ECONOMY =
Argument: Revolutionary and evolutionary socialists generally agree on the same ends, but differ over the
means to reach them. More agreement between later social democrats & Third Way too. However, third way
socialists do not even agree on ends – fundamentally rejecting the notion that capitalism should be abolished
and that private property is bad.
Revolutionary & early social democratic Not all socialists agree that capitalism must be completely
socialists (Marx/Engels, Luxemburg and removed and public ownership must replace private ownership.
Webb) agree that capitalism /
laissez-faire economy / completely free Revolutionary Socialists want to abolish capitalism through
market / private ownership is an revolution, to create absolute equality and replace it with a
inherently bad economic system. An centrally planned economy based on common ownership and
economic system that promotes greater collective means of production (where economic production will be
equality & based on shared rather than determined solely by human need). Private ownership was made
private ownership would be better, as possible due to the exploitation of the proletariat by the
capitalism has led to inequality between bourgeoisie so would be abolished by a ‘dictatorship of the
classes and exploitation (which they proletariat’ when class consciousness occurs & create a classless
would have witnessed first-hand during society. Marx and Engels argued as part of their belief in
the rise of heavy industry during the 19th historicism that this was the next stage in society's advancement
century across Europe which pushed so saw it as inevitably going to lead to its own destruction
lower classes into low paying (whereas Luxemburg agreed it should be destroyed but didn't see
occupations). If left unrestricted the this as inevitable).
economy inevitably falls victim to the
unpredictability of the capitalist market, Evolutionary socialists disagree with capitalism but don't believe
which often leads to social problems like it should be removed completely. They are willing to implement
unemployment which only serve to socialist policies within a capitalist system in order advance their
further the inequality socialists wish to ideological goals. Social democrats like Webb wanted welfare
prevent. policies/progressive tax to redistribute wealth & called revolution
‘chaotic and inefficient’, so instead called for ‘gradualism’ of
capitalism being gradually replaced by a socialist economy based
on common ownership. Labour, influenced by her, included
Clause IV in their constitution which called for nationalisation of
“the means of production, distribution and exchange”. Whilst
Crosland advocated a mixed economy (believed capitalism had
largely been reformed of its exploitative tendencies) where
capitalism continues to play a key role but is regulated with
Keynesian economics, alongside government intervention + public
ownership of some key industries.
Third Way thinkers like Giddens believed the nature of the
economy had changed ‘post-ford', so supported a mixed economy
too BUT went even further. Argues that capitalism should not only
be tolerated but embraced, fully rejecting the idea of
common/public ownership (as seen by New Labour’s decision to
abandon Clause IV), regulation of the economy, or state
intervention which stifles entrepreneurial initiative. Instead is
influenced by neo-liberal ideas: believes in privatisation, taxation
to fund public services like education (Blair’s New Labour 3
priorities were ‘education, education, education’) to increase
equality & argues the free market creates wealth that can then be
used on socialist projects - like improving the NHS.
SOCIETY =
Argument = ??? The advance of socialism is associated with the narrowing of decisions between the middle
and working class, brought about through economic and social intervention.
Class - Revolutionary and early social democrats agree you can classify society into class & agree that
capitalist societies create damaging class conflict so must be changed. Revolutionary Socialists define
classes as the bourgeois (owners of capital) and proletariat (those that sell their labour), and viewed conflict as
natural in society - being based on ‘class struggles’ (SD believe in social improvement and class harmony
rather than social polarisation and class war). For Marx and Engels, a capitalist society is flawed and will
, inevitably lead to class conflict between the working class proletariat and the bourgeois upper class.
Luxemburg agrees that class conflict within society will lead to revolutionary change but this is spontaneous
rather than inevitable. Webb agrees that the working classes are repressed and exploited in a capitalist society
which perpetuated inequality and poverty. Yet Social democrats define class in terms of income and status
difference between the 'middle class; and 'working class'. Crossland suggested the Marxist notion of classes
defined by ownership was out of date as shared ownership widened meaning that many had shares in
companies. Evolutionary socialists put less or no emphasis on social class in capitalist societies.
Revolutionary socialists reject a class-based society, as the key aim of Marx & Engels was a classless
society. As industrial societies have grown in affluence, evolutionary socialists like Social Democrats (and
even the Third Way to an extent) moved away from eradicating class divides to minimising them. Crossland
wrote of the increasing complexities of class, as new classes emerge such as 'meritocratic' managers and
'classless' technocrats, meaning capitalism won't drive social change as Marx envisioned. Introduced
comprehensive education. Third-way go even further as unlike the other two strands, they refusing to
recognise capitalism as a system of class exploitation & reject class based analsysis compeltley, instead
preferring to focus on supporting the most vulnerable in society. They argue that capitalism has changed since
the day of Marx, so there now is no class war nor exploitation of the working-class in society. Giddens prefered
a consensual, community model of society, working on the ties that bind people together rather than seeing it
as consisting of two opposing classes in society & in "The Class Structure of the Advanced Societies" argues
traditional class distinctions based solely on economic factors have become less relevant in modern societies
as the 'post-industrial' class system is constantly evolving in response to changes in the economy, society, and
culture.
Means to change society - Revolutionary overthrow the ruling class and establish a new socialist society
where class divisions are eliminated. Social Democrats believe in gradual change (Webb) through reform
rather than revolution, through state intervention & policies that promote social welfare / economic equality like
progressive taxation, universal healthcare, and public education. Third Way believes in keeping capitalism.
Equality - revolutionary & early social democrats see society as currently unfair and unequal towards different
classes, with the most exploited group in society being the working class, so want to improve the conditions of
the lower classes through state intervention. BUT later social democrats and especially Third Way don't see
class as an issue anymore, as the class gap has narrowed like more trade unions to protect rights of workers
or less exploitation, so economic equality can be better created through policies like progressive tax and
regulated capitalism. And believe everyone should have the opportunity to pursue their own goals and
aspirations, but that everyone also has a responsibility to contribute to society and the common good.
Human nature - All socialists see our social environment (i.e. society) as the crucial determinant of our
personalities. So if society can be improved (i.e. made more equal and fraternal), improvements in our attitude
and behaviour will follow.
Collectivist society?
To what extent do socialists agree/disagree on the role of human nature? =
2 Socialism and Human Nature - Class 2 Alevel Politics
Argument = Agree that the socialist opinion is positive about human nature. But the main disagreement is between
those who blame capitalism for any negative aspects of human nature, versus those that see a benefit of the
capitalist system.
Agree: Disagree:
Paragraph #1 Human nature is 'plastic', shaped by a There are some variations in how different
- HN socially person's experiences and the society they live socialist strands view the extent human nature is
constructed + in. Marx and Engels write about how human malleable or fixed.
effects nature is socially determined and the
positives (e.g. fraternity, altruism and Revolutionary socialists argue human nature is
cooperation) are damaged by the 'false shaped by the dominant economic system
consciousness' of bourgeois values. Similarly, (capitalism) but through the transformation to
Giddens says that human nature is shaped by socialism true human potential can be achieved
socio-economic conditions and this alters the through socialisation - showing how they believe
natural instincts that are to cooperate and human nature is very malleable. While social
seek fairness. democrats and Third Way believe human nature
has some fixed aspects that cannot be changed -
like the desire for personal autonomy. But also
flexible and can be shaped by social and cultural
, factors & argue it is possible to create a society
that promotes cooperation and altruism by
policies that foster social cohesion e.g.
progressive tax, public services, and welfare
programs.
Although Marx and Giddens agree on human
nature being socially constructed, they have
different ideas on how the state should intervene
in society. Marx and Engels believed that
capitalist society distorts the positive aspects of
human nature by promoting individualism and
competition. So want a stateless society /
dismantling capitalism to allow human nature to
flourish. Giddens argued for a more moderate
form of social democracy, where the state could
play a role in regulating the market and promoting
social welfare (humans are social beings and our
well-being is linked to others), while still allowing
for the benefits of capitalism (competitiveness &
individualism)
Paragraph #2 Socialists agree that capitalism has negative Although agree capitalism damages human
- ^^ effects on the people socially. nature, they disagree on the extent of the
Capitalism damage, the best way to restore true human
Revolutionary socialists see capitalism as nature & extent they are willing to work in
corrupting human nature (causes selfish, conjunction with capitalism (evolutionary more,
individualist and greedy behaviour) and revolutionary no)
tempting them into privatisation of wealth over
cooperation & it creates a class conflict which WHEREAS Third Way argues capitalism can be
is detrimental to society so should be beneficial to human nature. Economic rewards
abolished through revolution. Marx believed can be utilised for the common good if correctly
capitalism was harmful to human nature so married to core socialist beliefs of cooperation,
was flawed in its approach and revolution was fraternity and community.
inevitable as the proletariat would grow tired
of the rich and overthrow them to create the Luxemburg did not believe that the damage was
utopia of a communist society - ridding the as bad as Marx and Engels suggested. She
nation of capitalism and its ills. argued that fraternity and altruism continues in
working class communities despite capitalism.
Social democrats argue capitalism has
distorted human nature into a false Webb takes this argument further, suggesting that
consciousness of greed and selfishness too. a violent revolution as promoted by the
Webb saw capitalism as a 'corrupting force'. Revolutionary Socialists would do more
damage than good to human nature. Instead a
gradual move by the working class towards
instinctive human nature was needed, reforming
capitalism through democratic action.
They will work with capitalism e.g socialism
compatible with it in Atlee government of 1945
which had a strong policy to nationalise
businesses for the benefit of the country
Paragraph #3 Socialists share a positive view of human Not all are positive = Webb was the only socialist
- Positive nature as humans being 'social beings', to have a negative view of human nature,
view collectivist, cooperate for shared societal believing that humans can be selfish.
goals etc. This improves society for everyone.
Divided over how far humans are motivated by
Revolutionary socialists argue people are moral concern for society (collectivism) / the
naturally motivated to work for common good degree of cooperation that can take place in a
& revolution is premised on collectivism. socialist society. Social Democrats and Third
Marx/Engels = true common humanity can be way argue financial incentive is needed &
expressed only under communism. When humans are self interested/competitive too.
capitalism has been destroyed people will - Social democracy - humans are both
naturally work hard as the success of a individualistic and social, so need
