💾 Archived View for library.inu.red › file › tom-mclaughlin-libertarian-socialism.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 14:20:53. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
➡️ Next capture (2024-06-20)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Title: Libertarian Socialism Author: Tom McLaughlin Date: 1977 Language: en Topics: libertarian socialist Source: http://www.connexions.org/RedMenace/Docs/RM2-LibSocialismMcLaughlin.htm Notes: Published in Volume 2, Number 1 of The Red Menace, Summer 1977.
Two models of “socialism” presently prevail. They are Social Democracy
and Bureaucratic Collectivism. Both the former with its concentration on
the welfare state and state intervention in the economy and the latter
with its plan attempt to administer society according to a bureaucratic
plan or plans and attempt to fulfill the needs of their societies for
ever more capital and consumer goods. In both these societies there is a
hierarchy that is not hidden by the formal democracy in Social Democracy
or the rhetoric of Bureaucratic Collectivism.
Against these two models of society Libertarian Socialists have upheld
the principle of self-determination which means not only the control of
impersonal economic processes but the collective administration of
society by all its members. This is not to be confused with forms of
“workers’ control” which decide how to implement decisions arrived at
from above. Instead it means the democratic determination as well as
implementation of the goals of a society.
Why is this important? Not because of any abstract democratic dogma. The
collective self-management of society is required if certain needs
suppressed in this society are to be realized. In general these needs
can be described as reconciliation with nature both inner (desire for
immediate gratification) and outer (the sensuous world).
Capitalism requires the endless accumulation of capital goods. Hence any
object is a potential instrument for the creation of other instruments.
Any quality it has that cannot be employed in the accumulation of
capital is abstracted from or even forgotten. Thus capital accumulation
requires a repression of outer nature — it can have no worth of its own,
it must be simply a source of tools and raw materials. This in turn
requires a repression of inner nature — urges to enjoy the sensuous
outer world must be repressed.
Along with continuous capital accumulation occurs the production of
consumer goods market but this doesn’t result in the satisfaction of
repressed needs. The consumer must be encouraged to be dissatisfied with
the present supply of goods so that he/she can buy more. Thus the
existence of an infinite possibility of fulfillment of consumer wants
results in an endless dissatisfaction with the goods already possessed.
And of course the consumer will have to continue his/her laborious toil
to buy these goods.
This repression of needs must continue as long as capital accumulation
remains unchecked. For under such a system it will not be possible to
think of the objects produced except as tools to make tools. As objects
to be used rather than enjoyed.
Furthermore the endless accumulation of capital reduces that shortening
of the working day which Marx called the basic precondition of freedom.
Thus there is a very basic connection between the form of Libertarian
Socialism — self-management — and its content — the satisfaction of
basic needs through the reconciliation with Nature. Only through the
self-management of production will it be possible to produce objects to
satisfy needs for enjoyment. At present these repressed needs are
expressed in art and play.
In this society play and art have no utility as independent activities —
a source of freedom and a limitation. Art abandons any claim to shape
this society for the freedom to create its own world where freedom and
sensibility are united in an aesthetic form according to its own proper
laws. The conflict that exists between a reason bent on domination and
sensibility which must serve as a mere raw material is replaced by
harmony. The aesthetic form is not imposed upon sensory experience but
instead allows it to express truth that is suppressed in daily
existence. However Art remains a contemplative activity for most people
especially with its enshrinement in museums.
Play however is something that all can participate in at least in its
early stages in childhood and in this period it is egalitarian as well.
Each player in the simple childhood game takes his turn or plays in a
circle. And like art play is performed for its own sake according to its
own rules. However, to a large extent it is devolved as trivial, made
into a contemplative activity (spectator sports) or comes to reflect a
repressive society (card games are played for money and schools compete
in hierarchically organized teams that vie for rewards.)
However play is a reconciliation between reason and sensibility. There
are rules but they have no other aim than to provide enjoyment.
Both these activities prefigure a new society — one where rules are
freely chosen by those to whom they are applied and reason and
sensibility are united. It is now more possible than ever before to
construct such a society. It would mean that play could come into its
own and be taken seriously for its own sake. The conflict between
freedom and necessity would disappear as work could be performed as an
enjoyable activity. In fact enjoyment of work would become a need. It
would be performed in accordance with needs for objects of beauty and
enjoyment as well as mere utility.
For such a society to be realized there must be a revolt against the
present system whereby needs are reduced to the need for objects of mere
utility in the cause of infinite capital accumulation imposed by
hierarchical plans. In short there must be a revolt against bureaucracy
— the predominant trend of societal organization. While there is no
evidence of a mass movement against bureaucratization, still we can
observe the following trends:
ultimately self-defeating. It can’t be done even for natural scientific
subject matter, is less possible for societies and is impossible under a
dynamic capitalist economy where means of production are constantly
changing.
administered in order to deal with shortcomings that must necessarily
arise in the plan.
neighbourhoods, and all other places where it is necessary to respond to
bureaucratization must be crushed but can never entirely disappear.
the conditions for a higher level of consciousness later. Revolts
against monopoly capitalism led to the welfare state. Now this cushion
against unemployment has led to a revolt against work and labour
discipline.
bureaucratization expands. Thus not only the industrial worker but the
housewife, tenant, student must respond to bureaucratization. The revolt
can encompass all aspects of daily life.
It should be pointed out that there is no guarantee that anyone group in
this society — including the proletariat wherever and whatever it is —
will necessarily be the bearer of the universal. The World Spirit owes
us no favours. All that bureaucratization implies is that more and more
the critique of anyone’s particular condition can if pushed far enough
lead to the critique of society.