As a term, socialism represents a broad range of theoretical and historical socioeconomic systems and has also been used by many political movements throughout history to describe themselves and their goals, generating a variety of socialism types.[10]Socialist economic systems can be further divided into market and non-market forms.[16] The first type of socialism utilizes markets for allocating inputs and capital goods among economic units. In the second type of socialism, planning is utilized and include a system of accounting based on calculation-in-kind to value resources and goods wherein production is carried out directly for use.[17][18]
The term socialism was coined in the 1830s and it was first used to refer to philosophical or moral beliefs rather than any specific political views. Alexandre Vinet, who claimed to have been the first person to use the term, defined socialism simply as "the opposite of individualism".[27]Robert Owen also viewed socialism as a matter of ethics, although he used it with a slightly more specific meaning to refer to the view that human society can and should be improved for the benefit of all. In a similar vein, Pierre-Joseph Proudhon claimed that socialism is "every aspiration towards the amelioration of society".[28]
In the first half of the 19th century, many writers who described themselves as socialists—and who would be later called utopian socialists—wrote down descriptions of what they believed to be the ideal human society. Some of them also created small communities that put their ideals into practice. A constant feature of these ideal societies was social and economic equality. Because the people who proposed the creation of such societies called themselves socialists, the term socialism came to refer not only to a certain moral doctrine, but also to a type of egalitarian society based on such a doctrine.
Other early advocates of socialism took a more scientific approach by favouring social leveling to create a meritocratic society based upon freedom for individual talent to prosper.[29] One of those was Count Henri de Saint-Simon, who was fascinated by the enormous potential of science and technology and believed a socialist society would eliminate the disorderly aspects of capitalism.[30] He advocated the creation of a society in which each person was ranked according to his or her capacities and rewarded according to his or her work.[29] The key focus of this early socialism was on administrative efficiency and industrialism and a belief that science was the key to progress.[31] Simon's ideas provided a foundation for scientific economic planning and technocratic administration of society.
Other early socialist thinkers such as Charles Hall and Thomas Hodgskin based their ideas on David Ricardo's economic theories. They reasoned that the equilibrium value of commodities approximated to prices charged by the producer when those commodities were in elastic supply and that these producer prices corresponded to the embodied labor, i.e. the cost of the labor (essentially the wages paid) that was required to produce the commodities. The Ricardian socialists viewed profit, interest and rent as deductions from this exchange-value.[32] These ideas embodied early conceptions of market socialism.
After the advent of Karl Marx's theory of capitalism and scientific socialism, socialism came to refer to ownership and administration of the means of production by the working class, either through the state apparatus or through independent cooperatives. In Marxist theory, socialism refers to a specific stage of social and economic development that will displace capitalism, characterized by coordinated production, public or cooperative ownership of capital, diminishing class conflict and inequalities that spawn from such and the end of wage-labor with a method of compensation based on the principle of "From each according to his ability, to each according to his contribution".[33]
Differences between various schools
Although they share a common root (as elaborated upon in the above sections), schools of socialism are divided on many issues and sometimes there is a split within a school. The following is a brief overview of the major issues which have generated or are generating significant controversy amongst socialists in general.
Theory
Some branches of socialism arose largely as a philosophical construct (e.g. utopian socialism)—others in the heat of a revolution (e.g. early Marxism or Leninism). A few arose merely as the product of a ruling party (e.g. Stalinism), other as a product or various worker movements (e.g. anarcho-syndicalism), or a party or other group contending for political power in a democratic society (e.g. social democracy).
Some are in favour of a socialist revolution (e.g. Maoism, Marxism–Leninism, revolutionary socialism, social anarchism and Trotskyism) whilst others tend to support reform instead (e.g. Fabianism and individualist anarchism). Others believe both are possible (e.g. syndicalism or various forms of Marxism). The first utopian socialists even failed to address the question of how a socialist society would be achieved, upholding the belief that technology was a necessity for a socialist society and that they themselves had no comprehension of the technology of the future.[citation needed]
All socialists criticize the current system in some way. Some criticisms center on the ownership of the means of production (e.g. Marxism) whereas others tend to focus on the nature of mass and equitable distribution (e.g. most forms of utopian socialism). Most are opposed to unchecked industrialism as well as capitalism (e.g. green left) and believe that under socialism the environment must be protected. Utopian socialists like Robert Owen and Henri de Saint-Simon argued, although not from exactly the same perspective, that the injustice and widespread poverty of the societies they lived in were a problem of distribution of the goods created. On the other hand, Marxian socialists determined that the root of the injustice is based not in the function of distribution of goods already created, but rather in the fact that the ownership of the means of production is in the hands of the upper class. Marxian socialists also maintain in contrast to the utopian socialists that the root of injustice is not in how goods (commodities) are distributed, but for whose economic benefit are they produced and sold.[citation needed]
Practice
Most forms and derivatives of Marxism and anarchism advocated total or near-total socialization of the economy. Less radical schools (e.g. Reformism and reformist Marxism) proposed a mixed market economy instead. Mixed economies can in turn range anywhere from those developed by the social democratic governments that have periodically governed Northern and Western European countries, to the inclusion of small cooperatives in the planned economy of Yugoslavia under Josip Broz Tito. A related issue is whether it is better to reform capitalism to create a fairer society (e.g. most social democrats) or to totally overthrow the capitalist system (all Marxists).
Some schools advocate centralized state control of the socialized sectors of the economy (e.g. Leninism), whilst others argue for control of those sectors by workers' councils (e.g. anarcho-communism, council communism, left communism, Marxism or syndicalism). This question is usually referred to by socialists in terms of "ownership of the means of production". None of the social democratic parties of Europe advocate total state ownership of the means of production in their contemporary demands and popular press.
Another issue socialists are divided on is what legal and political apparatus the workers would maintain and further develop the socialization of the means of production. Some advocate that the power of the workers' councils should itself constitute the basis of a socialist state (coupled with direct democracy and the widespread use of referendums), but others hold that socialism entails the existence of a legislative body administered by people who would be elected in a representative democracy.
Different ideologies support different governments. During the era of the Soviet Union, Western socialists were bitterly divided as to whether the Soviet Union was actually socialist, moving toward socialism, or inherently unsocialist and in fact inimical to true socialism. Similarly, today the government of the People's Republic of China claims to be socialist and refers to its own approach as socialism with Chinese characteristics, but many other socialists consider modern China to be essentially capitalist. The Chinese leadership concurs with most of the usual critiques against a command economy and many of their actions to manage what they call a socialist economy have been determined by this opinion.
Socialist planned economy
This form of socialism combines public ownership and management of the means of production with centralized state planning and can refer to a broad range of economic systems from the centralized Soviet-style command economy to participatory planning via workplace democracy. In a centrally-planned economy decisions regarding the quantity of goods and services to be produced as well as the allocation of output (distribution of goods and services) are planned in advance by a planning agency. This type of economic system was often combined with a one-party political system and is associated with the Communist states of the 20th century.
State-directed economy
A state-directed economy is a system where either the state or worker cooperatives own the means of production, but economic activity is directed to some degree by a government agency or planning ministry through mechanisms such as indicative planning or dirigisme. This differs from a centralized planned economy, or a command economy, in that micro-economic decision making, such as quantity to be produced and output requirements, is left to managers and workers in state enterprises or cooperative enterprises rather than being mandated by a comprehensive economic plan from a centralized planning board. However, the state will plan long-term strategic investment and some aspect of production. It is possible for a state-directed economy to have elements of both a market and planned economy. For example, production and investment decisions may be semi-planned by the state, but distribution of output may be determined by the market mechanism.
State-directed socialism can also refer to technocratic socialism—economic systems that rely on technocratic management and technocratic planning mechanisms, along with public ownership of the means of production. A forerunner of this concept was Henri de Saint-Simon, who understood the state would undergo a transformation in a socialist system and change its role from one of "political administration of men, to the administration of things".
A decentralized planned economy is one where ownership of enterprises is accomplished through various forms of self-management and worker cooperatives in which planning of production and distribution is done from the bottom-up by local worker councils in a democratic manner. This form of socialist economy is related to the political philosophies of libertarian socialism, syndicalism and various forms of communal utopian socialism.
Market socialism refers to various economic systems that involve either public ownership and management or worker cooperative ownership over the means of production, or a combination of both, and the market mechanism for allocating economic output, deciding what to produce and in what quantity. In state-oriented forms of market socialism where state enterprises attempt to maximize profit, the profits can fund government programs and services eliminating or greatly diminishing the need for various forms of taxation that exist in capitalist systems.
Some forms of market socialism are based on neoclassical economic theory, with the aim of attaining pareto efficiency by setting price to equal marginal cost in public enterprises. This form of socialism was promoted by Oskar Lange, Abba Lerner and Fredrick Taylor. Other forms of market socialism are based on classical economics, such as those advocated by Thomas Hodgskin, who viewed interest accumulation, rent and profit as deductions from exchange-value, so that eliminating the capitalist element from the economy would lead to a free market and socialism. The term market socialism has also been applied to planned economic systems that try to organize themselves partially along market-lines while retaining centralized state ownership of capital.
A socialist market economy refers to the economic systems adopted by the People's Republic of China and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam, and previously also Yugoslavia. Although there is dispute as to whether or not these models actually constitute state capitalism, the decisive means of production remain under state-ownership. State enterprises are organized into corporations (corporatization) and operate like private capitalist enterprises. A substantial private sector exists alongside the state sector of the economy, but it plays a secondary role usually relegated to the service sector and production of consumer goods.
Utopian socialism is a term used to define the first currents of modern socialist thought as exemplified by the work of Henri de Saint-Simon, Charles Fourier and Robert Owen, which inspired Karl Marx and other early socialists.[35] Although it is technically possible for any set of ideas or any person living at any time in history to be a utopian socialist, the term is most often applied to those socialists who lived in the first quarter of the 19th century who were ascribed the label "utopian" by later socialists as a negative term, in order to imply naivete and dismiss their ideas as fanciful or unrealistic.[31] Later socialists argued that visions of imaginary ideal societies, which competed with revolutionary social democratic movements, were not grounded in the material conditions of society and were therefore "reactionary".[36] Forms of socialism which existed in traditional societies, including pre-Marxist communism are referred to as primitive communism by Marxists.
Sociocracy is a socialist-positivist political view created by Auguste Comte, based on Saint-Simon's aristocratic, utopian socialist heritage, prioritizing social justice and a central government with direct democracy without parliament. Religious sects whose members live communally, such as the Hutterites, for example, are not usually called "utopian socialists", although their way of living is a prime example. They have been categorized as religious socialists by some. Similarly, modern intentional communities based on socialist ideas could also be categorized as "utopian socialist".
While Marxism had a significant impact on socialist thought, pre-Marxist thinkers (before Marx wrote on the subject) have advocated socialism in forms both similar and in stark contrast to Marx and Friedrich Engels' conception of socialism, advocating some form of collective ownership over large-scale production, worker-management within the workplace, or in some cases a form of planned economy. Early socialist philosophers and political theorists included Gerrard Winstanley, who founded the Diggers movement in the United Kingdom; Charles Fourier, French philosopher who propounded principles very similar to that of Marx; Louis Blanqui, French socialist and writer; Marcus Thrane, Norwegian socialist; Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Genevan philosopher, writer and composer whose works influenced the French Revolution; and Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, French politician writer.
Although the term socialism has come to mean specifically a combination of political and economic science, it is also applicable to a broader area of science encompassing what is now considered sociology and the humanities. The distinction between Utopian and scientific socialism originated with Marx, who criticized the Utopian characteristics of French socialism and English and Scottish political economy. Engels later argued that Utopian socialists failed to recognize why it was that socialism arose in the historical context that it did, that it arose as a response to new social contradictions of a new mode of production, i.e. capitalism. In recognizing the nature of socialism as the resolution of this contradiction and applying a thorough scientific understanding of capitalism, Engels asserted that socialism had broken free from a primitive state and become a science.[39]
Communism has usually been distinguished from socialism since the 1840s. The modern definition and usage of socialism settled by the 1860s, becoming the predominant term among the group of words associationist, co-operative and mutualist which had previously been used as synonyms. Instead, communism fell out of use during this period.[55] An early distinction between communism and socialism was that the latter aimed to only socialise production while the former aimed to socialise both production and consumption (in the form of free access to final goods).[56] However, Marxists employed socialism in place of communism by 1888 which had come to be considered an old-fashion synonym for socialism. It was not until 1917 after the Bolshevik Revolution that socialism came to refer to a distinct stage between capitalism and communism, introduced by Vladimir Lenin as a means to defend the Bolshevik seizure of power against traditional Marxist criticism that Russia's productive forces were not sufficiently developed for socialist revolution.[57] A distinction between communist and socialist as descriptors of political ideologies arose in 1918 after the Russian Social-Democratic Labour Party renamed itself to the All-Russian Communist Party, where communist came to specifically mean socialists who supported the politics and theories of Bolshevism, Leninism and later Marxism–Leninism,[58] although communist parties continued to describe themselves as socialists dedicated to socialism.[55]
Both communism and socialism eventually accorded with the adherents' and opponents' cultural attitude towards religion. In Christian Europe, communism was believed to be the atheist way of life. In Protestant England, communism was too culturally and aurally close to the Roman Catholic communion rite, hence English atheists denoted themselves socialists.[59]Friedrich Engels argued that in 1848, at the time when The Communist Manifesto was first published, "socialism was respectable on the continent, while communism was not". The Owenites in England and the Fourierists in France were considered respectable socialists while working-class movements that "proclaimed the necessity of total social change" denoted themselves communists. This latter branch of socialism produced the communist work of Étienne Cabet in France and Wilhelm Weitling in Germany.[60]
The dominant forms of communism are based on Marxism, but non-Marxist versions of communism such as anarcho-communism and Christian communism also exist. According to The Oxford Handbook of Karl Marx, "Marx used many terms to refer to a post-capitalist society—positive humanism, socialism, Communism, realm of free individuality, free association of producers, etc. He used these terms completely interchangeably. The notion that "socialism" and "Communism" are distinct historical stages is alien to his work and only entered the lexicon of Marxism after his death".[61]
Marxism, or Marxist communism, refers to classless, stateless social organization based upon common ownership of the means of production and to a variety of movements acting in the name of this goal which are influenced by the thought of Karl Marx. In general, the classless forms of social organisation are not capitalised while movements associated with official communist parties and communist states usually are. In the classic Marxist definition (pure communism), a communist economy refers to a system that has achieved a superabundance of goods and services due to an increase in technological capability and advances in the productive forces and therefore has transcended socialism such as a post-scarcity economy. This is a hypothetical stage of social and economic development with few speculative details known about it.
The actual goal of communism has never been attained in practice from a Marxist position, though anarchist societies have provided a glimpse of what a communist world would look like. The real idea behind it is to abolish all leadership, and govern with a commune. That is, the people themselves make all decisions, and everyone contributing to the wellbeing of the commune. Communist state is used by Western historians, political scientists and media to refer to these countries and distinguish them from other socialist states. In practice, most governments that have claimed to be communists have not described themselves as a communist state nor they claimed to have achieved communism or communist society. Those states have referred to themselves as socialist states (i.e. states that are constitutionally socialist) that are in the process of constructing socialism.[62][63][64][65]
The modern political Marxist communist movement was created when the social democratic parties of Europe split between their rightist and leftist tendencies during World War I. The leftists, led internationally by Vladimir Lenin, Rosa Luxemburg and Karl Liebknecht, to distinguish their brand of socialism from the "reformist" social democrats, were called "communists". However, after Luxemburg's and Liebknecht's murders the term communist became generally associated solely with the parties and organisations following Lenin, along with their various derivations, such as Stalinism or Maoism.
There is a considerable variety of views among self-identified communists. However, Marxism and Leninism, schools of communism associated with Karl Marx and of Vladimir Lenin respectively, have the distinction of having been a major force in world politics since the early 20th century. Class struggle plays a central role in Marxism. This theory views the formation of communism as the culmination of the class struggle between the capitalist class, the owners of most of the capital and the working class. Marx held that society could not be transformed from the capitalist mode of production to the communist mode of production all at once, but required a transitional state which Marx described as the revolutionary dictatorship of the proletariat.
Some forms of the communist society that Marx envisioned, as emerging from capitalism, have been claimed to be achieved for limited periods during certain historical moments and under certain circumstances. For example, the Paris Commune in fact let Marx reinforce and implement his theories by adapting them to a real experience he could draw from. Another similar case, though disputed by anarcho-syndicalism or even anarchism, was the Spanish Revolution of 1936 (often missed or unmentioned by official historiography), during which much of Spain's economy in most of Republican areas, some of which enjoyed a practical absence of state, was put under workers' direct collective control.
In addition to this, the term communism (as well as socialism) is often used to refer to those political and economic systems and states dominated by a political, bureaucratic class, typically attached to one singleCommunist party that follow Marxist–Leninist doctrines and often claim to represent the dictatorship of the proletariat in a non-democratic fashion, described by critics as in a totalitarian and bureaucratic. These systems are also often called Stalinism, state capitalism, state communism or state socialism.
With the Soviet Union's creation after the end of Russian Civil War that followed to initial success of Red October Revolution in Russia, other socialist parties in other countries and the Bolshevik party itself became Communist parties, owing allegiance of varying degrees to the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (see Communist International). After World War II, regimes calling themselves Communist took power in Eastern Europe. In 1949, the Communists in China, supported by Soviet Union and led by Mao Zedong, came to power and established the People's Republic of China. Among the other countries in the Third World that adopted a bureaucratic Communist state as form of government at some point were Cuba, North Korea, Vietnam, Laos, Angola and Mozambique. By the early 1980s, almost one third of the world's population lived under Communist states.
Communism carries a strong social stigma in the United States due to a history of anti-communism in the United States. Since the early 1970s, the term Eurocommunism was used to refer to the policies of Communist parties in western Europe, which sought to break with the tradition of uncritical and unconditional support of the Soviet Union. Such parties were politically active and electorally significant in France and Italy. With the collapse of the statalized one-party systems and Marxist–Leninist governments, in Eastern Europe from the late 1980s and the breakup of the Soviet Union on December 8, 1991, Marxist–Leninist state communism's influence has decreased dramatically in Europe, but around a quarter of the world's population still lives under such a kind of Communist states.
Vladimir Lenin never used the term Leninism, nor did he refer to his views as Marxism–Leninism. However, his ideas diverged from classical Marxist theory on several important points (see the articles on Marxism and Leninism for more information). Bolshevik communists saw these differences as advancements of Marxism made by Lenin. After Lenin's death, his ideology and contributions to Marxist theory were termed "Marxism–Leninism", or sometimes only "Leninism". Marxism–Leninism soon became the official name for the ideology of the Comintern and of Communist parties around the world.
Trotskyism is the theory of Marxism as advocated by Russian revolutionary and intellectual[66][67]Leon Trotsky. Trotsky had been the leader of the Red Army[68] and Lenin had proposed he serve as Vice-chairman to preside over economic management.[69][70] Trotsky considered himself a Bolshevik–Leninist, arguing for the establishment of a vanguard party. He considered himself an advocate of orthodox Marxism. His politics differed greatly from those of Stalin or Mao, most importantly in declaring the need for an international "permanent revolution" and arguing that democracy is essential to both socialism and communism. Numerous groups around the world continue to describe themselves as Trotskyist and see themselves as standing in this tradition, although they have diverse interpretations of the conclusions to be drawn from this.
Stalinism was the totalitarian[82][83][84] theory and practice of communism practiced by Joseph Stalin, leader of the Soviet Union from 1928 to 1953. Officially it adhered to Marxism–Leninism, but whether Stalin's practices actually followed the principles of Marx and Lenin is a subject of debate and criticism. In contrast to Marx and Lenin, Stalin made few new theoretical contributions. Stalin's main contributions to communist theory were Socialism in One Country and the theory of aggravation of class struggle under socialism, a theoretical base supporting the repression of political opponents as necessary. Stalinism took an aggressive stance on class conflict, utilizing state violence in an attempt to forcibly purge society of the bourgeoisie.[85] The groundwork for the Soviet policy concerning nationalities was laid out in Stalin's 1913 work Marxism and the National Question.[86]
Stalinist policies in the Soviet Union featured de facto one man rule,[87][88] rapid industrialization, cult of personality, mass censorship, Five-Year Plans, socialism in one country, a centralized state, collectivization of agriculture and subordination of interests of other communist parties to those of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union.[89] Rapid industrialization was designed to accelerate the development towards communism, stressing that industrialization was needed because the country was economically backward in comparison with other countries, and was needed in order to face the challenges posed by internal and external enemies.[90] Rapid industrialization was accompanied with mass collective farming and rapid urbanization.[91] Rapid urbanization converted many small villages into industrial cities.[91]
A key concept that distinguishes Maoism from other left-wing ideologies is the belief that the class struggle continues throughout the entire socialist period, as a result of the fundamental antagonistic contradiction between capitalism and communism. Even when the proletariat has seized state power through a socialist revolution, the potential remains for a bourgeoisie to restore capitalism. Indeed, Mao famously stated that "the bourgeoisie [in a socialist country] is right inside the Communist Party itself", implying that corrupt Party officials would subvert socialism if not prevented.
Unlike the earlier forms of Marxism–Leninism in which the urban proletariat was seen as the main source of revolution, and the countryside was largely ignored, Mao focused on the peasantry as a revolutionary force which, he said, could be mobilized by a Communist Party with their knowledge and leadership.
Unlike most other political ideologies, including other socialist and Marxist ones, Maoism contains an integral military doctrine and explicitly connects its political ideology with military strategy. In Maoist thought, "political power comes from the barrel of the gun" (one of Mao's quotes), and the peasantry can be mobilized to undertake a "people's war" of armed struggle involving guerrilla warfare.
Since the death of Mao and the reforms of Deng, most of the parties explicitly defining themselves as "Maoist" have disappeared, but various communist groups around the world, particularly armed ones like the Unified Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist), the CPI (Maoist) and CPI (ML) of India and the New People's Army of the Philippines, continue to advance Maoist ideas and get press attention for them. These groups generally have the idea that Mao's ideas were betrayed before they could be fully or properly implemented.
Dengism is a political and economic ideology that originated with Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping. Dengism aims to adapt Marxism–Leninism and Mao Zedong Thought to China's specific socio-economic context. Deng emphasized several key principles, including opening China to the global community, implementing the "one country, two systems" policy, and promoting political and economic pragmatism through the maxim "seek truth from facts".
As a reformist branch of communism and a variant of Maoism, Dengism is often criticized by traditional Maoists. Dengists believe that given China's isolation in the current international order and its extremely underdeveloped economy, it is crucial to swiftly bridge the gap between China and the West for socialism to succeed (as outlined in the theory of the primary stage of socialism). To encourage productivity and foster innovation, Dengist thought advocates for the introduction of market elements into the socialist system. Dengists maintain that China should retain public ownership of land, banks, raw materials, and strategic industries, but they also endorse private ownership in industries related to finished goods and services.[92][93][94] According to Dengist theory, private owners in these industries do not constitute a bourgeoisie, as the term “bourgeois” traditionally refers to those who own land and raw materials. Instead, private company owners are referred to as civil-run enterprises.[95] An important note is that Dengists take a firm stance against any form of personality cult, such as those in China under Mao's rule, the Soviet Union during Stalin's era, and North Korea under the Kim family.[96][97]
China was the first country to adopt this model, although it is vaguely similar to Russia under Lenin's New Economic Policy. The adoption of this model significantly boosted China's economy, leading to what is often referred to as the Chinese economic miracle. Over a period of thirty years, China achieved an annual GDP growth rate of over 8%, securing its position as the world's second-largest economy. Dengism, with its influence, has found adoption in other countries as well. Notably, both Vietnam and Laos have embraced this ideology, resulting in substantial economic growth. In the case of Laos, the real GDP growth rate reached 8.3%.[98] Additionally, Cuba began exploring this model, allowing small and medium-sized private businesses in 2021.[99][100][101]
The historical origins of left communism can be traced to the period before World War I, but it only came into focus after 1918. All left communists were supportive of the October Revolution in Russia, but retained a critical view of its development. However, some would in later years come to reject the idea that the revolution had a proletarian or socialist nature, asserting that it had simply carried out the tasks of the bourgeois revolution by creating a state capitalist system.
Unlike other forms of Marxism, autonomist Marxism emphasises the ability of the working class to force changes to the organization of the capitalist system independent of the state, trade unions or political parties. Autonomists are less concerned with party political organization than other Marxists, focusing instead on self-organized action outside of traditional organizational structures. Autonomist Marxism is thus a "bottom up" theory: it draws attention to activities that autonomists see as everyday working class resistance to capitalism, for example absenteeism, slow working, and socialization in the workplace.
Through translations made available by Danilo Montaldi and others, the Italian autonomists drew upon previous activist research in the United States by the Johnson-Forest Tendency and in France by the group Socialisme ou Barbarie.
It influenced the German and Dutch Autonomen, the worldwide Social Centre movement, and today is influential in Italy, France, and to a lesser extent the English-speaking countries. Those who describe themselves as autonomists now vary from Marxists to post-structuralists and anarchists. The Autonomist Marxist and Autonomen movements provided inspiration to some on the revolutionary left in English speaking countries, particularly among anarchists, many of whom have adopted autonomist tactics. Some English-speaking anarchists even describe themselves as Autonomists.
In 1864 the International Workingmen's Association (sometimes called the First International) united diverse revolutionary currents including French followers of Proudhon,[122] The anti-authoritarian sections of the First International were the precursors of the anarcho-syndicalists, seeking to "replace the privilege and authority of the State" with the "free and spontaneous organization of labor."[123]
In 1907, the International Anarchist Congress of Amsterdam gathered delegates from 14 countries, among which important figures of the anarchist movement, including Errico Malatesta, Pierre Monatte, Luigi Fabbri, Benoît Broutchoux, Emma Goldman, Rudolf Rocker, and Christiaan Cornelissen. Various themes were treated during the Congress, in particular concerning the organisation of the anarchist movement, popular education issues, the general strike or antimilitarism. A central debate concerned the relation between anarchism and syndicalism (or trade unionism). The Spanish Workers Federation in 1881 was the first major anarcho-syndicalist movement; anarchist trade union federations were of special importance in Spain. The most successful was the Confederación Nacional del Trabajo (National Confederation of Labour: CNT), founded in 1910. Before the 1940s, the CNT was the major force in Spanish working class politics, attracting 1.58 million members at one point and playing a major role in the Spanish Civil War.[124] The CNT was affiliated with the International Workers Association, a federation of anarcho-syndicalist trade unions founded in 1922, with delegates representing two million workers from 15 countries in Europe and Latin America.
Some anarchists, such as Johann Most, advocated publicizing violent acts of retaliation against counter-revolutionaries because "we preach not only action in and for itself, but also action as propaganda."[125] Numerous heads of state were assassinated between 1881 and 1914 by members of the anarchist movement. For example, U.S. President McKinley's assassin Leon Czolgosz claimed to have been influenced by anarchist and feministEmma Goldman. Anarchists participated alongside the Bolsheviks in both February and October revolutions, and were initially enthusiastic about the Bolshevik coup.[126] However, the Bolsheviks soon turned against the anarchists and other left-wing opposition, a conflict that culminated in the 1921 Kronstadt rebellion which the new government repressed. Anarchists in central Russia were either imprisoned, driven underground or joined the victorious Bolsheviks; the anarchists from Petrograd and Moscow fled to Ukraine.[127] There, in the Makhnovshchina, they fought in the civil war against the Whites (a Western-backed grouping of monarchists and other opponents of the October Revolution) and then the Bolsheviks as part of the Revolutionary Insurgent Army of Ukraine led by Nestor Makhno, who established an anarchist society in the region for a number of months.
In the 1920s and 1930s, the rise of fascism in Europe transformed anarchism's conflict with the state. In Spain, the CNT initially refused to join a popular front electoral alliance, and abstention by CNT supporters led to a right-wing election victory. In 1936, the CNT changed its policy and anarchist votes helped bring the popular front back to power. Months later, the former ruling class responded with an attempted coup causing the Spanish Civil War (1936–1939).[128] In response to the army rebellion, an anarchist-inspired movement of peasants and workers, supported by armed militias, took control of Barcelona and of large areas of rural Spain where they collectivised the land.[129] But even before the fascist victory in 1939, the anarchists were losing ground in a bitter struggle with the Stalinists, who controlled the distribution of military aid to the Republican cause from the Soviet Union. Stalinist-led troops suppressed the collectives and persecuted both dissident Marxists and anarchists.[130]
Mutualism began in 18th-century English and French labor movements, then took an anarchist form associated with Pierre-Joseph Proudhon in France and others in the US.[137] This influenced individualist anarchists in the United States such as Benjamin Tucker and William B. Greene. Josiah Warren proposed similar ideas in 1833[138] after participating in a failed Owenite experiment.[139] In the 1840s and 1850s, Charles A. Dana,[140] and William B. Greene introduced Proudhon's works to the US. Greene adapted Proudhon's mutualism to American conditions and introduced it to Benjamin R. Tucker.[141]
Mutualist anarchism is concerned with reciprocity, free association, voluntary contract, federation, and credit and currency reform. Many mutualists believe a market without government intervention drives prices down to labor-costs, eliminating profit, rent, and interest according to the labor theory of value. Firms would be forced to compete over workers just as workers compete over firms, raising wages.[142][143] Some see mutualism as between individualist and collectivist anarchism;[144] in What Is Property?, Proudhon develops a concept of "liberty", equivalent to "anarchy", which is the dialectical "synthesis of communism and property."[145] Greene, influenced by Pierre Leroux, sought mutualism in the synthesis of three philosophies – communism, capitalism and socialism.[146] Later individualist anarchists used the term mutualism but retained little emphasis on synthesis, while social anarchists such as the authors of An Anarchist FAQ claim mutualism as a subset of their philosophical tradition.[147]
Collectivist anarchism is a revolutionary[148] form of anarchism most commonly associated with Mikhail Bakunin, Johann Most and the anti-authoritarian section of the First International (1864–1876).[149] Unlike mutualists, collectivist anarchists oppose all private ownership of the means of production, instead advocating that ownership be collectivized. This was to be initiated by small cohesive elite group through acts of violence, or "propaganda by the deed", which would inspire the workers to revolt and forcibly collectivize the means of production.[148] Workers would be compensated for their work on the basis of the amount of time they contributed to production, rather than goods being distributed "according to need" as in anarcho-communism.
Although collectivist anarchism shares many similarities with anarchist communism there are also many key differences between them. For example, collectivist anarchists believe that the economy and most or all property should be collectively owned by society while anarchist communists by contrast believe that the concept of ownership should be rejected by society and replaced with the concept of usage.[150] Also Collectivist anarchists often favor using a form of currency to compensate workers according to the amount of time spent contributing to society and production while anarcho-communists believe that currency and wages should be abolished all together and goods should be distributed "to each according to his or her need".
Peter Kropotkin, an anarcho-communist theoretician who argued that workers spontaneously self-organize to produce goods in common for all society in anarchy
In anarcho-communism, individuals would not receive direct compensation for labour (through sharing of profits or payment), but would instead have free access to the resources and surplus of the commune.[154] On the basis of his biological research and experimentation, Kropotkin believed that humans and human society are more inclined towards efforts for mutual benefit than toward competition and strife.[155][156][157][158] Kropotkin believed that private property was one of the causes of oppression and exploitation and called for its abolition,[159][160] but he only opposed ownership, not possession.[161]
Some anarcho-syndicalists saw anarcho-communism as their objective. For example, the Spanish CNT adopted Isaac Puente's 1932 "Libertarian Communism" as its manifesto for a post-revolutionary society.[151]
Anarcho-communism does not always have a communitarian philosophy. Some forms of anarcho-communism are egoist and strongly influenced by radical individualism believing that anarcho-communism does not require a communitarian nature at all. Forms of libertarian communism such as Situationism are strongly egoist in nature.[162] Anarcho-communist Emma Goldman was influenced by both Stirner and Kropotkin and blended their philosophies together in her own, as shown in books of hers such as Anarchism And Other Essays.[163]
Anarcho-syndicalism is a branch of anarchism that focuses on the labor movement.[164] Anarcho-syndicalists view labor unions as a potential force for revolutionary social change, replacing capitalism and the state with a new society democratically self-managed by workers.
The basic principles of anarcho-syndicalism are the following:
Workers' solidarity means that anarcho-syndicalists believe all workers—no matter their race, gender, or ethnic group—are in a similar situation in regard to their boss (class consciousness). Furthermore, it means that, within capitalism, any gains or losses made by some workers from or to bosses will eventually affect all workers. Therefore, all workers must support one another in their class conflict to liberate themselves.
Anarcho-syndicalists believe that only direct action—that is, action concentrated on directly attaining a goal, as opposed to indirect action, such as electing a representative to a government position—will allow workers to liberate themselves.[165] Moreover, anarcho-syndicalists believe that workers' organizations (the organizations that struggle against the wage system, which, in anarcho-syndicalist theory, will eventually form the basis of a new society) should be self-managing. They should not have bosses or "business agents"; rather, the workers should be able to make all the decisions that affect them themselves.
Rudolf Rocker was one of the most popular voices in the anarcho-syndicalist movement. He outlined a view of the origins of the movement, what it sought, and why it was important to the future of labor in his 1938 pamphlet Anarcho-Syndicalism. The International Workers Association is an international anarcho-syndicalist federation of various labor unions from different countries. The Spanish Confederación Nacional del Trabajo played and still plays a major role in the Spanish labor movement. It was also an important force in the Spanish Civil War.
Josiah Warren, regarded by some as the first American anarchist
Josiah Warren is widely regarded as the first American anarchist[184] and the four-page weekly paper he edited during 1833, The Peaceful Revolutionist, was the first anarchist periodical published.[185] For American anarchist historian Eunice Minette Schuster, "[i]t is apparent [...] that Proudhonian Anarchism was to be found in the United States at least as early as 1848 and that it was not conscious of its affinity to the Individualist Anarchism of Josiah Warren and Stephen Pearl Andrews [...]. William B. Greene presented this Proudhonian Mutualism in its purest and most systematic form".[186] Later, the American individualist anarchist Benjamin Tucker "was against both the state and capitalism, against both oppression and exploitation. While not against the market and property he was firmly against capitalism as it was, in his eyes, a state-supported monopoly of social capital (tools, machinery, etc.) which allows owners to exploit their employees, i.e., to avoid paying workers the full value of their labour. He thought that the "labouring classes are deprived of their earnings by usury in its three forms, interest, rent and profit", therefore "Liberty will abolish interest; it will abolish profit; it will abolish monopolistic rent; it will abolish taxation; it will abolish the exploitation of labour; it will abolish all means whereby any labourer can be deprived of any of his product". This stance puts him squarely in the libertarian socialist tradition and Tucker referred to himself many times as a socialist and considered his philosophy to be anarchistic socialism.[187][188]
French individualist anarchistÉmile Armand shows clearly opposition to capitalism and centralized economies when he said that the individualist anarchist "inwardly he remains refractory – fatally refractory – morally, intellectually, economically (The capitalist economy and the directed economy, the speculators and the fabricators of single are equally repugnant to him.)".[189] The Spanish individualist anarchist Miguel Giménez Igualada thought that "capitalism is an effect of government; the disappearance of government means capitalism falls from its pedestal vertiginously...That which we call capitalism is not something else but a product of the State, within which the only thing that is being pushed forward is profit, good or badly acquired. And so to fight against capitalism is a pointless task, since be it State capitalism or Enterprise capitalism, as long as Government exists, exploiting capital will exist. The fight, but of consciousness, is against the State".[190] His view on class division and technocracy are as follows: "Since when no one works for another, the profiteer from wealth disappears, just as government will disappear when no one pays attention to those who learned four things at universities and from that fact they pretend to govern men. Big industrial enterprises will be transformed by men in big associations in which everyone will work and enjoy the product of their work. And from those easy as well as beautiful problems anarchism deals with and he who puts them in practice and lives them are anarchists. [...] The priority which without rest an anarchist must make is that in which no one has to exploit anyone, no man to no man, since that non-exploitation will lead to the limitation of property to individual needs".[191]
The anarchist[192] writer and BohemianOscar Wilde wrote in his famous essay The Soul of Man under Socialism that "[a]rt is individualism, and individualism is a disturbing and disintegrating force. There lies its immense value. For what it seeks is to disturb monotony of type, slavery of custom, tyranny of habit, and the reduction of man to the level of a machine".[193] For anarchist historian George Woodcock, "Wilde's aim in The Soul of Man under Socialism is to seek the society most favorable to the artist [...] for Wilde art is the supreme end, containing within itself enlightenment and regeneration, to which all else in society must be subordinated. [...] Wilde represents the anarchist as aesthete".[194] In a socialist society, people will have the possibility to realise their talents as "each member of the society will share in the general prosperity and happiness of the society". Wilde added that "upon the other hand, Socialism itself will be of value simply because it will lead to individualism" since individuals will no longer need to fear poverty or starvation. This individualism would, in turn, protect against governments "armed with economic power as they are now with political power" over their citizens. However, Wilde advocated non-capitalist individualism, saying that "of course, it might be said that the Individualism generated under conditions of private property is not always, or even as a rule, of a fine or wonderful type" a critique which is "quite true".[195] In Wilde's imagination, in this way socialism would free men from manual labour and allow them to devote their time to creative pursuits, thus developing their soul. He ended by declaring: "The new individualism is the new hellenism".[195]
Democratic socialism is a broad political movement that seeks to propagate the ideals of socialism within the context of a democratic system, as was done by Western social democrats, who popularized democratic socialism as a label to criticize the perceived authoritarian or non-democratic socialist development in the East, during the 19th and 20th centuries. In this sense, democratic socialism is closely related to social democracy and in some accounts are identical; other accounts stress differences, while maintaining that they are not mutually exclusive and can be compatible. Many democratic socialists support the system of social democracy as a road to reform of the capitalist system, while others support more revolutionary change in society to establish socialist goals. In the former sense, social democracy is considered to be more centrist and is more concerned of gradual improvements of the capitalist system, the mixed economy, and the welfare state, while some more radical social democrats, who describe themselves as democratic socialists, support a more anti-capitalist reformism, or through more radical evolutionary means, including revolutionary means.
Modern democratic socialists and social democrats both advocate the concept of the welfare state, at least to the extent that it protects and promotes the economic and social well-being of its citizens, including those unable to minimally provide for a good life. Whereas some modern social democrats view are more concern to gradually improve the welfare state, irrespective of any hierarchies of power that may persist following welfare reforms, which can and have been reversed by capital after the breakdown of the post-war compromise with labor, many modern democratic socialists view it as a means to an egalitarian end. Democratic socialists are also committed to the ideas of the redistribution of wealth and power as well as social ownership of certain industries, concepts which are considered to be abandoned by Third Way social democrats. Highlighting this difference, contemporary advocates of the democratic socialist model have criticized the modern Third Way social democratic approach of a welfare state if it is not adequately providing socioeconomic welfare programs at the universal level.[196]
While there are no countries in the world that would qualify as a democratic socialist state, i.e. as a democratic state having achieved a post-capitalist, socialist economy, several academics, political commentators, and scholars have distinguished between authoritarian socialist and democratic socialist states, with the first representing the Soviet Bloc, which is considered as being authoritarian or non-democratic enough and as being socialist only constitutionally, and the latter representing Western Bloc countries which have been democratically governed by socialist parties such as Britain, France, Sweden, and Western social-democracies in general, among others, which have pushed the ideals and objectives of socialism within the context of a democratic political system and capitalist economic system. Some states have described as being democratic socialists. In other countries, democratic socialism is defined more generally, essentially equating economic rights with human rights. United States Senator Bernie Sanders, a proponent of democratic socialism, has defined the term as universally guaranteeing rights to quality health care, sufficient education, employment at a living wage, affordable housing, secure retirement, and a clean environment. Toward these ends, he has invoked the words of Martin Luther King Jr., who also advocated democratic socialism, in calling for "a better distribution of wealth".[197]
Social democracy can be divided into classical and modern strands. Classical social democracy attempts to achieve socialism through gradual, parliamentary means and by introducing it from within democracy rather than through revolutionary means. The term social democracy can refer to the particular kind of society that social democrats advocate.
The Socialist International (SI), the worldwide organization of social democratic and democratic socialist parties, defines social democracy as an ideal form of representative democracy that may solve the problems found in a liberal democracy. The SI emphasizes principles such as freedom—not only individual liberties, but also freedom from discrimination and freedom from dependence on either the owners of the means of production or the holders of abusive political power; equality and social justice—not only before the law, but also economic and socio-cultural equality as well equal opportunities for all, including those with physical, mental, or social disabilities; and solidarity—unity and a sense of compassion for the victims of injustice and inequality.[198]
Modern social democracy seeks to contain capitalism through transitioning unstable private sector enterprises into public ownership, correcting economic and social inequality through social safety nets and services, sometimes referred to as welfare state policies, and more aggressive regulation of markets and private enterprise than other forms of mixed economy. Over the past forty years, social democracy has increasingly been replaced with alternate economic systems such as the social market economy or Third Way mixed economies that are informed by Keynesian economics.
Merging aspects of Marxism, socialism, environmentalism, anarchism and ecology, eco-socialists generally believe that the capitalist system is the cause of social exclusion, inequality and environmental degradation. Eco-socialists criticise many within the green movement for not going far enough in their critique of the current world system and for not being overtly anti-capitalist. At the same time, Eco-socialists would blame the traditional Left for overlooking or not properly addressing ecological problems.[199] Eco-socialists are anti-globalisation. Joel Kovel sees globalisation as a force driven by capitalism; in turn, the rapid economic growth encouraged by globalisation causes acute ecological crises.[200]
Eco-socialism goes beyond a criticism of the actions of large corporations and targets the inherent properties of capitalism. Such an analysis follows Marx's theories about the contradiction between use values and exchange values. As Kovel explains, within a market economy, goods are not produced to meet needs but are produced to be exchanged for money that we then use to acquire other goods. As we have to keep selling to keep buying, we must persuade others to buy our goods just to ensure our survival, which leads to the production of goods with no previous use that can be sold to sustain our ability to buy other goods. Eco-socialists like Kovel stress that this contradiction has reached a destructive extent, where certain essential activities such as caring for relatives full-time and basic subsistence are unrewarded while unnecessary economic activities earn certain individuals huge fortunes.[200]Agrarian socialism is another variant of eco-socialism.
Some contemporary green anarchists can be described as anti-civilization or primitivist anarchists, although not all green anarchists are primitivists. Similarly, there is a strong critique of modern technology among green anarchists, although not all reject it entirely. Important contemporary currents include anarcho-naturism as the fusion of anarchism and naturist philosophies; anarcho-primitivism which offers a critique of technology and argues that anarchism is best suited to uncivilised ways of life; eco-anarchism which combines older trends of primitivism as well as bioregional democracy, eco-feminism, intentional community, pacifism and secession that distinguish it from the more general green anarchism; green syndicalism, a green anarchist political stance made up of anarcho-syndicalist views; social ecology which argues that the hierarchical domination of nature by human stems from the hierarchical domination of human by human;[204] and veganarchism which argues that human liberation and animal liberation are inseparable.[205]
Liberal socialism is a political philosophy that incorporates liberal principles into socialism.[206] Liberal socialism refuses to abolish capitalism with a socialist economy[207] and supports a mixed economy that includes both social ownership and private property in capital goods.[208][209] This synthesis sees liberalism as the political theory that takes the inner freedom of the human spirit as a given and adopts liberty as the goal, means and rule of shared human life. Socialism is seen as the method to realize this recognition of liberty through political and economic autonomy and emancipation from the grip of pressing material necessity.[210] Principles that can be described as liberal socialist are based on the works of liberal, left-liberal, radical, socialist and anarchist economists and philosophers. Liberal socialism has been particularly prominent in British and Italian politics.[211] Liberal socialist Carlo Rosselli founded the liberal socialist-led anti-fascist resistance movement Giustizia e Libertà that later became an active combatant against the Fascist regime in Italy during World War II and included Ferruccio Parri (who later became Prime Minister of Italy) who was among Giustizia e Libertà's leaders.[212]
Abertzale left (Basque: ezker abertzalea, "patriotic left";[250][251] translated in Spanish as izquierda nacionalista radical vasca, "Basque radical nationalist left")[252] is a term used to refer to the parties or organizations of the Basque nationalist/separatist left, stretching from social democracy to communism.
Ezker abertzalea (Spanish: izquierda abertzale) is notably used when referring to the leftist-nationalist environment of Batasuna, an outlawed political party.[256]
In 2011–2012, the main abertzale parties and groups joined forces in forming a succession of coalitions: Bildu, Amaiur and, finally, EH Bildu. A group of former members of Batasuna were identified by the media as independents of izquierda abertzale.[257][258][259]
The Arab Socialist Ba'ath Party rules Syria and has ruled Iraq under Saddam Hussein based on a tradition of secular, non-Marxist socialism. Ba'thist beliefs combine Arab socialism, nationalism, and pan-Arabism. The mostly secular ideology often contrasts with that of other Arab governments in the Middle East, which sometimes lean towards Islamism and theocracy. The Ba'athists have persecuted socialists in their own countries. In Iraq, the American Central Intelligence Agency assisted Iraq with a list of communists to eliminate, effectively wiping them out. Socialist Lynn Walsh argues that the Iraqi Ba'athists promoted capitalists from within the party and outside the country.[266]
The Arab Socialist Ba'ath Party, also known as the Ba'ath Party (Arabic: حزب البعث العربي الاشتراكي), is a secularistpan-Arabist political party that synthesizes Arab nationalism and Arab socialism. It opposes Western imperialism and calls for the ethnic "awakening" or "resurrection" of the Arab people into a single united state.[267]Ba'ath, also spelled as Ba'th or Baath, means resurrection or renaissance. The party's motto, "Unity, Liberty, Socialism" (wahda, hurriya, ishtirakiya), was inspired by the French Jacobin political doctrine linking national unity and social equity.[268] In the slogan, "unity" refers to Arab unity, "liberty" emphasizes being free from foreign control and interference, and "socialism" refers to Arab socialism, not European-style Marxism or communism.
The party was founded in Damascus, Syria, in 1940 by the Syrian intellectuals Michel Aflaq and Salah al-Bitar, and since its inception, it has established branches in different Arab countries, although the only countries it has ever held power in are Syria and Iraq. Aflaq and al-Bitar both studied at the Sorbonne in the early 1930s, at a time when centre-leftpositivism was still the dominant ideology amongst France's academic elite. The Ba'ath party included a significant number of Christian Arabs among its founding members. For them, a resolutely nationalist and secular political framework was a suitable way to avoid a faith-based Islamic orientation and to give non-Muslims full acknowledgement as citizens.
In 1955, a coup d'état by the military against the historical leadership of Aflaq and al-Bitar led the Syrian and Iraqi parties to split into rival organizations—the Qotri (Regionalist) Syria-based party and the Qawmi (Nationalist) Iraq-based party.[269] Both Ba'ath parties kept their names and maintained parallel structures, but became so antagonistic that the Syrian Ba'ath government became the only Arab government to support non-Arab Iran against Iraq during the Iran–Iraq War. In Syria, the Ba'ath Party has had a monopoly on political power since the party's 1963 coup. Ba'athists seized power in Iraq in 1963, but were deposed months later. They returned to power in a 1968 coup and remained the sole party of government until the 2003 Iraq invasion. Since then, the party has been banned in Iraq.
The Kuomintang attempted to levy taxes upon merchants in Canton and the merchants resisted by raising an army, the Merchant's Volunteer Corps. The merchants were conservative and reactionary and their leader Chen Lianbao was a prominent comprador trader.[273] Chiang Kai-shek led his army of Whampoa Military Academy graduates to defeat the merchant's army. He was assisted by Soviet advisors, who supplied him with weapons, while the merchants were supplied with weapons from the Western countries.[274][275] The British led an international flotilla to support the merchants.[276] Chiang seized the Western-supplied weapons from the merchants, and battled against them. A Kuomintang general executed several merchants, and the Kuomintang formed a Soviet-inspired Revolutionary Committee.[277] The Kuomintang's economic and military campaign against merchants continued for many years. Chiang also enforced an anti-Japanese boycott, sending agents to sack the shops of those who sold Japanese-made items, fining them.
The Việt Nam Quốc Dân Đảng (VNQDĐ) was based on the Chinese Kuomintang, and incorporated socialism and nationalism as part of its ideology. The party sought independence from French colonial rule in Vietnam during the early 20th century. Its origins lie in the mid-1920s, when a group of young Hanoi-based intellectuals began publishing revolutionary material. From 1928, the VNQDĐ attracted attention through its assassinations of French officials and Vietnamese collaborators. During the 1930s, the party was eclipsed by Ho Chi Minh's Indochinese Communist Party (ICP). Vietnam was occupied by Japan during World War II and in the chaos that followed the Japanese surrender in 1945 the VNQDĐ and the ICP briefly joined forces in the fight for Vietnamese independence. After a falling out, Ho purged the VNQDĐ, leaving his communist-dominated Viet Minh unchallenged as the foremost anti-colonial militant organisation. As a part of the post-war settlement that ended the First Indochina War, Vietnam was partitioned into two zones. The remnants of the VNQDĐ fled to the anti-communist south, where they remained until the Fall of Saigon in 1975 and the reunification of Vietnam under communist rule.
Religious socialism is any form of socialism based on religious values. Members of several major religions have found that their beliefs about human society fit with socialist principles and ideas. As a result, religious socialist movements have developed within these religions.
Bhikkhu Buddhadasa coined the phrase "Dhammic socialism".[279] He believed that socialism is a natural state,[285] meaning all things exist together in one system.[285] Han Yong-un felt that equality was one of the main principles of Buddhism.[280] In an interview published in 1931, Yong-un spoke of his desire to explore Buddhist socialism: "I am recently planning to write about Buddhist socialism. Just like there is Christian socialism as a system of ideas in Christianity, there must be also Buddhist socialism in Buddhism".[280]
Tenzin Gyatso, the Fourteenth Dalai Lama of Tibet has said that "[o]f all the modern economic theories, the economic system of Marxism is founded on moral principles, while capitalism is concerned only with gain and profitability. [...] The failure of the regime in the former Soviet Union was, for me, not the failure of Marxism but the failure of totalitarianism. For this reason I still think of myself as half-Marxist, half-Buddhist".[286]
Christian anarchism is a movement in political theology that combines anarchism and Christianity.[288] The foundation of Christian anarchism is a rejection of violence, with Leo Tolstoy's The Kingdom of God Is Within You regarded as a key text.[289][290] Tolstoy sought to separate Russian Orthodox Christianity—which was merged with the state—from what he believed was the true message of Jesus as contained in the Gospels, specifically in the Sermon on the Mount. Tolstoy takes the viewpoint that all governments who wage war, and churches who in turn support those governments, are an affront to the Christian principles of nonviolence and nonresistance. Although Tolstoy never actually used the term Christian anarchism in The Kingdom of God Is Within You, reviews of this book following its publication in 1894 appear to have coined the term.[291][292]
Christian communism is a form of religious communism based on Christianity. It is a theological and political theory based upon the view that the teachings of Jesus Christ compel Christians to support communism as the ideal social system. Although there is no universal agreement on the exact date when Christian communism was founded, many Christian communists assert that evidence from the Bible (in the Acts of the Apostles)[293] suggests that the first Christians, including the apostles, established their own small communist society in the years following Jesus' death and resurrection.[293] As such, many advocates of Christian communism argue that it was taught by Jesus and practiced by the apostles themselves.[294] Some independent historians confirm it.[295][296][297][298][299][300][301][302][303][304][305][306]
Islamic socialism incorporates Islamic principles to socialism. As a term, it was coined by various Muslim leaders to describe a more spiritual form of socialism. Scholars have highlighted the similarities between the Islamic economic system and socialist theory as both socialism and Islam are against unearned income. Muslim socialists believe that the teachings of the Quran and Muhammad—especially the zakat—are compatible with principles of socialism. They draw inspiration from the early Medinan welfare state established by Muhammad. Muslim socialists found their roots in anti-imperialism. Muslim socialist leaders believe in the derivation of legitimacy from the public.
Islamic socialism is the political ideology of Libya's Muammar al-Gaddafi, former Iraqi president Ahmed Hassan al-Bakr, Syrian President Hafez Al-Assad and of the Pakistani leader of Pakistan Peoples Party, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto. The Green Book (written by Muammar al-Gaddafi) consists of three parts, namely "The Solution of the Problem of Democracy: 'The Authority of the People'", "The Solution of the Economic Problem: 'Socialism'", and "The Social Basis of the Third Universal Theory". The book is controversial because it completely rejects modern conceptions of liberal democracy and encourages the institution of a form of direct democracy based on popular committees. Critics charge that Qaddafi uses these committees as tools of autocratic political repression in practice.
The Jewish left consists of Jews who identify with, or support, left-wing or liberal causes, consciously as Jews, either as individuals or through organizations. There is no one organization or movement which constitutes the Jewish left, however. Jews have been major forces in the history of the labor movement, the settlement house movement, the women's rights movement, anti-racist and anti-colonialist work, and anti-fascist and anti-capitalist organizations of many forms in Europe, the United States, Algeria, Iraq, Ethiopia, and modern-day Israel.[307][308][309][310] Jews have a rich history of involvement in anarchism, socialism, Marxism, and Western liberalism. Although the expression "on the left" covers a range of politics, many well-known figures "on the left" have been of Jews who were born into Jewish families and have various degrees of connection to Jewish communities, Jewish culture, Jewish tradition, or the Jewish religion in its many variants.
Labor Zionism or socialist Zionism[311] (Hebrew: צִיּוֹנוּת סוֹצְיָאלִיסְטִית, translit.Tziyonut sotzyalistit; Hebrew: תְּנוּעָת הָעַבוֹדָהtranslit.Tnu'at ha'avoda, i.e. The labor movement) is the left wing of the Zionist movement. For many years, it was the most significant tendency among Zionists and Zionist organizations. It saw itself as the Zionist sector of the historic Jewish labor movements of Eastern and Central Europe, eventually developing local units in most countries with sizable Jewish populations. Unlike the "political Zionist" tendency founded by Theodor Herzl and advocated by Chaim Weizmann, Labor Zionists did not believe that a Jewish state would be created simply by appealing to the international community or to a powerful nation such as Britain, Germany or the Ottoman Empire. Rather, Labor Zionists believed that a Jewish state could only be created through the efforts of the Jewish working class settling in the Land of Israel and constructing a state through the creation of a progressive Jewish society with rural kibbutzim and moshavim and an urban Jewish proletariat.
Labor Zionism grew in size and influence and eclipsed "political Zionism" by the 1930s both internationally and within the British Mandate of Palestine where Labor Zionists predominated among many of the institutions of the pre-independence Jewish community Yishuv, particularly the trade union federation known as the Histadrut. The Haganah, the largest Zionist paramilitary defense force, was a Labor Zionist institution and was used on occasion (such as during the Hunting Season) against right-wing political opponents or to assist the British Administration in capturing rival Jewish militants. Labor Zionists played a leading role in the 1948 Arab–Israeli War and Labor Zionists were predominant among the leadership of the Israeli military for decades after the formation of the state of Israel in 1948.
Demonstration by the Argentine syndicalist union FORA in 1915
Syndicalism is a radical current in the labor movement that was most active in the early 20th century. Its main idea is the establishment of local worker-based organizations and the advancement of the demands and rights of workers through strikes. According to the Marxist historian Eric Hobsbawm, it was predominant in the revolutionary left in the decade which preceded the outbreak of World War I because Marxism was mostly reformist at that time.[312]
^ abcBusky, Donald F. (2000). Democratic Socialism: A Global Survey. Praeger. p. 2. ISBN978-0-275-96886-1. Socialism may be defined as movements for social ownership and control of the economy. It is this idea that is the common element found in the many forms of socialism.
^ abArnold, N. Scott (1998). The Philosophy and Economics of Market Socialism: A Critical Study. Oxford University Press. p. 8. "What else does a socialist economic system involve? Those who favor socialism generally speak of social ownership, social control, or socialization of the means of production as the distinctive positive feature of a socialist economic system."
^ abRosser, Mariana V. and J Barkley Jr. (23 July 2003). Comparative Economics in a Transforming World Economy. MIT Press. p. 53. ISBN978-0-262-18234-8. Socialism is an economic system characterised by state or collective ownership of the means of production, land, and capital.
^ abBertrand Badie; Dirk Berg-Schlosser; Leonardo Morlino (2011). International Encyclopedia of Political Science. SAGE Publications, Inc. p. 2456. ISBN978-1-4129-5963-6. Socialist systems are those regimes based on the economic and political theory of socialism, which advocates public ownership and cooperative management of the means of production and allocation of resources.
^ abZimbalist, Andrew; Sherman, Howard J.; Brown, Stuart (1988). Comparing Economic Systems: A Political-Economic Approach. Harcourt College Pub. p. 7. ISBN978-0-15-512403-5. Pure socialism is defined as a system wherein all of the means of production are owned and run by the government and/or cooperative, nonprofit groups.
^ abBrus, Wlodzimierz (2015). The Economics and Politics of Socialism. Routledge. p. 87. ISBN978-0-415-86647-7. This alteration in the relationship between economy and politics is evident in the very definition of a socialist economic system. The basic characteristic of such a system is generally reckoned to be the predominance of the social ownership of the means of production.
^ abNove, Alec. "Socialism". New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics, Second Edition (2008). A society may be defined as socialist if the major part of the means of production of goods and services is in some sense socially owned and operated, by state, socialised or cooperative enterprises. The practical issues of socialism comprise the relationships between management and workforce within the enterprise, the interrelationships between production units (plan versus markets), and, if the state owns and operates any part of the economy, who controls it and how.
^Michie, Jonathan (2001). Readers Guide to the Social Sciences. Routledge. p. 1516. ISBN978-1-57958-091-9. Just as private ownership defines capitalism, social ownership defines socialism. The essential characteristic of socialism in theory is that it destroys social hierarchies, and therefore leads to a politically and economically egalitarian society. Two closely related consequences follow. First, every individual is entitled to an equal ownership share that earns an aliquot part of the total social dividend…Second, in order to eliminate social hierarchy in the workplace, enterprises are run by those employed, and not by the representatives of private or state capital. Thus, the well-known historical tendency of the divorce between ownership and management is brought to an end. The society—i.e. every individual equally—owns capital and those who work are entitled to manage their own economic affairs.
^ ab"2. (Government, Politics & Diplomacy) any of various social or political theories or movements in which the common welfare is to be achieved through the establishment of a socialist economic system" "Socialism" at The Free dictionary
^O'Hara, Phillip (September 2003). Encyclopedia of Political Economy, Volume 2. Routledge. p. 71. ISBN0-415-24187-1. In order of increasing decentralisation (at least) three forms of socialised ownership can be distinguished: state-owned firms, employee-owned (or socially) owned firms, and citizen ownership of equity.
^"Socialism". Glossary of Terms. Marxists Internet Archive. Retrieved 25 February 2020.
^ abcDocherty, James C.; Lamb, Peter, eds. (2006). Historical Dictionary of Socialism (2nd ed.). Historical Dictionaries of Religions, Philosophies, and Movements. 73. Lanham, Maryland: Scarecrow Press. pp. 1–3. ISBN9780810855601.
^Arnold, Scott (1994). The Philosophy and Economics of Market Socialism: A Critical Study. Oxford University Press. pp. 7–8. ISBN978-0195088274. This term is harder to define, since socialists disagree among themselves about what socialism 'really is.' It would seem that everyone (socialists and nonsocialists alike) could at least agree that it is not a system in which there is widespread private ownership of the means of production...To be a socialist is not just to believe in certain ends, goals, values, or ideals. It also requires a belief in a certain institutional means to achieve those ends; whatever that may mean in positive terms, it certainly presupposes, at a minimum, the belief that these ends and values cannot be achieved in an economic system in which there is widespread private ownership of the means of production...Those who favor socialism generally speak of social ownership, social control, or socialization of the means of production as the distinctive positive feature of a socialist economic system.
^Hastings, Adrian; Mason, Alistair; Pyper, Hugh (21 December 2000). The Oxford Companion to Christian Thought. Oxford University Press. p. 677. ISBN978-0198600244. Socialists have always recognized that there are many possible forms of social ownership of which co-operative ownership is one...Nevertheless, socialism has throughout its history been inseparable from some form of common ownership. By its very nature it involves the abolition of private ownership of capital; bringing the means of production, distribution, and exchange into public ownership and control is central to its philosophy. It is difficult to see how it can survive, in theory or practice, without this central idea.
^Kolb, Robert (19 October 2007). Encyclopedia of Business Ethics and Society, First Edition. SAGE Publications, Inc. p. 1345. ISBN978-1412916523. There are many forms of socialism, all of which eliminate private ownership of capital and replace it with collective ownership. These many forms, all focused on advancing distributive justice for long-term social welfare, can be divided into two broad types of socialism: nonmarket and market.
^Schweickart, David; Lawler, James; Ticktin, Hillel; Ollman, Bertell (1998). Market Socialism: The Debate Among Socialists. "The Difference Between Marxism and Market Socialism". Routledge. pp. 61–63. "More fundamentally, a socialist society must be one in which the economy is run on the principle of the direct satisfaction of human needs. [...] Exchange-value, prices and so money are goals in themselves in a capitalist society or in any market. There is no necessary connection between the accumulation of capital or sums of money and human welfare. Under conditions of backwardness, the spur of money and the accumulation of wealth has led to a massive growth in industry and technology. [...] It seems an odd argument to say that a capitalist will only be efficient in producing use-value of a good quality when trying to make more money than the next capitalist. It would seem easier to rely on the planning of use-values in a rational way, which because there is no duplication, would be produced more cheaply and be of a higher quality. [...] Although money, and so monetary calculation, will disappear in socialism this does not mean that there will no longer be any need to make choices, evaluations and calculations. [...] Wealth will be produced and distributed in its natural form of useful things, of objects that can serve to satisfy some human need or other. Not being produced for sale on a market, items of wealth will not acquire an exchange-value in addition to their use-value. In socialism their value, in the normal non-economic sense of the word, will not be their selling price nor the time needed to produce them but their usefulness. It is for this that they will be appreciated, evaluated, wanted and produced."
^Wright, Anthony (1999). "Social Democracy and Democratic Socialism". In Eatwell, Roger; Wright, Anthony (eds.). Contemporary Political Ideologies (2nd ed.). London: Continuum. pp. 80–103. ISBN978-1-85567-605-3. This was an ideology which, at bottom, was grounded not in materialism but in morals. Thus Bernstein summoned up Kant to point the way towards a politics of ethical choices.
^Thompson, Noel W. (2006). Political Economy and the Labour Party: The Economics of Democratic Socialism, 1884–2005 (2nd ed.). Abingdon, England: Routledge. pp. 52–60. ISBN978-0-415-32880-7.
^Berman, Sheri (2008). Understanding Social Democracy(PDF). What's Left of the Left: Liberalism and Social Democracy in a Globalized World. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Minda de Gunzburg Center for European Studies, Harvard University. pp. 12–13. Retrieved 25 February 2020. Regardless of the specific policies they advocated, one thing that joined all budding interwar social democrats was a rejection of the passivity and economic determinism of orthodox Marxism [...] so they often embraced communitarian, corporatist, and even nationalist appeals and urged their parties to make the transition from workers' to 'people's' parties.
^Heywood, Andrew (2012). Political Ideologies: An Introduction (5th ed.). Basingstoke, England: Palgrave Macmillan. p. 128. ISBN978-0-230-36725-8. The theoretical basis for social democracy has been provided more by moral or religious beliefs, rather than by scientific analysis. Social democrats have not accepted the materialist and highly systematic ideas of Marx and Engels, but rather advanced an essentially moral critique of capitalism.
^ abBoyle, James. "What is Socialism?", The Shakespeare Press, 1912. pp. 35. Boyle quotes Pierrerismo Joseph Proudhon as stating that socialism is "every aspiration towards the amelioration of society", and then admitting that, under this definition, "we are all socialists."
^Bockman, Johanna (2011). Markets in the name of Socialism: The Left-Wing origins of Neoliberalism. Stanford University Press. p. 20. ISBN978-0-8047-7566-3. According to nineteenth-century socialist views, socialism would function without capitalist economic categories – such as money, prices, interest, profits and rent – and thus would function according to laws other than those described by current economic science. While some socialists recognized the need for money and prices at least during the transition from capitalism to socialism, socialists more commonly believed that the socialist economy would soon administratively mobilize the economy in physical units without the use of prices or money.
^Draper, Hal (1990). Karl Marx's Theory of Revolution, Volume IV: Critique of Other Socialisms. New York: Monthly Review Press. pp. 1–21. ISBN978-0-85345-798-5.
^Engels, Friedrich (1847). Principles of Communism. "Section 18". "Finally, when all capital, all production, all exchange have been brought together in the hands of the nation, private property will disappear of its own accord, money will become superfluous, and production will so expand and man so change that society will be able to slough off whatever of its old economic habits may remain."
^Newman, Michael (2005). Socialism: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford University Press. p. 5. "Chapter 1 looks at the foundations of the doctrine by examining the contribution made by various traditions of socialism in the period between the early 19th century and the aftermath of the First World War. The two forms that emerged as dominant by the early 1920s were social democracy and communism."
^Busky, Donald F. (2000). Democratic Socialism: A Global Survey. Praeger. pp. 6–8. ISBN978-0-275-96886-1. "In a modern sense of the word, communism refers to the ideology of Marxism–Leninism. [...] [T]he adjective democratic is added by democratic socialists to attempt to distinguish themselves from Communists who also call themselves socialists. All but communists, or more accurately, Marxist-Leninists, believe that modern-day communism is highly undemocratic and totalitarian in practice, and democratic socialists wish to emphasise by their name that they disagree strongly with the Marxist–Leninist brand of socialism."
^Ellman, Michael (2007). "The Rise and Fall of Socialist Planning". In Estrin, Saul; Kołodko, Grzegorz W.; Uvalić, Milica (eds.). Transition and Beyond: Essays in Honour of Mario Nuti. New York City: Palgrave Macmillan. p. 22. ISBN978-0-230-54697-4. In the USSR in the late 1980s the system was normally referred to as the 'administrative-command' economy. What was fundamental to this system was not the plan but the role of administrative hierarchies at all levels of decision making; the absence of control over decision making by the population [...].
^ abWilliams, Raymond (1985) [1976]. "Socialism". Keywords: A Vocabulary of Culture and Society (revised ed.). New York: Oxford University Press. p. 289. ISBN978-0-1952-0469-8. OCLC1035920683. The decisive distinction between socialist and communist, as in one sense these terms are now ordinarily used, came with the renaming, in 1918, of the Russian Social-Democratic Labour Party (Bolsheviks) as the All-Russian Communist Party (Bolsheviks). From that time on, a distinction of socialist from communist, often with supporting definitions such as social democrat or democratic socialist, became widely current, although it is significant that all communist parties, in line with earlier usage, continued to describe themselves as socialist and dedicated to socialism.
^Steele, David (1992). From Marx to Mises: Post-Capitalist Society and the Challenge of Economic Calculation. Open Court Publishing Company. p. 43. ISBN978-0-87548-449-5. One widespread distinction was that socialism socialised production only while communism socialised production and consumption.
^Steele, David (1992). From Marx to Mises: Post-Capitalist Society and the Challenge of Economic Calculation. Open Court Publishing Company. pp. 44–45. ISBN978-0-87548-449-5. By 1888, the term 'socialism' was in general use among Marxists, who had dropped 'communism', now considered an old fashioned term meaning the same as 'socialism'. [...] At the turn of the century, Marxists called themselves socialists. [...] The definition of socialism and communism as successive stages was introduced into Marxist theory by Lenin in 1917 [...], the new distinction was helpful to Lenin in defending his party against the traditional Marxist criticism that Russia was too backward for a socialist revolution.
^Busky, Donald F. (2000). Democratic Socialism: A Global Survey. Praeger. p. 9. ISBN978-0-275-96886-1. In a modern sense of the word, communism refers to the ideology of Marxism-Leninism.
^Wilczynski, J. (2008). The Economics of Socialism after World War Two: 1945-1990. Aldine Transaction. p. 21. ISBN978-0202362281. Contrary to Western usage, these countries describe themselves as 'Socialist' (not 'Communist'). The second stage (Marx's 'higher phase'), or 'Communism' is to be marked by an age of plenty, distribution according to needs (not work), the absence of money and the market mechanism, the disappearance of the last vestiges of capitalism and the ultimate 'whithering away' of the State.
^Steele, David Ramsay (September 1999). From Marx to Mises: Post Capitalist Society and the Challenge of Economic Calculation. Open Court. p. 45. ISBN978-0875484495. Among Western journalists the term 'Communist' came to refer exclusively to regimes and movements associated with the Communist International and its offspring: regimes which insisted that they were not communist but socialist, and movements which were barely communist in any sense at all.
^Rosser, Mariana V. and J Barkley Jr. (23 July 2003). Comparative Economics in a Transforming World Economy. MIT Press. p. 14. ISBN978-0262182348. Ironically, the ideological father of communism, Karl Marx, claimed that communism entailed the withering away of the state. The dictatorship of the proletariat was to be a strictly temporary phenomenon. Well aware of this, the Soviet Communists never claimed to have achieved communism, always labeling their own system socialist rather than communist and viewing their system as in transition to communism.
^Williams, Raymond (1983). "Socialism". Keywords: A vocabulary of culture and society, revised edition. Oxford University Press. p. 289. ISBN978-0-19-520469-8. The decisive distinction between socialist and communist, as in one sense these terms are now ordinarily used, came with the renaming, in 1918, of the Russian Social-Democratic Labour Party (Bolsheviks) as the All-Russian Communist Party (Bolsheviks). From that time on, a distinction of socialist from communist, often with supporting definitions such as social democrat or democratic socialist, became widely current, although it is significant that all communist parties, in line with earlier usage, continued to describe themselves as socialist and dedicated to socialism.
^"A prolific writer and a spellbinding orator, he was a central figure in the Russian Revolution of 1905 and the October Revolution of 1917,
the organizer and leader of the Red Army in the Russian Civil War, the heir apparent to Soviet leader Vladimir Lenin, and the arch enemy and then vanquished foe of Joseph Stalin in the succession struggle after Lenin's death".Patenaude, Betrand (21 September 2017). "Trotsky and Trotskyism" in The Cambridge History of Communism: Volume 1, World Revolution and Socialism in One Country 1917–1941. Cambridge University Press. p. 189. ISBN978-1-108-21041-6.
^Ticktin, Hillel (1992). Trotsky's political economy of capitalism. Brotherstone, Terence; Dukes, Paul,(eds). Edinburgh University Press. p. 227. ISBN978-0-7486-0317-6.
^Stephen Kotkin. Magnetic Mountain: Stalinism As a Civilization. First Paperback Edition. Berkeley and Los Angeles, California, USA: University of California Press, 1997. ISBN978-0-520-20823-0. pp. 71, 307, 81.
^T. B. Bottomore. A Dictionary of Marxist thought. Malden, Massaschussetts, USA; Oxford, England, UK; Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; Berlin, Germany: Wiley-Blackwell, 1991. pp. 54.
^Stephen Kotkin. Magnetic Mountain: Stalinism As a Civilization. First Paperback Edition. Berkeley and Los Angeles, California: University of California Press, 1997. ISBN978-0-520-20823-0. pp. 70–71.
^ abStephen Kotkin. Magnetic Mountain: Stalinism As a Civilization. First Paperback Edition. Berkeley and Los Angeles, California, USA: University of California Press, 1997. ISBN978-0-520-20823-0. pp. 70–79.
^Wang Yiwei (2005-03-01). "厉以宁：民营企业家不是旧中国资本家的延续" [Li Yining: Private Entrepreneurs Are Not the Continuation of the Old Chinese Capitalists]. NetEase News (in Chinese). Archived from the original on 2005-05-05. Retrieved 2020-10-03.
^"邓小平八大发言：坚持民主集中制 反对个人崇拜" [Deng Xiaoping's speech at the Eighth National Congress: Adhere to democratic centralism and oppose personality worship]. Sohu (in Chinese). 2014-08-10.
^"That is why Anarchy, when it works to destroy authority in all its aspects, when it demands the abrogation of laws and the abolition of the mechanism that serves to impose them, when it refuses all hierarchical organization and preaches free agreement — at the same time strives to maintain and enlarge the precious kernel of social customs without which no human or animal society can exist." Peter Kropotkin. Anarchism: its philosophy and ideal
^"anarchists are opposed to irrational (e.g., illegitimate) authority, in other words, hierarchy — hierarchy being the institutionalisation of authority within a society." "B.1 Why are anarchists against authority and hierarchy?" in An Anarchist FAQ
^"ANARCHISM, a social philosophy that rejects authoritarian government and maintains that voluntary institutions are best suited to express man's natural social tendencies." George Woodcock. "Anarchism" at The Encyclopedia of Philosophy
^"In a society developed on these lines, the voluntary associations which already now begin to cover all the fields of human activity would take a still greater extension so as to substitute themselves for the state in all its functions." [1]Peter Kropotkin. "Anarchism" from the Encyclopædia Britannica
^Malatesta, Errico. "Towards Anarchism". Man!. Los Angeles: International Group of San Francisco. OCLC3930443. Archived from the original on 7 November 2012. Agrell, Siri (14 May 2007). "Working for The Man". The Globe and Mail. Archived from the original on 16 May 2007. Retrieved 14 April 2008. "Anarchism". Encyclopædia Britannica. Encyclopædia Britannica Premium Service. 2006. Archived from the original on 14 December 2006. Retrieved 29 August 2006.
"Anarchism". The Shorter Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy: 14. 2005. Anarchism is the view that a society without the state, or government, is both possible and desirable. The following sources cite anarchism as a political philosophy: Mclaughlin, Paul (2007). Anarchism and Authority. Aldershot: Ashgate. p. 59. ISBN978-0-7546-6196-2. Johnston, R. (2000). The Dictionary of Human Geography. Cambridge: Blackwell Publishers. p. 24. ISBN0-631-20561-6.
^Slevin, Carl. "Anarchism." The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Politics. Ed. Iain McLean and Alistair McMillan. Oxford University Press, 2003.
^"Authority is defined in terms of the right to exercise social control (as explored in the "sociology of power") and the correlative duty to obey (as explored in the "philosophy of practical reason"). Anarchism is distinguished, philosophically, by its scepticism towards such moral relations-by its questioning of the claims made for such normative power- and, practically, by its challenge to those "authoritative" powers which cannot justify their claims and which are therefore deemed illegitimate or without moral foundation."Anarchism and Authority: A Philosophical Introduction to Classical Anarchism by Paul McLaughlin. AshGate. 2007. pg. 1
^ ab"Anarchism, then, really stands for the liberation of the human mind from the dominion of religion; the liberation of the human body from the dominion of property; liberation from the shackles and restraint of government. Anarchism stands for a social order based on the free grouping of individuals for the purpose of producing real social wealth; an order that will guarantee to every human being free access to the earth and full enjoyment of the necessities of life, according to individual desires, tastes, and inclinations." Emma Goldman. "What it Really Stands for Anarchy" in Anarchism and Other Essays.
^Individualist anarchist Benjamin Tucker defined anarchism as opposition to authority as follows "They found that they must turn either to the right or to the left, — follow either the path of Authority or the path of Liberty. Marx went one way; Warren and Proudhon the other. Thus were born State Socialism and Anarchism ... Authority, takes many shapes, but, broadly speaking, her enemies divide themselves into three classes: first, those who abhor her both as a means and as an end of progress, opposing her openly, avowedly, sincerely, consistently, universally; second, those who profess to believe in her as a means of progress, but who accept her only so far as they think she will subserve their own selfish interests, denying her and her blessings to the rest of the world; third, those who distrust her as a means of progress, believing in her only as an end to be obtained by first trampling upon, violating, and outraging her. These three phases of opposition to Liberty are met in almost every sphere of thought and human activity. Good representatives of the first are seen in the Catholic Church and the Russian autocracy; of the second, in the Protestant Church and the Manchester school of politics and political economy; of the third, in the atheism of Gambetta and the socialism of Karl Marx." Benjamin Tucker. Individual Liberty.
^Anarchist historian George Woodcock report of Mikhail Bakunin's anti-authoritarianism and shows opposition to both state and non-state forms of authority as follows: "All anarchists deny authority; many of them fight against it." (pg. 9) ... Bakunin did not convert the League's central committee to his full program, but he did persuade them to accept a remarkably radical recommendation to the Berne Congress of September 1868, demanding economic equality and implicitly attacking authority in both Church and State."
^ abBrown, L. Susan (2002). "Anarchism as a Political Philosophy of Existential Individualism: Implications for Feminism". The Politics of Individualism: Liberalism, Liberal Feminism and Anarchism. Black Rose Books Ltd. Publishing. p. 106.
^Jonathan Purkis and James Bowen, "Introduction: Why Anarchism Still Matters", in Jonathan Purkis and James Bowen (eds), Changing Anarchism: Anarchist Theory and Practice in a Global Age (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2004), p. 3.
^Resolutions from the St. Imier Congress, in Anarchism: A Documentary History of Libertarian Ideas, Vol. 1, p. 100 [3]Archived 2008-09-29 at the Wayback Machine
^Bolloten, Burnett (1984-11-15). The Spanish Civil War: Revolution and Counterrevolution. University of North Carolina Press. p. 1107. ISBN978-0-8078-1906-7.
^Birchall, Ian (2004). Sartre Against Stalinism. Berghahn Books. p. 29. ISBN1-57181-542-2.
^Thomas, Paul (1985). Karl Marx and the Anarchists. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. p. 4. ISBN978-0-7102-0685-5.
^"A member of a community", The Mutualist; this 1826 series criticized Robert Owen's proposals, and has been attributed to Josiah Warren or another dissident Owenite in the same circles; Wilbur, Shawn, 2006, "More from the 1826 "Mutualist"?"
^Warren published the periodical "The Peaceful Revolutionist" in 1833, seven years before Proudhon's "What is Property."
^"While more learned men lost faith in utopias and in human nature when the New Harmony experiment failed, Warren became more trusting than before in man's intelligence and perfectibility." – Native American Anarchism, pg. 94, Eunice Schuster
^"Under the mutual system, each individual will receive the just and exact pay for his work; services equivalent in cost being exchangeable for services equivalent in cost, without profit or discount; and so much as the individual laborer will then get over and above what he has earned will come to him as his share in the general prosperity of the community of which he is an individual member." From "Communism versus Mutualism", Socialistic, Communistic, Mutualistic and Financial Fragments. (Boston: Lee & Shepard, 1875) by William Batchelder Greene
^Avrich, Paul. Anarchist Voices: An Oral History of Anarchism in America, Princeton University Press 1996 ISBN0-691-04494-5, p.6 Blackwell Encyclopaedia of Political Thought, Blackwell Publishing 1991 ISBN0-631-17944-5, p.11
^ abPuente, Isaac (1982). "Libertarian Communism". The Cienfuegos Press Anarchist Review (6). Archived from the original on 2010-01-06. Retrieved 2010-01-06.
^Graeber, David and Grubacic, Andrej. Anarchism, Or The Revolutionary Movement Of The Twenty-first Century
^"[t]he landlord owes his riches to the poverty of the peasants, and the wealth of the capitalist comes from the same source" – Kropotkin, "The Conquest of Bread" op cit.
^"We do not want to rob any one of his coat, but we wish to give to the workers all those things the lack of which makes them fall an easy prey to the exploiter, and we will do our utmost that none shall lack aught, that not a single man shall be forced to sell the strength of his right arm to obtain a bare subsistence for himself and his babes. This is what we mean when we talk of Expropriation..." Peter Kropotkin, The Conquest Of Bread, Chapter IV: ExpropriationArchived 2007-03-01 at the Wayback Machine
^see, for example, Christopher Gray, Leaving the Twentieth Century, p. 88.
^Sorel, Georges. 'Political Theorists in Context' Routledge (2004) p. 248
^Rocker, Rudolf. 'Anarcho-Syndicalism: Theory and Practice' AK Press (2004) p. 73
^"What do I mean by individualism? I mean by individualism the moral doctrine which, relying on no dogma, no tradition, no external determination, appeals only to the individual conscience."Mini-Manual of Individualism by Han Ryner
^"I do not admit anything except the existence of the individual, as a condition of his sovereignty. To say that the sovereignty of the individual is conditioned by Liberty is simply another way of saying that it is conditioned by itself.""Anarchism and the State" in Individual Liberty
^Hamilton, Peter (1995). Émile Durkheim. New York: Routledge. p. 79. ISBN978-0415110471.
^Faguet, Émile (1970). Politicians & Moralists of the Nineteenth Century. Freeport: Books for Libraries Press. p. 147. ISBN978-0-8369-1828-1.
^Bowen, James; Purkis, Jon (2004). Changing Anarchism: Anarchist Theory and Practice in a Global Age. Manchester University Press. p. 24.
^Knowles, Rob (Winter 2000). "Political Economy From Below: Communitarian Anarchism as a Neglected Discourse in Histories of Economic Thought". History of Economics Review. 31 (31): 30–47. doi:10.1080/10370196.2000.11733332. S2CID141027974.
^Baginki, Max (May 1907). "Stirner: The Ego and His Own". Mother Earth (2: 3). "Modern Communists are more individualistic than Stirner. To them, not merely religion, morality, family and State are spooks, but property also is no more than a spook, in whose name the individual is enslaved — and how enslaved! [...] Communism thus creates a basis for the liberty and Eigenheit of the individual. I am a Communist because I am an Individualist. Fully as heartily the Communists concur with Stirner when he puts the word take in place of demand — that leads to the dissolution of property, to expropriation. Individualism and Communism go hand in hand."; Novatore, Renzo (1924). "Towards the Creative Nothing"; Gray, Christopher (1974). Leaving the Twentieth Century. p. 88; Black, Bob (2010). "Nightmares of Reason". "[C]ommunism is the final fulfillment of individualism. [...] The apparent contradiction between individualism and communism rests on a misunderstanding of both. [...] Subjectivity is also objective: the individual really is subjective. It is nonsense to speak of "emphatically prioritizing the social over the individual," [...]. You may as well speak of prioritizing the chicken over the egg. Anarchy is a "method of individualization." It aims to combine the greatest individual development with the greatest communal unity".
^Kropotkin, Peter (1901). "Communism and Anarchy". "Communism is the one which guarantees the greatest amount of individual liberty — provided that the idea that begets the community be Liberty, Anarchy [...]. Communism guarantees economic freedom better than any other form of association, because it can guarantee wellbeing, even luxury, in return for a few hours of work instead of a day's work."; Truda, Dielo (1926). "Organisational Platform of the Libertarian Communists". "This other society will be libertarian communism, in which social solidarity and free individuality find their full expression, and in which these two ideas develop in perfect harmony."; "My Perspectives". Willful Disobedience (2: 12). "I see the dichotomies made between individualism and communism, individual revolt and class struggle, the struggle against human exploitation and the exploitation of nature as false dichotomies and feel that those who accept them are impoverishing their own critique and struggle."; Brown, L. Susan (2002). The Politics of Individualism. Black Rose Books; Brown, L. Susan (2 February 2011). "Does Work Really Work?".
^"Paralelamente, al otro lado del atlántico, en el diferente contexto de una nación a medio hacer, los Estados Unidos, otros filósofos elaboraron un pensamiento individualista similar, aunque con sus propias especificidades. Henry David Thoreau (1817–1862), uno de los escritores próximos al movimiento de la filosofía trascendentalista, es uno de los más conocidos. Su obra más representativa es Walden, aparecida en 1854, aunque redactada entre 1845 y 1847, cuando Thoreau decide instalarse en el aislamiento de una cabaña en el bosque, y vivir en íntimo contacto con la naturaleza, en una vida de soledad y sobriedad. De esta experiencia, su filosofía trata de transmitirnos la idea que resulta necesario un retorno respetuoso a la naturaleza, y que la felicidad es sobre todo fruto de la riqueza interior y de la armonía de los individuos con el entorno natural. Muchos han visto en Thoreau a uno de los precursores del ecologismo y del anarquismo primitivista representado en la actualidad por Jonh Zerzan. Para George Woodcock, esta actitud puede estar también motivada por una cierta idea de resistencia al progreso y de rechazo al materialismo creciente que caracteriza la sociedad norteamericana de mediados de siglo XIX.""Voluntary non-submission. Spanish individualist anarchism during dictatorship and the second republic (1923–1938)"Archived July 23, 2011, at the Wayback Machine
^Freeden, Michael. Ideologies and Political Theory: A Conceptual Approach. Oxford University Press. ISBN0-19-829414-X. pp. 313–314
^George Woodcock, Anarchism: A History of Libertarian Ideas and Movements. 1962
^Tucker, Benjamin (1970). Liberty. Greenwood Reprint Corporation. 7–8. p. 26. "Liberty has always insisted that Individualism and Socialism are not antithetical terms; that, on the contrary, the most ... not of Socialist Anarchism against Individualist Anarchism, but of Communist Socialism against Individualist Socialism."
^Martin, James J. (1953). Men Against the State: the State the Expositors of Individualist Anarchism. Dekalb, Illinois: The Adrian Allen Associates.
^William Bailie, "Josiah Warren: The First American Anarchist"(PDF). Archived from the original(PDF) on February 4, 2012. Retrieved June 17, 2013. Josiah Warren: The First American Anarchist – A Sociological Study, Boston: Small, Maynard & Co., 1906, p. 20
^"The economic principles of Modern Socialism are a logical deduction from the principle laid down by Adam Smith in the early chapters of his "Wealth of Nations," – namely, that labor is the true measure of price...Half a century or more after Smith enunciated the principle above stated, Socialism picked it up where he had dropped it, and in following it to its logical conclusions, made it the basis of a new economic philosophy...This seems to have been done independently by three different men, of three different nationalities, in three different languages: Josiah Warren, an American; Pierre J. Proudhon, a Frenchman; Karl Marx, a German Jew...That the work of this interesting trio should have been done so nearly simultaneously would seem to indicate that Socialism was in the air, and that the time was ripe and the conditions favorable for the appearance of this new school of thought...So far as priority of time is concerned, the credit seems to belong to Warren, the American, – a fact which should be noted by the stump orators who are so fond of declaiming against Socialism as an imported article." Benjamin Tucker. Individual Liberty
^"el capitalismo es sólo el efecto del gobierno; desaparecido el gobierno, el capitalismo cae de su pedestal vertiginosamente.... Lo que llamamos capitalismo no es otra cosa que el producto del Estado, dentro del cual lo único que se cultiva es la ganancia, bien o mal habida. Luchar, pues, contra el capitalismo es tarea inútil, porque sea Capitalismo de Estado o Capitalismo de Empresa, mientras el Gobierno exista, existirá el capital que explota. La lucha, pero de conciencias, es contra el Estado."Anarquismo by Miguel Giménez IgualadaArchived 2017-01-31 at the Wayback Machine
^"¿La propiedad? ¡Bah! No es problema. Porque cuando nadie trabaje para nadie, el acaparador de la riqueza desaparece, como ha de desaparecer el gobierno cuando nadie haga caso a los que aprendieron cuatro cosas en las universidades y por ese sólo hecho pretenden gobernar a los hombres. Porque si en la tierra de los ciegos el tuerto es rey, en donde todos ven y juzgan y disciernen, el rey estorba. Y de lo que se trata es de que no haya reyes porque todos sean hombres. Las grandes empresas industriales las transformarán los hombres en grandes asociaciones donde todos trabajen y disfruten del producto de su trabajo. Y de esos tan sencillos como hermosos problemas trata el anarquismo y al que lo cumple y vive es al que se le llama anarquista...El hincapié que sin cansancio debe hacer el anarquista es el de que nadie debe explotar a nadie, ningún hombre a ningún hombre, porque esa no-explotación llevaría consigo la limitación de la propiedad a las necesidades individuales."Anarquismo by Miguel Giménez IgualadaArchived 2017-01-31 at the Wayback Machine
^"The most ambitious contribution to literary anarchism during the 1890s was undoubtedly Oscar Wilde The Soul of Man Under Socialism. Wilde, as we have seen, declared himself an anarchist on at least one occasion during the 1890s, and he greatly admired Kropotkin, whom he had met. Later, in De Profundis, he described Kropotkin's life as one "of the most perfect lives I have come across in my own experience" and talked of him as "a man with a soul of that beautiful white Christ that seems coming out of Russia." But in The Soul of Man Under Socialism, which appeared in 1890, it is Godwin rather than Kropotkin whose influence seems dominant." George Woodcock. Anarchism: A History of Libertarian Ideas and Movements. 1962. (p. 447)
^Day, Meagan. "Why We Need Free College for Everyone — Even Rich People". Jacobin Magazine (July, 2019). Where a meager means-tested welfare-state model breeds alienation and competition, a robust universal welfare-state model breeds trust and cooperation. These qualities are necessary to develop a foundation from which to launch other ambitious social projects, and to progress as a society.
^Diez, Xavier. "La insumisión voluntaria. El anarquismo individualista español durante la dictadura y la segund arepública (1923-1938)". Archived 26 May 2006 at the Wayback Machine. "Su obra más representativa es Walden, aparecida en 1854, aunque redactada entre 1845 y 1847, cuando Thoreau decide instalarse en el aislamiento de una cabaña en el bosque, y vivir en íntimo contacto con la naturaleza, en una vida de soledad y sobriedad. De esta experiencia, su filosofía trata de transmitirnos la idea que resulta necesario un retorno respetuoso a la naturaleza, y que la felicidad es sobre todo fruto de la riqueza interior y de la armonía de los individuos con el entorno natural. Muchos han visto en Thoreau a uno de los precursores del ecologismo y del anarquismo primitivista representado en la actualidad por John Zerzan. Para George Woodcock, esta actitud puede estar también motivada por una cierta idea de resistencia al progreso y de rechazo al materialismo creciente que caracteriza la sociedad norteamericana de mediados de siglo XIX."
^The Anarchist FAQ Collective (2008). "A.3.3 What kinds of green anarchism are there?"Archived 2018-06-15 at the Wayback Machine. "An Anarchist FAQ". Anarchist Writers. "While almost all forms of modern anarchism consider themselves to have an ecological dimension, the specifically eco-anarchist thread within anarchism has two main focal points, Social Ecology and "primitivist". Retrieved 14 June 2020.
^Gerald F. Gaus, Chandran Kukathas. Handbook of political theory. London, England, UK; Thousand Oaks, California, USA; New Delhi, India: SAGE Publications, 2004. Pp. 420.
^Adams, Ian (1999). "Social Democracy to New Labor". Ideology and Politics in Britain Today. Manchester, England: Manchester University Press. p. 127.
^Noel W. Thompson. Political economy and the Labour Party: the economics of democratic socialism, 1884-2005. 2nd edition. Oxon, England, UK; New York, USA: Routledge, 2006. Pp. 60-61.
^Stanislao G. Pugliese. Carlo Rosselli: socialist heretic and antifascist exile. Harvard University Press, 1999. Pp. 99.
^Rosselli, Carlo (1994) [1930]. Liberal Socialism. William McCuaig, Nadia Urbinati (eds.). Princeton, NJ. pp. 85–88.
^Steve Bastow, James Martin. Third way discourse: European ideologies in the twentieth century. Edinburgh, Scotland, UK: Edinburgh University Press, Ltd, 2003. Pp. 72.
^Stanislao G. Pugliese. Carlo Rosselli: socialist heretic and antifascist exile. Harvard University Press, 1999. Pp. 51, 224.
^John Dearlove, Peter Saunders. Introduction to British politics. Wiley-Blackwell, 2000. Pp. 427.
^Noel W. Thompson. Political economy and the Labour Party: the economics of democratic socialism, 1884-2005. 2nd edition. Oxon, England, UK; New York, USA: Routledge, 2006. Pp. 52.
^ abStephen D. Tansey, Nigel A. Jackson. Politics: the basics. Fourth Edition. Oxon, England, UK; New York, USA: Routledge, 2008. Pp. 97.
^Noel W. Thompson. Political economy and the Labour Party: the economics of democratic socialism, 1884-2005. 2nd edition. Oxon, England, UK; New York, USA: Routledge, 2006. Pp. 52, 58, 60.
^Bookchin, Murray and Janet Biehl. The Murray Bookchin Reader. Cassell, 1997. p. 170 ISBN0-304-33873-7
^Hicks, Steven V. and Daniel E. Shannon. The American journal of economics and sociology. Blackwell Pub, 2003. p. 612
^Ostergaard, Geoffrey. "Anarchism". A Dictionary of Marxist Thought. Blackwell Publishing, 1991. p. 21.
^Chomsky, Noam (2004). Language and Politics. In Otero, Carlos Peregrín. AK Press. p. 739
^Miller, Wilbur R. (2012). The social history of crime and punishment in America. An encyclopedia. 5 vols. London: Sage Publications. p. 1007. ISBN1412988764. "There exist three major camps in libertarian thought: right-libertarianism, socialist libertarianism, and ..."
^"unlike other socialists, they tend to see (to various different degrees, depending on the thinker) to be skeptical of centralized state intervention as the solution to capitalist exploitation..." Roderick T. Long. "Toward a libertarian theory of class." Social Philosophy and Policy. Volume 15. Issue 02. Summer 1998. Pg. 305
^"We do not equate socialism with planning, state control, or nationalization of industry, although we understand that in a socialist society (not "under" socialism) economic activity will be collectively controlled, managed, planned, and owned. Similarly, we believe that socialism will involve equality, but we do not think that socialism is equality, for it is possible to conceive of a society where everyone is equally oppressed. We think that socialism is incompatible with one-party states, with constraints on freedom of speech, with an elite exercising power 'on behalf of' the people, with leader cults, with any of the other devices by which the dying society seeks to portray itself as the new society. "What is Libertarian Socialism?" by Ulli Diemer. Volume 2, Number 1 (Summer 1997 issue) of The Red Menace.
^"Therefore, rather than being an oxymoron, "libertarian socialism" indicates that true socialism must be libertarian and that a libertarian who is not a socialist is a phoney. As true socialists oppose wage labour, they must also oppose the state for the same reasons. Similarly, libertarians must oppose wage labour for the same reasons they must oppose the state." "I1. Isn't libertarian socialism an oxymoron" in An Anarchist FAQ
^"So, libertarian socialism rejects the idea of state ownership and control of the economy, along with the state as such. Through workers' self-management it proposes to bring an end to authority, exploitation, and hierarchy in production." "I1. Isn't libertarian socialism an oxymoron" in An Anarchist FAQ
^" ...preferringa system of popular self governance via networks of decentralized, local voluntary, participatory, cooperative associations. Roderick T. Long. "Toward a libertarian theory of class." Social Philosophy and Policy. Volume 15. Issue 02. Summer 1998. Pg. 305
^Mendes, Silva. Socialismo Libertário ou Anarchismo Vol. 1 (1896): "Society should be free through mankind's spontaneous federative affiliation to life, based on the community of land and tools of the trade; meaning: Anarchy will be equality by abolition of private property (while retaining respect for personal property) and liberty by abolition of authority".
^"We therefore foresee a Society in which all activities will be coordinated, a structure that has, at the same time, sufficient flexibility to permit the greatest possible autonomy for social life, or for the life of each enterprise, and enough cohesiveness to prevent all disorder...In a well-organized society, all of these things must be systematically accomplished by means of parallel federations, vertically united at the highest levels, constituting one vast organism in which all economic functions will be performed in solidarity with all others and that will permanently preserve the necessary cohesion." Gaston Leval. "Libertarian socialism: a practical outline".
^"...preferring a system of popular self governance via networks of decentralized, local, voluntary, participatory, cooperative associations-sometimes as a complement to and check on state power..."
^"LibSoc share with LibCap an aversion to any interference to freedom of thought, expression or choicce of lifestyle." Roderick T. Long. "Toward a libertarian theory of class." Social Philosophy and Policy. Volume 15. Issue 02. Summer 1998. pp 305
^"What is implied by the term 'libertarian socialism'?: The idea that socialism is first and foremost about freedom and therefore about overcoming the domination, repression, and alienation that block the free flow of human creativity, thought, and action...An approach to socialism that incorporates cultural revolution, women's and children's liberation, and the critique and transformation of daily life, as well as the more traditional concerns of socialist politics. A politics that is completely revolutionary because it seeks to transform all of reality. We do not think that capturing the economy and the state lead automatically to the transformation of the rest of social being, nor do we equate liberation with changing our life-styles and our heads. Capitalism is a total system that invades all areas of life: socialism must be the overcoming of capitalist reality in its entirety, or it is nothing." "What is Libertarian Socialism?" by Ulli Diemer. Volume 2, Number 1 (Summer 1997 issue) of The Red Menace.
^"Authority is defined in terms of the right to exercise social control (as explored in the "sociology of power") and the correlative duty to obey (as explred in the "philosophy of practical reason"). Anarchism is distinguished, philosophically, by its scepticism towards such moral relations – by its questioning of the claims made for such normative power – and, practically, by its challenge to those "authoritative" powers which cannot justify their claims and which are therefore deemed illegitimate or without moral foundation."Anarchism and Authority: A Philosophical Introduction to Classical Anarchism by Paul McLaughlin. AshGate. 2007. p. 1
^Individualist anarchist Benjamin Tucker defined anarchism as opposition to authority as follows "They found that they must turn either to the right or to the left, — follow either the path of Authority or the path of Liberty. Marx went one way; Warren and Proudhon the other. Thus were born State Socialism and Anarchism...Authority, takes many shapes, but, broadly speaking, her enemies divide themselves into three classes: first, those who abhor her both as a means and as an end of progress, opposing her openly, avowedly, sincerely, consistently, universally; second, those who profess to believe in her as a means of progress, but who accept her only so far as they think she will subserve their own selfish interests, denying her and her blessings to the rest of the world; third, those who distrust her as a means of progress, believing in her only as an end to be obtained by first trampling upon, violating, and outraging her. These three phases of opposition to Liberty are met in almost every sphere of thought and human activity. Good representatives of the first are seen in the Catholic Church and the Russian autocracy; of the second, in the Protestant Church and the Manchester school of politics and political economy; of the third, in the atheism of Gambetta and the socialism of Karl Marx." Benjamin Tucker. Individual Liberty.
^Anarchist historian George Woodcock report of Mikhail Bakunin's anti-authoritarianism and shows opposition to both state and non-state forms of authority as follows: "All anarchists deny authority; many of them fight against it." (p. 9)...Bakunin did not convert the League's central committee to his full program, but he did persuade them to accept a remarkably radical recommendation to the Berne Congress of September 1868, demanding economic equality and implicitly attacking authority in both Church and State."
^Sims, Franwa (2006). The Anacostia Diaries As It Is. Lulu Press. p. 160.
^"(Benjamin) Tucker referred to himself many times as a socialist and considered his philosophy to be "Anarchistic socialism." An Anarchist FAQ by Various Authors
^French individualist anarchist Émile Armand shows clearly opposition to capitalism and centralized economies when he said that the individualist anarchist "inwardly he remains refractory – fatally refractory – morally, intellectually, economically (The capitalist economy and the directed economy, the speculators and the fabricators of single are equally repugnant to him.)""Anarchist Individualism as a Life and Activity" by Emile Armand
^Anarchist Peter Sabatini reports that In the United States "of early to mid-19th century, there appeared an array of communal and "utopian" counterculture groups (including the so-called free love movement). William Godwin's anarchism exerted an ideological influence on some of this, but more so the socialism of Robert Owen and Charles Fourier. After success of his British venture, Owen himself established a cooperative community within the United States at New Harmony, Indiana during 1825. One member of this commune was Josiah Warren (1798–1874), considered to be the first individualist anarchist"Peter Sabatini. "Libertarianism: Bogus Anarchy"
^"It introduces an eye-opening approach to radical social thought, rooted equally in libertarian socialism and market anarchism." Chartier, Gary; Johnson, Charles W. (2011). Markets Not Capitalism: Individualist Anarchism Against Bosses, Inequality, Corporate Power, and Structural Poverty. Brooklyn, NY:Minor Compositions/Autonomedia. Pg. Back cover
^Kent Bromley, in his preface to Peter Kropotkin's book The Conquest of Bread, considered early French utopian socialist Charles Fourier to be the founder of the libertarian branch of socialist thought, as opposed to the authoritarian socialist ideas of Babeuf and Buonarroti." Kropotkin, Peter. The Conquest of Bread, preface by Kent Bromley, New York and London, G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1906.
^Sa'adah, Anne (2003) [1987]. Contemporary France: A Democratic Education. Lanham: Rowman Littlefield & Publishers. pp. 17–20.
^Smith, Angel; Berger, Stefan (1999). Nationalism, Labour and Ethnicity 1870-1939. Manchester and New York: Manchester University Press. p. 30.
^Delanty, Gerard; Kumar, Krishan (2006). The SAGE Handbook of Nations and Nationalism. London, England; Thousand Oaks, California; New Delhi, India: Sage Publications, Ltd. p. 542.
^Jeltzale comes from JEL, acronym of Jaungoikoa Eta Lagizarrak, which literally means "God and old laws" and refers to the political thought of Sabino Arana.
^Cecilia Arrozarena, El roble y la ceiba. Historia de los vascos en Cuba, ISBN84-8136-357-X, Txalaparta, 2003
^Öcalan, Abdullah (2008). War and Peace in Kurdistan (PDF). Translated by International Initiative Freedom for Abdullah Ocalan. London: Transmedia Publishing. p. 32.
^Öcalan, Abdullah (2011). Democratic Confederalism (PDF). Translated by International Initiative Freedom for Abdullah Ocalan. London: Transmedia Publishing. p. 21–32.
^Dirik, Dilar; Strauss, David Levi; Taussig, Michael; Wilson, Peter Lamborn, eds. (2016). To Dare Imagining: Rojava Revolution. New York: Autonomedia. chpt. 2.
^Öcalan, Abdullah (2008). War and Peace in Kurdistan (PDF). Translated by International Initiative Freedom for Abdullah Ocalan. London: Transmedia Publishing. p. 31–36.
^Öcalan, Abdullah (2011). Democratic Confederalism (PDF). Translated by International Initiative Freedom for Abdullah Ocalan. London: Transmedia Publishing. p. 21, 33–34.
^Öcalan, Abdullah (2008). War and Peace in Kurdistan (PDF). Translated by International Initiative Freedom for Abdullah Ocalan. London: Transmedia Publishing. p. 31–32.
^Walsh, Lynn. Imperialism and the gulf war, Chapter 5, 1990-91.
^ abcTikhonov, Vladimir, Han Yongun's Buddhist Socialism in the 1920s-1930s, International Journal of Buddhist Thought and Culture 6, 207-228 (2006). PDFArchived 2011-07-27 at the Wayback Machine
^Shields, James Mark; Blueprint for Buddhist Revolution The Radical Buddhism of Seno’o Girō (1889–1961) and the Youth League for Revitalizing Buddhism, Japanese Journal of religious Studies 39 (2), 331-351 (2012) PDF
^Rambelli, Fabio (2013). Zen Anarchism: The Egalitarian Dharma of Uchiyama Gudō. Institute of Buddhist Studies and BDK America, Inc.
^ abDhammic Socialism Political Thought of Buddhadasa Bhikku, Chulalangkorn Journal of Buddhist Studies 2 (1), page 118 (2003) PDFArchived 2012-03-13 at the Wayback Machine
^Christoyannopoulos, Alexandre (2010). Christian Anarchism: A Political Commentary on the Gospel. Exeter: Imprint Academic. pp. 2–4. Locating Christian anarchism...In political theology
^Christoyannopoulos, Alexandre (2010). Christian Anarchism: A Political Commentary on the Gospel. Exeter: Imprint Academic. pp. 19 and 208. Leo Tolstoy
^Lansford, Tom (2007). "History of Communism". Communism. Political Systems of the World. Marshall Cavendish. pp. 24–25. ISBN9780761426288. Retrieved 16 May 2011.
^"Rénan's Les Apôtres. Community life". The London Quarterly and Holborn Review, Volume 26. London: E.C. Barton. 1866 [April and July]. p. 502. Retrieved 10 May 2011.
^Montero, Roman A. (2017). All Things in Common The Economic Practices of the Early Christians. Foster, Edgar G. Eugene: Wipf and Stock Publishers. ISBN9781532607912. OCLC994706026.
^"The New Left."Jewish Virtual Library (2008); retrieved 6 June 2015.
^Naeim Giladi, "The Jews of Iraq": "In many countries, including the United States and Iraq, Jews represented a large part of the Communist party. In Iraq, hundreds of Jews of the working intelligentsia occupied key positions in the hierarchy of the Communist and Socialist parties."
^Hannah Borenstein, "Savior Story": "The violence of the late 1970s and early 1980s Ethiopia spurred many forms of active and comprehensive resistance. Ethiopian Jews participated widely; many, for instance, were members of the Marxist–Leninist EPRP."
G. D. H. Cole, History of Socialist Thought, in 7 volumes, Macmillan and St. Martin's Press (1965), Palgrave Macmillan (2003 reprint); 7 volumes, hardcover, 3160 pages, ISBN1-4039-0264-X.
Albert Fried, Ronald Sanders, eds., Socialist Thought: A Documentary History, Garden City, New York: Doubleday Anchor, 1964.
Norman Birnbaum. After Progress: American Social Reform and European Socialism in the Twentieth Century. Oxford University Press. (see review hereArchived 2004-08-23 at the Wayback Machine).
.jpg)
.jpg)
