Utopian Socialism

[Fairfax]

Whenever attempting to discuss socialism/communism with someone, I often get stopped in my tracks with the remark 'Communism is a utopian idea and will never work unless humans change.'

Now I know that communists themselves regard some ideas as Utopian Socialism.

My question is: What is Utopian Socialism and how does it differ with everyone's idea of communism here?

Thank you :)

[Blake's Baby]

Utopian socialism is what Marx and Engels called early-19th century socialism that relied on 'schemes' (usually financed by the bourgeoisie) to promote harmonious living through vast social experiments in planned rational settlements. Basically.

They contrasted that with their 'scientific socialism' which proposed that humanity couldn't become free and creative without the revolutionary overthrow of the existing order by the proletariat (as deduced from the history of class strugggle).

[Fairfax]

Utopian socialism is what Marx and Engels called early-19th century socialism that relied on 'schemes' (usually financed by the bourgeoisie) to promote harmonious living through vast social experiments in planned rational settlements. Basically.

They contrasted that with their 'scientific socialism' which proposed that humanity couldn't become free and creative without the revolutionary overthrow of the existing order by the proletariat (as deduced from the history of class strugggle).

So would that make Utopian Socialism reformist in some way? Sorry if I have misused that term, still learning the meanings.

[Red_Banner]

http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1917/staterev/ch05.htm

[Fairfax]

Thanks for the link! I'll give it a good old read :)

[Blake's Baby]

So would that make Utopian Socialism reformist in some way? Sorry if I have misused that term, still learning the meanings.

I suppose so, depending on what you mean by 'in some way'. But 'reformism' is usually appled to a doctrine that arose about 50 years after Marx was writing about the Uopians, and it grew up inside the IInd International (the international organisation of socialist parties).

It might be more accurate to say that the 'reformists' (who believed capitalism could evolve into socialism) were 'utopian' in some way.

[Fairfax]

I suppose so, depending on what you mean by 'in some way'. But 'reformism' is usually appled to a doctrine that arose about 50 years after Marx was writing about the Uopians, and it grew up inside the IInd International (the international organisation of socialist parties).

It might be more accurate to say that the 'reformists' (who believed capitalism could evolve into socialism) were 'utopian' in some way.

Okay thank you! Does anybody still think Utopian Socialism could work? I mean I'm sure there are, but is it a popular idea still. Or has it pretty much died out?

[strobe]

Looking for a common thread in the utopian socialists Fourier, Saint Simon, and Owen, G.V. Plekhanov defined it this way: "The Utopian is one who, starting from an abstract principle, seeks for a perfect social organisation." Usually, this a belief that a perfectly-written constitution will solve all social ills.

[Mark V.]

Okay thank you! Does anybody still think Utopian Socialism could work? I mean I'm sure there are, but is it a popular idea still. Or has it pretty much died out?

The vast majority of people who consider themselves "Socialist" or "Communist" tend to take inspiration from Marx, one of the largest critics of Utopian Socialism. Also, I've hung around far-left groups for about 5 years now and while it's only antedotal evidence, I've only ever meet one self described "Utopian socialist" and he seemed very confused about the basics.

[GiantMonkeyMan]

Reformism can grant huge boons to the working class within the capitalist system, for example in the post-Second World War period the Labour government created the NHS and built lots of good social housing whilst demolishing slums. However we can see from contemporary history that reforms can be implemented and then also taken away as the NHS is being stripped of all its efficiency via privatisation and social housing is being sold off en masse to private landlords that quickly raise rents.

Reforms do not challenge the underlying conditions of capitalism that allow the bourgeoisie to exploit the proletariat; the class system, accumulation of capital etc. Only revolution can bring about the fundemental changes needed to end the privileged position of the bourgeoisie. It's utopian to believe otherwise.

[reb]

Utopian socialism is what Marx and Engels called early-19th century socialism that relied on 'schemes' (usually financed by the bourgeoisie) to promote harmonious living through vast social experiments in planned rational settlements. Basically.

They contrasted that with their 'scientific socialism' which proposed that humanity couldn't become free and creative without the revolutionary overthrow of the existing order by the proletariat (as deduced from the history of class strugggle).

I would argue that in opposition to implementing of plans of the utopian socialism, scientific [groan] socialism is the realization that there are these objective movements in society pushing it in certain directions. This revolves around the labor - capital relationship so every act of labor against capital is objectively anti-capitalist. This puts class back into the whole thing, the "communism is the real movement" and "emancipation of the class by the class" and "abolition of wage-labor" stuff. This is why substitutionist ideologies such as stalinism are utopian with their ideas of "socialism" in one country and revisionism causing a change without any economic basis.

[reb]

Okay thank you! Does anybody still think Utopian Socialism could work? I mean I'm sure there are, but is it a popular idea still. Or has it pretty much died out?

Utopian socialism still exists in the world. Most socialist parties in the world function in a utopian way. This is mostly because they take the historical development out of capitalism, the struggle of classes and the place that the proletariat holds in capitalism. They won't work now as they didn't work then because they don't describe the real world.

[Jimmie Higgins]

Okay thank you! Does anybody still think Utopian Socialism could work? I mean I'm sure there are, but is it a popular idea still. Or has it pretty much died out?

I don't think it really exists much as a current in socialism or anarchism (some less class-oriented offshoots of socialism and anarchism, maybe) but this maybe due as much to a lack of a larger socialist movement in society (in which various trends and ideas can develop) as well as a general dystopian pall and cynacism among people in the neoliberal era.

I think there is some of this reflected among people with a more liberal worldview however. Utopianism (and I find nothing wrong with a "utopian impulse or a sense of what could feasibly be possible) seems to me to be an ideology rooted in middle class views - specifically professionals. It would make sense for people who make their living in creative ways and problem solving (like engineers, professors, artists, scientists) but still have little influence over society (and professionally are often subject to having to do what the people with money tell you to do with your creative efforts) to believe that the problems with society are not enough of their creative input! Scientists can rationally plan a city, engineers can design more efficient things and more useful things, artists can create spaces that are more livable and enjoyable... but ideas are not what make society work and specifically in our societies, it's profits that motivate what get's built and how and for whom.

So I think the most recent trends have been around infromation and digital technolgoy being able to counter or neutralize market society (or in some versions, fix the current problems and make a better market society).

The closest thing to utopianism in socialist circles today might be the idea of communes or some other pre-figurative social formation. Rather than dream of a perfect society, they want to create islands of a future society. There are different - more practical than ideological maybe - problems with this in my opinion, but I think there's some overlap with the utopianism of the past.

[Jimmie Higgins]

I often get stopped in my tracks with the remark 'Communism is a utopian idea and will never work unless humans change.'

One other thing because I don't think it has been adressed by others yet, but the statement above is a different use of utopian ("idealistic") and the arguments rests on different assumptions.

Communism in a very general sense of people living cooperatively without states actually existed for longer than there have been class societies so there is nothing "impossible" about it and it certaintly couldn't be against human nature since there are pleanty of examples of this and human bands lived and thrived without states for a long time.

The real assumption of the argument is that capitalism is a natural or at least neutral reflection of human desires, rather than a specific organization of society in order to produce what is needed for survival. In my opinion, this argument about human nature is less effective in arguing for impossibility of communism than it is about excusing-away the problems of capitalism today as being the result of some biological "orginal sin". This argument is easily flipped though: biologically our brains are specially tuned for social interactions whereas we are terrible at waking up at the same time every day and doing one repetative task for 8 hours:lol:. We wouldn't need alarm clocks if capitalism was human nature.

[Fairfax]

One other thing because I don't think it has been adressed by others yet, but the statement above is a different use of utopian ("idealistic") and the arguments rests on different assumptions.

Communism in a very general sense of people living cooperatively without states actually existed for longer than there have been class societies so there is nothing "impossible" about it and it certaintly couldn't be against human nature since there are pleanty of examples of this and human bands lived and thrived without states for a long time.

The real assumption of the argument is that capitalism is a natural or at least neutral reflection of human desires, rather than a specific organization of society in order to produce what is needed for survival. In my opinion, this argument about human nature is less effective in arguing for impossibility of communism than it is about excusing-away the problems of capitalism today as being the result of some biological "orginal sin". This argument is easily flipped though: biologically our brains are specially tuned for social interactions whereas we are terrible at waking up at the same time every day and doing one repetative task for 8 hours:lol:. We wouldn't need alarm clocks if capitalism was human nature.

I really liked that! Mind if I use some of this in future discussions with my very capitalist friends? ^_^

[Jimmie Higgins]

I really liked that! Mind if I use some of this in future discussions with my very capitalist friends? ^_^sure. One of the likely arguments against "primitive communism" would be something like bands being "states" or "classes" existing because some people are stronger or "better" than others. Of course this is an argument against a modern communist society: some people are superior and will just rise to the top. This is not how societies functioned in a fundamental way though. Humans are inherently social creatures, it's always just a question of how that community does what it needs to survive, what the arrangements are, etc. band communities have to cooperate because it requires a collective effort to survive in this way and reproduce.

In capitalism, we can produce much more than the lowest cost of what it might take for everyone to just get by. But the way things are produced currently depend on capitalists controlling that wealth and competing with each other... And the most fundamental way to compete better is to suck more extra wealth out of your workers than your competitors. This involves all sorts of ways our lives as workers are controlled and regimented and disciplined. There is nothing very biologically natural about it and that's why people get Heath problems from work and repetitive actions or sitting all day; we drink caffeine or smoke or eat terrible snacks just to keep ourselves alert. It only seems natural because it's what we know and there's nothing "utopian" in the sense of far-fetched, about organizing for and advocating a different arrangement of that wealth and how we get what we need to survive.

[Firebrand]

As far as I understand it utopianism in its classical sense refers to the "You know what, life in today's society is shit so lets you, me and your cousin Fred, get some like minded people and go and set up our ideal society on an island somewhere."

Problems usually start thirty to forty years later when you're dead, cousin Fred has dementia and my nephew gets a bit power mad, brainwashes most of the younger members and stages a coup. Leading to about twenty to forty years of leader worship and dodgy finances, resulting in an investigation by the cult specialists with the FBI and some kind of shootout with the authorities. Thus ends a beautiful dream.

[Jimmie Higgins]

As far as I understand it utopianism in its classical sense refers to the "You know what, life in today's society is shit so lets you, me and your cousin Fred, get some like minded people and go and set up our ideal society on an island somewhere."

Problems usually start thirty to forty years later when you're dead, cousin Fred has dementia and my nephew gets a bit power mad, brainwashes most of the younger members and stages a coup. Leading to about twenty to forty years of leader worship and dodgy finances, resulting in an investigation by the cult specialists with the FBI and some kind of shootout with the authorities. Thus ends a beautiful dream.

Yeah and for the utopian socialists, it was often trying to appeal to capitalists on the basis of the rationality of the utopian plan/design, or to try and get investment into their project. I think we still see some of these ideas today. It may or may not work (if actually completed) on the level of a sort of commune, but an island of cooperation in a sea of capitalism isn't an answer for masses of people; at best it can only work for small communities of people and remain marginal and ultimately subbordinate to the larger capitalist world around it. This view also sometimes reduces the problem of capitalism to a problem of poor planning and management, rather than a problem of class exploitation and popular repression.

[A Revolutionary Tool]

If you want to gain a sense of what utopian socialists are about in this day and age check out the people over at the Venus Project or the Zeitgeist Movement.

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

sweden 1970.. that is all..


That's not socialism at all, that's social-democracy at its height before it began reversing. Why do you think that is 'utopian socialism'?

[ckaihatsu]

Here's a recent example, from another thread:





The problem that you are having is that socialism is not an economic model to be implemented. Socialism isn't a question of computation power either. It is the abolition of capital by the proletarian class.




Anyone submitting plans or theories on how socialism will operate, or the best way to socialism such as market socialism or central planning involving computation power, are utopians who either don't understand the essential class characteristics of the proletariat and the whole of Marx's understanding of revolution, capital and socialism.





You're painting with a very broad brush here, and you're tarring a subset of revolutionaries as being stereotype "utopians" -- do you *really* think that such *don't* understand what the class divide in society is -- ?

It's *not* sidestepping the class struggle to conceive of possible societal implementations, post-class, as long as there's no fetish arising from that practice.

I, for one, think it can be helpful and instructive to consider various civilizational possibilities, given certain 'knowns' (like surplus-production), for a post-capitalist social order.