Simon Hannah says we need a new socialist paradigm that moves from nationalisation and growing productive forces to democratic control, global redistribution and ecological protection
As capitalism continues its death march towards ecocidal destruction of the living world in the name of profit, there is a growing discussion happening on the left about what a post-capitalist world might look like. Nearly every book that has come out from a socialist viewpoint in the last few years on the ecological crisis facing Earth continues to outline what a new society might look like. Some even have outright detailed plans. This is a useful and important shift in our thinking.
It is important because, since the collapse of ‘actually existing socialism’ and China’s integration into global markets, alternatives to capitalism seem thin on the ground. The (temporary) victory of neoliberalism, not just in practical terms but in ideological success, has narrowed our own horizons for thinking of a future fit for humanity. No wonder there is such an explosion of dystopian or outright apocalyptic movies and TV shows. As Frederic Jameson said, “It is easier to imagine the end of the world than the end of capitalism”.
What is clear is that there is no way that the capitalist class can slow down or prevent runaway global warming now. They are too trapped in the logic of their own commodified production to be able to put the brakes on in any meaningful way. There will be huge struggles over the coming years against the rise of the authoritarian right and their cruelty and inhumanity, as well as over ecological issues – socialists have to orient themselves to these to provide an alternative vision of society and then a strategy to get there. That is why I wrote Reclaiming The Future, a Beginners Guide to Planning the Economy, as a way to help focus some of these discussions.
Key principles
Despite the changes to post-war capitalism, from social democracy and mixed economy to neoliberalism, the basic Marxist, socialist position on capitalism as mass commodity production and the ways to outline a more socially just and equitable society remains the same.
We can identify the key tasks for any workers’ government and revolutionary transformation away from capitalism.
- Socialisation of the means of production and distribution.
- Participatory democracy – democracy is embedded in the dynamic forces of socialist production and is not an optional extra. Crucially, this means workers’ and consumers’ decision-making.
- Abolition of the social division of labour, productive and unproductive, intellectual and manual, but also gendered, racialised capital, etc.
- Progressive abolition of wage-commodity production and the law of value through planning – eliminating waste and creating radical abundance.
The main argument of Marxism, as opposed to utopian socialism, is that the material basis for socialism already exists and is embedded within modern capitalism. The economy is already largely socialised, and shareholders or public ownership or the complicated financial arrangements of banks show that the economy is not really in the hands of a tiny number of capitalists. The problem is that the current socialisation isn’t democratic and is still based on wealth. There are already elements of participatory democracy within capitalism, and the working class, by this stage, are used to the concept of voting and decision-making, even if they are excluded from it in their working lives. There are already aspects of planning in modern capitalism, both in terms of the state and internally within multinational companies, that must coordinate economic activity worldwide.
Democratic ecological planning
Learning the lessons from the failed attempts to move past capitalism in the 20th century, we can draw some clear political conclusions. First, nationalisation or state control does not mean socialism. Yes, removing key industries from market competition is a step towards socialisation, but it must not be confused with socialisation. If the industry is still organised along the lines of capital (interacting with markets, producing commodities, hierarchies of unaccountable management control) then we haven’t moved very far from a kind of state capitalism.
Engels made this point even back in 1877, complaining about the ‘state socialists’ of his time; “…since Bismarck went in for state-ownership of industrial establishments, a kind of spurious socialism has arisen, degenerating, now and again, into something of flunkeyism, that without more ado declares all state ownership, even of the Bismarckian sort, to be socialistic. Certainly, if the takeover by the state of the tobacco industry is socialistic, then Napoleon and Metternich must be numbered among the founders of socialism.” [Anti-Dühring]
Another key lesson is that any post-capitalist society must also have democratic control over economic decision-making. This isn’t just workplace democracy, though that is important; it is democratic social control over the entire economy to begin the process of producing a plan of production. This will reduce waste, align production with human need and move us from production of exchange values for market consumption to production of use values.
Democracy within the planning process – as opposed to the ‘blind’ logic of market forces or some all-knowing politburo – is a crucial part of the productive forces after capitalism. This is because it allows for genuine integration of the creative potential of humanity to deliberate, decide on priorities and develop the most efficient way to work without the pressure of profit or arbitrary targets. It allows for a self-actualisation of humans by aligning our needs with democratic mechanisms to fulfil those needs. No longer will we be victims of “laws of supply and demand” but instead agreed social priorities will drive economic decision making.
This will also allow us to properly deploy new technologies in a way that isn’t profoundly alienating to workers because there can be proper discussions about their role as labour-saving devices that can lead to a shorter working week, not a loss of jobs.
Within this, there is plenty of scope for technology to help us with production and also planning, but we should be wary of the view that somehow AI or some other deus ex machina will be able to take all the important decisions out of our hands.
Post-scarcity
One of the key tasks for any socialist society is to create a post-scarcity world. Capitalism creates the conditions for scarcity through both control of natural resources but also the way that the economy is structured. Because we are not paid the full value of our labour but only the average price for our labour power for the job we are forced to do (or starve), we live in a constant state of scarcity, struggling to make ends meet, pay bills, have a good life and so on. Some workers have relatively comfortable lives compared to others, but that is only a relatively privileged position. Most wealth, leisure time and abundance go to the capitalist class and their most important hangers-on.
The key social gain of overthrowing capitalism and socialising production and distribution is to overcome scarcity. A proper distribution of what is produced based on use values and human need, not on whether it is profitable or not, is the most rational way to provide for every human being.
One of the key ideas developing at the moment is that of Radical Abundance. This allows us to move towards a post-scarcity society, one where human needs are met within planetary limits. This is where ecosocialism comes in.
So why ecosocialism?
The point on ecosocialism is a necessary corrective to earlier Marxist positions that the key task was to ‘build the productive forces’. Given the extent of the climate crisis and the various tipping points for ecocidal meltdown that have already been reached, we cannot simply blithely talk about expanding production without first considering the proper allocation of what capitalism has already provided.
We can move beyond the growth and degrowth paradigm, which creates more heat than light at times. Ecosocialism as a framework focuses on qualitative transformation, not simply the quantitative values production of Stalinist era economics (“more tractors!”). First we start with the proper deployment of what we have already been provided by capitalism. We already produce enough food to feed everyone on the planet, and a huge part of it is thrown away, so it seems unlikely we need to continue to grow productive forces in agriculture for the time being. We can even look at how we can reduce nitrogen use, for instance, once we don’t have to worry about profit.
In many parts of the global north, we can scale back wasteful overconsumption and focus resources on the global south and ensure there is proper development there of energy infrastructure, water, schools, hospitals and good housing. The elimination of the capitalist class and their supremely wasteful lifestyles will certainly help alleviate some of the pressures on resources to allow for allocation in other, more vital areas.
Fighting the myths of capitalism
In Reclaiming the Future, I make the case that we have to directly challenge the myths perpetuated by the defenders of the current system. Principally, I deal with two ideas that market, price-based economics is always superior to planning and that human nature always tends towards selfishness and competition. These basic arguments are crucial to reinvigorating a mass politics of socialism that feels confident to advocate for radical ideas. The goal here is to reach out to people coming into political activism by beginning to question the direction of travel globally towards values that are clearly anti-human.
The myth of the genius tech bro investors like Elon Musk is clearly one that we must dismantle, and he gives us a lot of ammunition to be able to do that!
We also have to be clear that capitalism is only a few hundred years old, but that its rapacious drive for growth and profit means it cannot survive another hundred years. Or perhaps more accurately, the human species might struggle to survive in any meaningful way longer than this unless we fight for an ecosocialist revolution.