Socialism Essay, Research Paper

Socialist Theme in Recent History

The seemingly swift rush of technological and industrial development throughout the 18th and 19th centuries led to success and advancement in the standard of living and abilities and comforts available to the public. This heightened life was not, however, available to all people equally. Instead, a reaction on the side of economic and social survival took over. The owners of large industrial giants started gaining the good life brought about by this time, while those who worked for them received little that their work reaped. This created a separation by class based on wealth and position in society. Not dissimilar to the class systems of old medieval society, these new classes, first seen in Britain and France, separated the workers, or proletarians, from the few, rich controllers of industry called the Bourgeoisie. This split in society called out for something to help the oppressed majority, to which ideas of Socialism and Karl Marx s The Communist Manifesto responded. In this short, easy to understand pamphlet, Marx attempts to first, discredit and bring blame to the Bourgeoisie while pushing for an answer lying in an economic and political structure known as socialism and communism. Either name can be used because there is little difference between the two styles or ideals as well as a common place next to each other as each develop themes throughout the history of the 19th and 20th century. Each system touched every populated continent in the world, usually beginning with socialist movements, then leading to communist radicals, and, in a few countries, lead to actual practices of these styles, particularly communism.

The theme of socialism through history began with this reaction to the industrial revolution. The proletariats, or working lower class, searched for a way to rise above the stage they were at. Great Britain and France led the way in testing the waters of socialism as an alternative to the current situation of economic and social confusion. As Marx stated, laborers worked for the tycoons to live only so long as they find work, and [to] find work only so long as their labor increases capital (Marx 13) for the bourgeoisie and the new life created from this work and capital. Based on early socialist thought, The Communist Manifesto, written in Germany, appealed to this class as a simple to read, and understand, pamphlet attacking the Bourgeoisie for their selfish, industry-clutching grasp that choked the good life from the majority of the public, the workers. The socialism and communism spoken of in the manifesto begin with the workers. It speaks of this majority as something that can, and should, raise itself up and have a voice in what is happening. It seemed that the times of smoke filled skies, and apparent success abolished politics and organization of nations and focused only on the success and improvement of economics and technology. This mirage gave hope to the poor majority to rise up and put a socialist or communistic order in the place of politics where nothing seems to be happening.

Beginnings of socialism in Great Britain and Europe were seen in workers unions formed for the good of the people. These unions provided a voice for the oppressed workers whose lives suffer while their bosses lavish themselves in the fruits of the lower classes labor. In a small way, this is towards the goal outlined by Marx, leading to a level, and equal society, free of classes and poor distribution of products. But unions alone cannot bring about the full-fledged socialist or communist society, which thrives on equally redistributed property, wealth, and work. The nations government must be changed. Marx s plan of change from the bottom up could only spur revolutionary and idealistic groups in Britain.

Britain is now caught in an awkward situation. A history of monarchial rule and class system makes the current class system not seem so wrong or out of the ordinary, and its absence of full capitalism and democracy also prevent it from completely despising its current situation or alternative. So, should she accept socialism? From the governments stand point, it sees no political or economic purpose. Great Britain as a whole is enjoying the fruits it is producing with its great industry and trade flourishing. This whole, however, has the eyes of upper industrial moguls and does not speak the same as the lower class majority, which is suffering in this time of success. Rise in appeal for socialism and a sneak of socialistic parties into the governments of western Europe spurred a scare that led to beginnings of social policies to try to appease the public, without hurting the individual and independent success which drove the capitalistic state of Europe at this time.

The loose upraises and socialist political parties were scattered and disorganized in the early 19th century. Karl Marx attempted to unite these people with writing The Communist Manifesto. This simple guideline was an attempt to organize and bring better understanding to those scattered movements of workers who were trying to change the current economy of Britain. Nothing huge was able to come to the government level to make way in the form of Socialism. Upon the beginning of World War I, efforts seemed to stop in the push for Socialism as Great Britain joined in the war and many workers joined the armed forces in support of their nation in the form of nationalism. This was a first test for socialism, in which it failed.

In between wars, however, the class system emerged again as a forefront issue. The current capitalistic and democratic state of Britain was not satisfactory for the workers. Spreading passed the Second World War, workers became more vocal with a strike composed of over 2 million workers. This strike, however, proved how change from the bottom could not bring lasting effects, but instead, it gave a boast to what was called the labour party which brought about socialistic efforts inside parliament including government control of roadways, railways, coal and steel. Socialism and affects on Great Britain all the way until Margaret Thatcher became Prime Minister in 1979, which put a halt to socialist and communist ideas in Great Britain, as well as affecting those ideas worldwide.

Similar in timing to Great Britain, America experienced affects of the industrial revolution in the same way. In a different aspect, however, the American government seemed a little more prepared for such a jump in technology and advancement with the newly found democracy, as well as the old since of individual freedom and interest. There was a division between workers and industry owners, but nothing as severe as Britain. America, being young, did not have a basis in feudalism or class systems, which provided the problematic situations seen in Great Britain and Europe. This does not mean, however, that the socialist movement sweeping the world from early 19th to the 20th century did not affect it. The Communist Manifesto was the publication that really sent the shock waves worldwide. Although socialistic and communistic ideals formed in Western Europe, it took the writing of Karl Marx and Frederic Engels to unite socialists world wide as to the true advantages of their beliefs.

Even with this uniting, a firm base of socialistic and communistic thought did not form in America. Worker s Unions and strikes, however, were present, but nothing as organized as found in Europe at this time. As America traveled into the 20th century, political parties, and more organized groups of socialist and communist followers emerged. Only about 100,000 people actually accepted this view and joined the wave. The curiousness of this situation is what makes America different from the rest of the world in its reaction to Socialism.

America, having been newly formed as a Democracy based in individual freedoms and success, approached the industrial revolution and Socialism differently. The idea of the American individual giving up the land he came here to be free on did not appeal to many. Even being paid minimum wage under the grind of industry did not over cast the feeling of freedom America s nationalism provided. The depression, however, brought about a real low to morale of the American freedom, but instead of a direct or spoken reaction in the form of Socialism to care for the Nation, President Roosevelt implemented aspects of socialism integrated with Democracy to help pull the American situation up on its feet. The New Deal is laced with socialistic programs and policies in efforts to restore success to this young nation. These programs, however, were never referred to as socialistic; instead, they provided the foundation of national care for the public now seen as normal in a Democracy. The current Democratic Party pushes for such things as Medicare, welfare and social security, all socialistic programs starting with the New Deal which now have become Democratic norms.

Socialism as a theme in history is seen throughout the world as a reaction to the industrial revolution. Einstein comments that socialisms goal as to overcome and advance beyond the predatory phase of human development, economic science in its present state can throw little light on the socialist society of the future. Socialism attempt to change the world s politics and sense of being seems to have faded out by the 21st century, but could it return? Or are those socialistic policies still present, just integrated into the democracies and capitalistic economies of today?