
Thanks Starry, zzaapp Jul 2012 #16
"So our elected officials would set the social agenda, right?" Starry Messenger Jul 2012 #18
In the Halliburton scenario, would everyone be paid the same wage zzaapp Jul 2012 #20
Not necessarily, no. Starry Messenger Jul 2012 #22
I must be laboring under a misconception, zzaapp Jul 2012 #23
Yes, that is incorrect. Starry Messenger Jul 2012 #25
Thanks zzaapp Jul 2012 #26
Under Socialism, you get to keep your stuff. Starry Messenger Jul 2012 #27
LOL...I wouldn't say corporation... more of a small business man. zzaapp Jul 2012 #28
Marx was talking about property for heavy industries. Starry Messenger Jul 2012 #30
Most Marxist or communist organizations......... socialist_n_TN Aug 2012 #36
Thanks SNT zzaapp Aug 2012 #37
This actually touches on a larger debate in socialist circles that I won't get too much into white_wolf Aug 2012 #38
WW, thank you for your informative post, zzaapp Aug 2012 #39
Everyone's favorite example. PETRUS Aug 2012 #40
Thanks so much Petrus, going there now. zzaapp Aug 2012 #41
Well you probably wouldn't have a company organized like a capitalist corporation. white_wolf Aug 2012 #42
I know that this all is very speculative... zzaapp Aug 2012 #43
Sure it is. Democracy itself is cumbersome at times. Dictatorships are much more efficent. white_wolf Aug 2012 #44
I've read some Noam Chomsky.... zzaapp Aug 2012 #45
I'm one of the ones that think things should be a bit more centralized. Starry Messenger Aug 2012 #46
I second the call for common sense. limpyhobbler Aug 2012 #48
+1000 Starry Messenger Aug 2012 #49
To Limpy, Starry, Petrus, SNT and white wolf zzaapp Aug 2012 #50
Regarding individualism... white_wolf Aug 2012 #51
I've run into that here. zzaapp Aug 2012 #52
This is an excellent point ww. limpyhobbler Aug 2012 #53
Two Quotes Come to Mind Fantastic Anarchist Oct 2012 #56
hmm. that's interesting limpyhobbler Oct 2012 #57
From the Individualist to the Communist variants of anarchism ... Fantastic Anarchist Oct 2012 #58
Some point-people can be designated and authorized to make decisions, limpyhobbler Aug 2012 #47
Before I answer this, remember....... socialist_n_TN Aug 2012 #54
Damn, I forgot to answer your basic question........ socialist_n_TN Aug 2012 #55
Equal satisfaction of needs tama Nov 2012 #59
Mr. or Ms. zzaapp is no longer with us it seems. Been PPR'd. limpyhobbler Nov 2012 #60
One more question, this is very interesting, thanks for putting up with me. zzaapp Jul 2012 #17
Can't work because of disability? Starry Messenger Jul 2012 #19
I'm not sure, I think that there are many people who are content to let zzaapp Jul 2012 #21
Science usually says otherwise. Starry Messenger Jul 2012 #24
Starry, I hope you can take a compliment. zzaapp Jul 2012 #29
Thank you zzaapp. Starry Messenger Jul 2012 #31
Learn something new everyday, zzaapp Jul 2012 #15
Sarcasm? limpyhobbler Jul 2012 #32
I've never had the pleasure of hearing Mr. West speak. zzaapp Jul 2012 #33
That's star power I guess. limpyhobbler Jul 2012 #34
LH.....you're right on. zzaapp Aug 2012 #35
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»Socialist Progressives»Cornel West & company...»Reply #12