Tupac-Amaru
20th November 2004, 16:16
Why did Revolutionary Socialsim Fail in Western Europe in the late 19th Century?
I Wrote a small essay with the reason why there was no Worker's Revolution in the late 19th century in Europe.
----------------
In the 19th century socialism was a very powerful force on Europe. It appealed to the masses most of all. Socialism originates from the writings of Rousseau and the early ideas of the French revolution. But what really took socialist ideology forward was the industrial revolution with the development of huge cities, slums and the terrible conditions in which people worked and lived. Revolutionary socialism arises after the development of scientific socialism; the result of the writings of such men as Karl Marx and Frederick Engles. According to Marx the workers would inevitably revolt, and overthrow the system. Marx and Engles believed that in order to avoid the terrible conditions that there were at the time, the state should have total control over the means of production. This means that the state should own the factories and the state should distribute the wealth equally among all, under the doctrine of “from each according to his ability to each according to his need”. Revolutionary socialists believed that a workers’ revolution would be the only way to free the slave conditions of the proletariat. Revolutionary socialism failed however in Western Europe and in fact it was not until 1917 that a revolution took place in Russia but under very special circumstances.
One of the reasons that socialism failed is due to another powerful “ism” at that time: nationalism. Marx assumed that individuals would be loyal to their class but in the late 19th century, it became clear that the masses were more loyal to their own country than to the cause of workers worldwide. For example the French were very anti-German but not so anti-Russian, even though the Czar was regarded as the worst oppressor of the workers. According to the socialists, war was something used by the capitalists to gain economic power, and the result was workers killing workers; this is why the Second International, established in 1889, declared its opposition to war. But the powerful surge of nationalism encouraged many workers to join the army and they therefore gave up the spirit of “workers of the world unite”. This would be a severe blow to revolutionary socialism, since it was the workers who were supposed to carry out the revolution.
Another problem was the divisions inside the socialist movement itself. Many revisionists were willing to work for social change within the system instead of using a bloody revolution to achieve the needs of the people. The hard-line Marxists argued that all compromise with the existing system was wrong. One of the ways the revisionists used the system to achieve their aims was by forming parliamentary parties in order to impose these aims in the parliament. As stated, this disagreement shows that the revolutionaries were failing and that socialists were willing to achieve their aims in another way. Similarly the Marxists inside the socialist movement had a great dispute with the anarchists in the movement; this destroyed the first International.
Another very important factor was the evolution of capitalism. The accommodating nature of capitalism meant that there was more flexibility in adapting to changing circumstances and in fact capitalism began to award benefits to the workers. In the later years of the 19th century the capitalist system developed free, compulsory mass education. Also, companies introduced bonus schemes and the notion of promotion through merit.
Revolutionary socialism was also undermined by the reforms carried out by the governments in Western Europe. The workers’ demands were met by improvement of living standards and male suffrage. Social security was also introduced which meant that workers could get benefits for sickness, old age, accident, etc,. This and many other things like lower food prices meant that the workers were getting what they needed and therefore did not want to risk losing these benefits because of the revolution. There was also a growth in trade (labor) unions. As a result, the unions could negotiate with the owners of the factories for better conditions for the workers, and this meant that again the workers did not need to revolt to achieve justice.
The socialist movement, although it was very famous and powerful, achieved most of its aims without a revolution. We can easily conclude that the main reason revolutionary socialism failed in Europe was because the workers started to realize that they did not need a revolution when they saw that the capitalist system adapted to their needs. The revolutionaries were not able to attract much support because of internal disputes with the anarchists and influence of the revisionists who preferred to negotiate. Another major factor that blocked the revolution was nationalism that divided the workers according to their country and therefore did not allow them to unite.
I Wrote a small essay with the reason why there was no Worker's Revolution in the late 19th century in Europe.
----------------
In the 19th century socialism was a very powerful force on Europe. It appealed to the masses most of all. Socialism originates from the writings of Rousseau and the early ideas of the French revolution. But what really took socialist ideology forward was the industrial revolution with the development of huge cities, slums and the terrible conditions in which people worked and lived. Revolutionary socialism arises after the development of scientific socialism; the result of the writings of such men as Karl Marx and Frederick Engles. According to Marx the workers would inevitably revolt, and overthrow the system. Marx and Engles believed that in order to avoid the terrible conditions that there were at the time, the state should have total control over the means of production. This means that the state should own the factories and the state should distribute the wealth equally among all, under the doctrine of “from each according to his ability to each according to his need”. Revolutionary socialists believed that a workers’ revolution would be the only way to free the slave conditions of the proletariat. Revolutionary socialism failed however in Western Europe and in fact it was not until 1917 that a revolution took place in Russia but under very special circumstances.
One of the reasons that socialism failed is due to another powerful “ism” at that time: nationalism. Marx assumed that individuals would be loyal to their class but in the late 19th century, it became clear that the masses were more loyal to their own country than to the cause of workers worldwide. For example the French were very anti-German but not so anti-Russian, even though the Czar was regarded as the worst oppressor of the workers. According to the socialists, war was something used by the capitalists to gain economic power, and the result was workers killing workers; this is why the Second International, established in 1889, declared its opposition to war. But the powerful surge of nationalism encouraged many workers to join the army and they therefore gave up the spirit of “workers of the world unite”. This would be a severe blow to revolutionary socialism, since it was the workers who were supposed to carry out the revolution.
Another problem was the divisions inside the socialist movement itself. Many revisionists were willing to work for social change within the system instead of using a bloody revolution to achieve the needs of the people. The hard-line Marxists argued that all compromise with the existing system was wrong. One of the ways the revisionists used the system to achieve their aims was by forming parliamentary parties in order to impose these aims in the parliament. As stated, this disagreement shows that the revolutionaries were failing and that socialists were willing to achieve their aims in another way. Similarly the Marxists inside the socialist movement had a great dispute with the anarchists in the movement; this destroyed the first International.
Another very important factor was the evolution of capitalism. The accommodating nature of capitalism meant that there was more flexibility in adapting to changing circumstances and in fact capitalism began to award benefits to the workers. In the later years of the 19th century the capitalist system developed free, compulsory mass education. Also, companies introduced bonus schemes and the notion of promotion through merit.
Revolutionary socialism was also undermined by the reforms carried out by the governments in Western Europe. The workers’ demands were met by improvement of living standards and male suffrage. Social security was also introduced which meant that workers could get benefits for sickness, old age, accident, etc,. This and many other things like lower food prices meant that the workers were getting what they needed and therefore did not want to risk losing these benefits because of the revolution. There was also a growth in trade (labor) unions. As a result, the unions could negotiate with the owners of the factories for better conditions for the workers, and this meant that again the workers did not need to revolt to achieve justice.
The socialist movement, although it was very famous and powerful, achieved most of its aims without a revolution. We can easily conclude that the main reason revolutionary socialism failed in Europe was because the workers started to realize that they did not need a revolution when they saw that the capitalist system adapted to their needs. The revolutionaries were not able to attract much support because of internal disputes with the anarchists and influence of the revisionists who preferred to negotiate. Another major factor that blocked the revolution was nationalism that divided the workers according to their country and therefore did not allow them to unite.