Dr.

RAM MANOHAR LOHIYA

NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

SOCIALISM AS A POLITICAL THEORY

SUBMITTED TO SUBMITTED BY
DR. MONIKA SRIVASTAVA PARAM CHAUDHARY

ASSISSTANT PROFESSOR Enrolment no.- 210101099

(POLITICAL SCIENCE) B.A. LL.B.(Hons.)

Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia National Law University 2nd Semester, Section ‘A’
 DECLARATION

I hereby declare that my project work titled “Socialism as a political theory” submitted to the

Political Science Department, Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia National Law University, Lucknow is

a record of an original work done by me under the guidance of Dr. Monika Srivastava and

this project work is submitted in the partial fulfilment of the requirements for the award of the

degree of B.A. LLB.(hons). This project work has not been submitted to any other University

or Institute for the award of any degree or diploma.

 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I would like to express profound gratitude to Dr. Monika Srivastava, Assistant Prof., Political

Science, who gave me the opportunity to work on this project and allowed me to develop the

skills and acquire the necessary knowledge to complete this project. I would also like to

express humble gratitude for his exemplary guidance, monitoring, and constant

encouragement throughout the course of this project

I would also like to thank the faculty of Dr. Madhu Limaye Library who extended their

assistance to me by helping me consult relevant books and provide me with research material

which greatly assisted me in completing this project.

Lastly, I would like to thank my family and friends for their constant encouragement without

which this project would not have been possible to complete.

Param Chaudhary
 SOCIALISM – A POLITICAL THEORY

Socialism is a political, social, and economic philosophy encompassing a range

of economic and social systems characterised by social ownership of the means of

production, as opposed to private ownership. Social ownership can be public, collective,

or cooperative. While no single definition encapsulates the many types of socialism, social

ownership is the one common element. Socialisms vary based on the role of markets and

planning in resource allocation, on the structure of management in organizations, and from

below or from above approaches, with some socialists favouring a party, state,

or technocratic-driven approach. More specifically, Socialism is a populist economic and

political system based on public ownership (also known as collective or common ownership)

of the means of production. Those means include the machinery, tools, and factories used to

produce goods that aim to directly satisfy human needs. 1

Common ownership under socialism may take shape through technocratic, oligarchic,

totalitarian, democratic, or even voluntary rule. A prominent historical example of a socialist

country, albeit one run by communists, is the former Union of Soviet Socialist Republics

(U.S.S.R.), also known as the Soviet Union.

Due to its practical challenges and poor track record, socialism is sometimes referred to as a

utopian or “post-scarcity” system, although modern adherents believe it could work if only

properly implemented. They argue that socialism creates equality and provides security—a

worker’s value comes from the amount of time they work, not in the value of what they

produce—while capitalism exploits workers for the benefit of the wealthy.

1
Socialism (INVESTOPEDIA)
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/socialism.asp
Socialist ideals include production for use, rather than for profit; an equitable distribution of

wealth and material resources among all people; no more competitive buying and selling in

the market; and free access to goods and services. Or, as an old socialist slogan describes it,

“from each according to ability, to each according to need.” 2

Socialism falls under the umbrella of left-wing politics along with Communism, with which

it is often confused. Communism and socialism are umbrella terms referring to two left-wing

schools of economic thought. Although both oppose capitalism, socialism predates the

"Communist Manifesto". There are many differences between socialism and communism

even though they are often wrongly considered similar. One key difference between the two

is the way in which each of these economic philosophies might be realized in a society.

Communism is generally expected to result from a violent overthrow of the status quo of the

bourgeoisie, while socialism can be achieved through gradual social and political change

which has the potential to be peaceful and non-violent.

There are several socialist theories and varying interpretations of said theories. One of the

widely accepted objectives of socialism is to attain an advanced level of material production

and therefore greater productivity, reduce workplace and labour alienation and hence increase

efficiency and rationality as compared to capitalism and all previous systems, under the view

that an expansion of human productive capability and elimination or great reduction of labour

exploitation is the basis for the extension of freedom and equality in society. Many forms of

socialist theory hold that human behaviour is largely shaped by the social environment. In

particular, socialism holds that social mores, societal values, cultural traits and economic

practices are social creations and not the result of an immutable natural law. The object of

their critique is thus not human avarice or human consciousness, but the material conditions

2
Socialism (INVESTOPEDIA)
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/socialism.asp
and man-made social systems (i.e. the economic structure of society) that gives rise to

observed social problems and inefficiencies. Karl Marx had gone as far as to say that the

economic system prevalent at large in a given society is largely responsible for the moral

values of the society.3

CAPITALISM

Socialists argue that the accumulation of capital and wealth hoarding generates waste that

requires costly corrective regulatory measures. They also point out that this process generates

wasteful industries and practices that exist only to generate excessive superficial demand for

products such as high-pressure advertisement to be sold at a profit, thereby creating

unnecessary wants rather than satisfying essential needs.

Socialists argue that capitalism consists of irrational activity, such as the purchasing of

commodities and/or assets only to sell at a later time when their price appreciates, rather than

for consumption, even if the commodity cannot be sold at a profit to individuals in need and

therefore a crucial criticism often made by socialists is that "making money", or accumulation

of capital, does not correspond to the satisfaction of demand. The fundamental criterion for

economic activity in capitalism is the accumulation of capital for reinvestment in production,

but this spurs the development of new, non-productive industries that do not produce use-

value and only exist to keep the accumulation process afloat such as the spread of

the financial industry, contributing to the formation of economic bubbles.

Socialists view private property relations as limiting the potential of productive forces in the

economy. According to socialists, private property becomes obsolete when it concentrates

into centralised, socialised institutions, not based on private appropriation of revenue—but

3
Karl Marx (STANFORD ENCYCLOPEDIA OF PHILOSOPHY)
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/marx/
based on cooperative work and internal planning in allocation of inputs—until the role of the

capitalist becomes redundant. With no need for capital accumulation and a class of owners,

private property in the means of production is perceived as being an outdated form of

economic organisation that should be replaced by a free association of individuals based on

public or common ownership of these socialised assets. Private ownership imposes

constraints on planning, leading to uncoordinated economic decisions that result in business

fluctuations, unemployment and a tremendous waste of material resources during crisis

of overproduction.

Socialism is also concerned with the effect capitalism has on society, primarily through the

wage and wealth gap. Wealth gap can be understood as the difference in assets and net worth

among two well defined groups. It takes a comprehensive approach to determining the true

economic condition of a group of people.4 Excessive disparities in income distribution leads

to social instability and requires costly corrective measures in the form of redistributive

taxation, which incurs heavy administrative costs while weakening the incentive to work,

inviting dishonesty and increasing the likelihood of tax evasion while the corrective measures

reduce the overall efficiency of the market economy.

These corrective policies limit the incentive system of the market by providing things such

as minimum wages, unemployment insurance, taxing profits and reducing the reserve army of

labour, resulting in reduced incentives for capitalists to invest in more production. Moreover,

a wide and significant wealth gap in a large group of people, such as in a country, tends to

create social unrest and stifle the social harmony and potential prosperity of the nation. In

essence, social welfare policies cripple capitalism and its incentive system and are thus

unsustainable in the long run. Marxists argue that the establishment of a socialist mode of

4
Wealth Gap (SMART ASSET)
https://smartasset.com/insights/what-is-the-wealth-gap
production is the only way to overcome these deficiencies. Socialists and

specifically Marxian socialists argue that the inherent conflict of interests between the

working class and capitalist class prevents optimal use of available human resources and

leads to contradictory interest groups such as labour and business who strive to influence the

state to intervene in the economy in their favour at the expense of overall economic

efficiency.
 HISTORY OF SOCIALISM

Socialism as a way of organizing and running a large economy has existed since ages.

Socialist models and ideas espousing common or public ownership have existed since

antiquity. The economy of the 3rd century BCE Mauryan Empire of India, an absolute

monarchy, has been described by some scholars as "a socialized monarchy" and "a sort of

state socialism" due to "nationalisation of industries".5 Other scholars have suggested that

elements of socialist thought were present in the politics of classical Greek

philosophers Plato and Aristotle. Mazdak the Younger, a Persian communal proto-

socialist, instituted communal possessions and advocated the public good. Abu Dharr al-

Ghifari, a Companion of Muhammad, is credited by multiple authors as a principal

antecedent of Islamic socialism.6

While these proto-socialist States and arrangements had existed since a long time, formal and

widespread knowledge of socialism took place in early and mid-1800s. Socialism developed

in opposition to the excesses and abuses of liberal individualism and capitalism. Under early

capitalist economies during the late 18th and 19th centuries, western European countries

experienced industrial production and compound economic growth at a rapid pace. Some

individuals and families rose to riches quickly, while others sank into poverty, creating

income inequality and other social concerns. The most famous early socialist thinkers were

Robert Owen and Henri de Saint-Simon, and later Karl Marx and then Vladimir Lenin. It

was primarily Lenin who expounded on the ideas of earlier socialists and helped bring

socialist planning to the national level after the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution in Russia. 7

5
Mookerji, Radhakumud; Chandragupta Maurya and His Times, Page 102 (Motilal Banarsidass)
6
Socialism (Brittanica)
https://www.britannica.com/topic/socialism
7
Origins of Socialism (INVESTOPEDIA)
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/socialism.asp
Groups such as the Fourierists, Owenites and Saint-Simonians provided a series of analyses

and interpretations of society. Especially the Owenites overlapped with other working-class

movements such as the Chartists in the United Kingdom. Leaders in the movement called for

a more equitable distribution of income and better living conditions for the working classes.

The first trade unions and consumer cooperative societies followed the Chartist

movement. Pierre-Joseph Proudhon proposed his philosophy of mutualism in which

"everyone had an equal claim, either alone or as part of a small cooperative, to possess and

use land and other resources as needed to make a living". Other currents inspired Christian

socialism "often in Britain and then usually coming out of left liberal politics and a romantic

anti-industrialism" which produced theorists such as Edward Bellamy, Charles

Kingsley and Frederick Denison Maurice.

Despite their imagination and dedication to the cause of the workers, none of the early

socialists met with the full approval of Karl Marx, who is unquestionably the most important

theorist of socialism. In fact, Marx and his long-time friend and collaborator Friedrich

Engels were largely responsible for attaching the label “utopian,” which they intended to be

derogatory, to Saint-Simon, Fourier, and Owen, whose “fantastic pictures of future society”

they contrasted to their own “scientific” approach to socialism. The path to socialism

proceeds not through the establishment of model communities that set examples of

harmonious cooperation to the world, according to Marx and Engels, but through the clash of

social classes.

Like Hegel, Marx understood history as the story of human labour and struggle. However,

whereas for Hegel history was the story of spirit’s self-realization through human conflict, for

Marx it was the story of struggles between classes over material or economic interests and

resources. In place of Hegel’s philosophical idealism, in other words, Marx developed a

materialist or economic theory of history. Before people can do anything else, he held, they
must first produce what they need to survive, which is to say that they are subject to

necessity. Freedom for Marx is largely a matter of overcoming necessity. Necessity compels

people to labour so that they may survive, and only those who are free from this compulsion

will be free to develop their talents and potential. This is why, throughout history, freedom

has usually been restricted to members of the ruling class, who use their control of the land

and other means of production to exploit the labour of the poor and subservient. The masters

in slaveholding societies, the landowning aristocracy in feudal times, and the bourgeoisie

who control the wealth in capitalist societies have all enjoyed various degrees of freedom, but

they have done so at the expense of the slaves, serfs, and industrial workers, or proletarians,

who have provided the necessary labour.8

The Russian Revolution established perhaps the most famous example of a socialist (or

potentially socialist) State. Lenin had little faith in the revolutionary potential of the

proletariat, arguing in What Is to Be Done? (1902) that the workers, left to themselves, would

fight only for better wages and working conditions; they therefore needed to be educated,

enlightened, and led to revolution by a “vanguard” party of professional revolutionaries.

World War I also inflicted severe hardships on the Russian people, thereby contributing to

the collapse of the tsarist regime and creating an opportunity for revolution, which the

Bolsheviks seized in the Russian Revolution of 1917.

Lenin’s death in 1924 led to a power struggle between Stalin and Leon Trotsky. Stalin not

only won the struggle but eventually ordered the deaths of Trotsky and other rivals—and of

millions more who opposed or resisted his policies. While professing to be a revolutionary in

the Marxist-Leninist tradition, Stalin concentrated his efforts on building “socialism in one

country,” largely through a program of forced collectivization and industrialization.

8
Marxian Socialism (BRITANNICA)
https://www.britannica.com/topic/socialism/Other-early-socialists
In China another mass movement for national liberation developed at this time, though it was

explicitly communist. Its leader, Mao Zedong, helped to found the Chinese Communist

Party (CCP) in 1921. After a disastrous beginning—the Comintern had pushed the Chinese

communists into an alliance with the nationalist leader Chiang Kai-shek, who attacked the

communists as soon as he thought it expedient—Mao retreated to the fields and hills to

rebuild the CCP. While remaining faithful to Lenin’s notion of the communist party as the

revolutionary vanguard, Mao proceeded to lead a guerrilla movement that established its

power base among the peasantry, which he regarded as a rural proletariat. In Mao’s hands,

moreover, the concept of nation largely replaced that of class, with China represented as a

poor and oppressed proletarian nation that had to rise against the oppressing imperialist

nations and their bourgeois underlings.9

After the second World War came to an end with the defeat of fascism, the uneasy alliances

that had been till now formed between communists and socialists, liberals and conservatives

came to an end. The Cold War deepened the fissure between communists and other socialists,

the latter seeing themselves as democrats opposed to the one-party rule of the Soviet Union

and its satellites. The Labour Party, for example, won a parliamentary majority in the British

elections of 1945 and subsequently established a national health care system and public

control of major industries and utilities; when the party lost its majority in 1951, it peacefully

relinquished the offices of government to the victorious Conservatives.

The communists also claimed to be democrats, but their notion of “people’s democracy”

rested on the belief that the people were not yet capable of governing themselves. Thus, Mao

declared, after Chiang Kai-shek’s forces were driven from mainland China in 1949, that the

new People’s Republic of China was to be a “people’s democratic dictatorship”; that is, the

9
Socialism in the Era of World War (BRITANNICA)
https://www.britannica.com/topic/socialism/Syndicalism
CCP would rule in the interests of the people by suppressing their enemies and building

socialism. This type of reasoning also became the justification for one-party rule by other

communist nations such as Vietnam, North Korea, Cuba, etc. Elsewhere, the withdrawal of

European colonial powers from Africa and the Middle East created opportunities for new

forms of socialism. Terms such as African socialism and Arab socialism were frequently

invoked in the 1950s and ’60s, partly because the old colonial powers were identified with

capitalist imperialism. In practice, these new kinds of socialism typically combined appeals to

indigenous traditions, such as communal land ownership, with the Marxist-Leninist model of

one-party rule for the purpose of rapid modernization.10

10
Socialism after Communism (BRITANNICA)
https://www.britannica.com/topic/socialism/Postwar-socialism
 SOCIALISM IN TODAY’S WORLD

In today’s world, there are only a few truly socialist or even semi-socialist countries left.

China

The People’s Republic of China under Chairman Mao Zedong flew the flag of communism,

promoting political goals over common sense, Big Think reports. But after incompetence and

mismanagement caused a famine that killed millions from 1959 to 1961, Deng Xiaoping took

over in the 1970s and implemented what he called “socialism with Chinese characteristics”.

The news site reports that for the first time in decades, farmers were allowed to sell the crops

they grew, entrepreneurs were allowed to start businesses and foreigners were allowed to

invest in China. To many, this was seen as a betrayal of China’s communist and socialist

ideals, but Deng demonstrated how his actions were in line with accepted communist theory.

China news digest Inkstone News suggests that the Chinese government’s strong hand in the

economy “qualifies it somewhat as socialist” but adds that the country is “obviously much

less socialist when it comes to providing public goods and services”.

Cuba

Cuba is perhaps the most undiluted example of a socialist system in action,

with Reuters describing it as a “one-party socialist republic, in which political power is

vested solely in the Cuban Communist Party (PCC)”.

The socialist system is enshrined in the Cuban constitution approved by referendum in 1976,

while another referendum in 2002 made socialism “irrevocable”. The constitution designates

the PCC as the “vanguard of the Cuban nation … which organises and directs common
efforts toward the higher goals of construction of socialism and the advance toward

communist society”. The majority of Cubans are employed by the state, and receive

government-subsidised food, healthcare and housing.

Laos

The southeast Asian nation of Laos was a French colony until 1953, and communist forces

eventually overthrew the monarchy in 1975. It has technically remained communist ever

since, but after the fall of the Soviet Union in the 1990s, the BBC reports that “Laos began

opening up to the world”.

Article 13 of the country’s constitution states that “all types of enterprises are equal before

the law and operate according to the principle of the market economy, competing and co-

operating with each other to expand production and business while regulated by the State in

the direction of socialism”.

But despite economic reforms, the country remains poor and heavily dependent on foreign

aid, the BBC says, adding that the communist state “exerts tight control over the media,

owning all newspapers and broadcast media”.

Socialist Voice calls Laos “a country with much value for those eager to understand the

complexities involved in the building of socialism in very difficult conditions”.

Vietnam

Next door to Laos, Vietnam describes itself as having a “socialist-oriented market economy”.

It has been officially communist since the 1970s but was forced to adopt elements of market
capitalism “in order to build the necessary economic infrastructure to advance Vietnam’s

capability to produce wealth/capital”, Otello Carvalho writes on Medium.

The Communist Party of Vietnam does this “through allowing markets to exist in Vietnam,

under strict state supervision or through state owned enterprises” allowing private capital to

flourish “only to the degree in which it positively contributes to the economic development of

the whole country and serves the greater class interests of the working class”.11

11
Countries that are still Socialist Today (TheWeek)
https://www.theweek.co.uk/102332/countries-that-are-still-socialist-today