![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Edwardian Socialism
Aug. 4th, 2024 08:48 pmI recently finished reading Barbara W. Tuchmann's The Proud Tower: A Portrait of the World Before the War 1890 - 1914. Like all of her other books I have read, such as The Guns of August and A Distant Mirror, it was a very educational look at history I didn't know very well if at all.
One major takeaway about that period of history was that Anarchists and Marxists were about as useful as teats on a boar hog (to use an old expression).
Anarchists were (and presumably still are) fatally allergic to organized activism or politics, because organization and hierarchy are against anarchist principles. Unfortunately for them, that means they have no political power whatsoever. Their strategy, such as it was, was stochastic terrorism ("Propaganda of the Word") and plain old terrorism ("Propaganda of the Deed"). By murdering bosses, leaders, rulers and other oppressors, they thought that they could somehow spark the masses of working people to spontaneously revolt and overthrow all the oppressors and usher in a golden age of harmonious anarchy. Which is to say, Anarchists were either as dumb as posts, or had never actually met other human beings before.
Syndicalists were another development of Anarchism, except instead of throwing bombs and shooting rulers, they believed that General Strikes would magically bring about the overthrow of capitalism and usher in a new golden age. They seem to have overlooked that most union men consider strikes a tool to achieve a specific goal, not another way to have a revolution.
Orthodox Marxists believed in Marx's prediction that Late-stage Capitalism (a term the internet gets from Marxism, I believe) would lead to ever-increasing poverty for the working class, ever-increasing wealth for the ultra-rich, and the destruction of the middle-class, and this miserable state would lead in turn to the the collapse of Capitalism and the seizure of the means of production by the working class, ushering in a golden age of socialism (communism). Orthodox Marxists wanted nothing to do with improving conditions in the here-and-now for the working class, because that would delay the final collapse of Capitalism. Also, they were organized, but shunned getting involved in politics, because that would require joining with the bourgeoisie and playing by Capitalism's rules.
Both Anarchists and Orthodox Marxists struck me as being like evangelicals awaiting the End Times, and doing nothing to improve things for those suffering here and now, because "Jesus will take us all up into heaven by and by." In their case, the "inevitable working class revolution" was their future Rapture event.
Revisionism, a branch of Socialism that popped up in the Edwardian period, suggested that Capitalism didn't look like it was going to collapse any time soon, so maybe we ought to work with the existing government and get involved in politics and try to improve things for the working class. They were regarded as a bunch of heretics who would destroy the fabric of socialism by the Marxists, but I believe they're probably the origin of modern social-democracies in Europe today.
Also, Trade Unions had little use for Marxists, because Marxists didn't care to work for social safety nets and the 8-hour day and all those benefits that lift the working class out of desperate poverty. Unions weren't interested in overthrowing society, they just wanted to make things better for their members. They were actually useful and they and the socialists willing to work with them on their goals actually got things done.
(cross-posted to Tumblr)
One major takeaway about that period of history was that Anarchists and Marxists were about as useful as teats on a boar hog (to use an old expression).
Anarchists were (and presumably still are) fatally allergic to organized activism or politics, because organization and hierarchy are against anarchist principles. Unfortunately for them, that means they have no political power whatsoever. Their strategy, such as it was, was stochastic terrorism ("Propaganda of the Word") and plain old terrorism ("Propaganda of the Deed"). By murdering bosses, leaders, rulers and other oppressors, they thought that they could somehow spark the masses of working people to spontaneously revolt and overthrow all the oppressors and usher in a golden age of harmonious anarchy. Which is to say, Anarchists were either as dumb as posts, or had never actually met other human beings before.
Syndicalists were another development of Anarchism, except instead of throwing bombs and shooting rulers, they believed that General Strikes would magically bring about the overthrow of capitalism and usher in a new golden age. They seem to have overlooked that most union men consider strikes a tool to achieve a specific goal, not another way to have a revolution.
Orthodox Marxists believed in Marx's prediction that Late-stage Capitalism (a term the internet gets from Marxism, I believe) would lead to ever-increasing poverty for the working class, ever-increasing wealth for the ultra-rich, and the destruction of the middle-class, and this miserable state would lead in turn to the the collapse of Capitalism and the seizure of the means of production by the working class, ushering in a golden age of socialism (communism). Orthodox Marxists wanted nothing to do with improving conditions in the here-and-now for the working class, because that would delay the final collapse of Capitalism. Also, they were organized, but shunned getting involved in politics, because that would require joining with the bourgeoisie and playing by Capitalism's rules.
Both Anarchists and Orthodox Marxists struck me as being like evangelicals awaiting the End Times, and doing nothing to improve things for those suffering here and now, because "Jesus will take us all up into heaven by and by." In their case, the "inevitable working class revolution" was their future Rapture event.
Revisionism, a branch of Socialism that popped up in the Edwardian period, suggested that Capitalism didn't look like it was going to collapse any time soon, so maybe we ought to work with the existing government and get involved in politics and try to improve things for the working class. They were regarded as a bunch of heretics who would destroy the fabric of socialism by the Marxists, but I believe they're probably the origin of modern social-democracies in Europe today.
Also, Trade Unions had little use for Marxists, because Marxists didn't care to work for social safety nets and the 8-hour day and all those benefits that lift the working class out of desperate poverty. Unions weren't interested in overthrowing society, they just wanted to make things better for their members. They were actually useful and they and the socialists willing to work with them on their goals actually got things done.
(cross-posted to Tumblr)
