The cultural contradictions of socialism

Social Philosophy and Policy

Volumn 20, Issue 1, 2003, Pages

  Kukathas, Chandran ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES   (Australia)

^b Australian Defence Force Academy   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 3242694887     PISSN: 02650525     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S0265052503201023     Document Type: Review

References (45)

1. David Hume, An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals, in Hume, Enquiries Concerning Human Understanding and Concerning the Principles of Morals, ed. L. A. Selby-Bigge, rev. P. H. Nidditch, 3d ed. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1975), 194.
2. See Joseph Schumpeter, Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy (New York: Yale University Press, 1942); Daniel Bell, The Cultural Contradictions of Capitalism (London: Heineman, 1976); and Jurgen Habermas, Legitimation Crisis (London: Heineman, 1979).
3. See Joseph Schumpeter, Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy (New York: Yale University Press, 1942); Daniel Bell, The Cultural Contradictions of Capitalism (London: Heineman, 1976); and Jurgen Habermas, Legitimation Crisis (London: Heineman, 1979).
4. See Joseph Schumpeter, Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy (New York: Yale University Press, 1942); Daniel Bell, The Cultural Contradictions of Capitalism (London: Heineman, 1976); and Jurgen Habermas, Legitimation Crisis (London: Heineman, 1979).
5. See John Roemer, Analytical Foundations of Marxian Economic Theory (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989).
6. Ludwig von Mises had argued as early as 1920 that socialism was technically impossible because, in the absence of prices set by competitive markets, producers would be unable to make even simple decisions about what to make, or to decide which inputs to choose in the production process. The absence of prices would make it impossible to tell which materials were scarcer or more valuable. See Ludwig von Mises, Socialism: An Economic and Sociological Analysis, trans. J. Kahane (Indianapolis, IN: Liberty Fund, 1981). This argument was also put forward by F. A. Hayek in the 1930s in his critique of socialism's leading theoreticians, such as Oskar Lange and H. D. Dickinson. Hayek suggested that, under socialism, the absence of prices would make comparative cost calculation impossible: the centralization of production decisions would lead to the discoordination between the demand and supply of goods. The result would be inefficiency, chronic shortages of some goods and the oversupply of others, and, ultimately, material poverty. Indeed, Hayek thought that this problem would remain even under modified variants of socialism such as "market socialism." See F. A. Hayek, ed., Collectivist Economic Planning: Critical Studies in the Possibilities of Socialism (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1935). See also Hayek's essays on socialist calculation in F. A. Hayek, Individualism and Economic Order (Chicago: Midway, 1980). For a modern discussion of the socialist calculation debate, see Don Lavoie, Rivalry and Central Planning: The Socialist Calculation Debate Reconsidered (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985). For recent debate among socialists on these issues, see Bertell Ollman, ed., Market Socialism: The Debate Among Socialists (New York: Routledge, 1998).
7. Ludwig von Mises had argued as early as 1920 that socialism was technically impossible because, in the absence of prices set by competitive markets, producers would be unable to make even simple decisions about what to make, or to decide which inputs to choose in the production process. The absence of prices would make it impossible to tell which materials were scarcer or more valuable. See Ludwig von Mises, Socialism: An Economic and Sociological Analysis, trans. J. Kahane (Indianapolis, IN: Liberty Fund, 1981). This argument was also put forward by F. A. Hayek in the 1930s in his critique of socialism's leading theoreticians, such as Oskar Lange and H. D. Dickinson. Hayek suggested that, under socialism, the absence of prices would make comparative cost calculation impossible: the centralization of production decisions would lead to the discoordination between the demand and supply of goods. The result would be inefficiency, chronic shortages of some goods and the oversupply of others, and, ultimately, material poverty. Indeed, Hayek thought that this problem would remain even under modified variants of socialism such as "market socialism." See F. A. Hayek, ed., Collectivist Economic Planning: Critical Studies in the Possibilities of Socialism (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1935). See also Hayek's essays on socialist calculation in F. A. Hayek, Individualism and Economic Order (Chicago: Midway, 1980). For a modern discussion of the socialist calculation debate, see Don Lavoie, Rivalry and Central Planning: The Socialist Calculation Debate Reconsidered (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985). For recent debate among socialists on these issues, see Bertell Ollman, ed., Market Socialism: The Debate Among Socialists (New York: Routledge, 1998).
8. Ludwig von Mises had argued as early as 1920 that socialism was technically impossible because, in the absence of prices set by competitive markets, producers would be unable to make even simple decisions about what to make, or to decide which inputs to choose in the production process. The absence of prices would make it impossible to tell which materials were scarcer or more valuable. See Ludwig von Mises, Socialism: An Economic and Sociological Analysis, trans. J. Kahane (Indianapolis, IN: Liberty Fund, 1981). This argument was also put forward by F. A. Hayek in the 1930s in his critique of socialism's leading theoreticians, such as Oskar Lange and H. D. Dickinson. Hayek suggested that, under socialism, the absence of prices would make comparative cost calculation impossible: the centralization of production decisions would lead to the discoordination between the demand and supply of goods. The result would be inefficiency, chronic shortages of some goods and the oversupply of others, and, ultimately, material poverty. Indeed, Hayek thought that this problem would remain even under modified variants of socialism such as "market socialism." See F. A. Hayek, ed., Collectivist Economic Planning: Critical Studies in the Possibilities of Socialism (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1935). See also Hayek's essays on socialist calculation in F. A. Hayek, Individualism and Economic Order (Chicago: Midway, 1980). For a modern discussion of the socialist calculation debate, see Don Lavoie, Rivalry and Central Planning: The Socialist Calculation Debate Reconsidered (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985). For recent debate among socialists on these issues, see Bertell Ollman, ed., Market Socialism: The Debate Among Socialists (New York: Routledge, 1998).
9. Ludwig von Mises had argued as early as 1920 that socialism was technically impossible because, in the absence of prices set by competitive markets, producers would be unable to make even simple decisions about what to make, or to decide which inputs to choose in the production process. The absence of prices would make it impossible to tell which materials were scarcer or more valuable. See Ludwig von Mises, Socialism: An Economic and Sociological Analysis, trans. J. Kahane (Indianapolis, IN: Liberty Fund, 1981). This argument was also put forward by F. A. Hayek in the 1930s in his critique of socialism's leading theoreticians, such as Oskar Lange and H. D. Dickinson. Hayek suggested that, under socialism, the absence of prices would make comparative cost calculation impossible: the centralization of production decisions would lead to the discoordination between the demand and supply of goods. The result would be inefficiency, chronic shortages of some goods and the oversupply of others, and, ultimately, material poverty. Indeed, Hayek thought that this problem would remain even under modified variants of socialism such as "market socialism." See F. A. Hayek, ed., Collectivist Economic Planning: Critical Studies in the Possibilities of Socialism (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1935). See also Hayek's essays on socialist calculation in F. A. Hayek, Individualism and Economic Order (Chicago: Midway, 1980). For a modern discussion of the socialist calculation debate, see Don Lavoie, Rivalry and Central Planning: The Socialist Calculation Debate Reconsidered (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985). For recent debate among socialists on these issues, see Bertell Ollman, ed., Market Socialism: The Debate Among Socialists (New York: Routledge, 1998).
10. Ludwig von Mises had argued as early as 1920 that socialism was technically impossible because, in the absence of prices set by competitive markets, producers would be unable to make even simple decisions about what to make, or to decide which inputs to choose in the production process. The absence of prices would make it impossible to tell which materials were scarcer or more valuable. See Ludwig von Mises, Socialism: An Economic and Sociological Analysis, trans. J. Kahane (Indianapolis, IN: Liberty Fund, 1981). This argument was also put forward by F. A. Hayek in the 1930s in his critique of socialism's leading theoreticians, such as Oskar Lange and H. D. Dickinson. Hayek suggested that, under socialism, the absence of prices would make comparative cost calculation impossible: the centralization of production decisions would lead to the discoordination between the demand and supply of goods. The result would be inefficiency, chronic shortages of some goods and the oversupply of others, and, ultimately, material poverty. Indeed, Hayek thought that this problem would remain even under modified variants of socialism such as "market socialism." See F. A. Hayek, ed., Collectivist Economic Planning: Critical Studies in the Possibilities of Socialism (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1935). See also Hayek's essays on socialist calculation in F. A. Hayek, Individualism and Economic Order (Chicago: Midway, 1980). For a modern discussion of the socialist calculation debate, see Don Lavoie, Rivalry and Central Planning: The Socialist Calculation Debate Reconsidered (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985). For recent debate among socialists on these issues, see Bertell Ollman, ed., Market Socialism: The Debate Among Socialists (New York: Routledge, 1998).
11. For a general history of socialism that discusses its various attitudes toward individualism, see George Lichtheim, A Short History of Socialism (London: Weidenfeld and Nicholson, 1970).
12. G. A. Cohen, Self-Ownership, Freedom, and Equality (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995), 253.
13. Adam Przeworski, "Socialism and Social Democracy," in Joel Krieger, ed., The Oxford Companion to the Politics of the World, 2d ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001), 777.
14. Cohen, Self-Ownership, Freedom, and Equality, 260.
15. One of the earliest to do so was British socialist theorist, C. A. R. Crosland, notably in C. A. R. Crosland, The Future of Socialism (London: Jonathan Cape, 1956).
16. Ronald Beiner, What's the Matter with Liberalism? (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1992), 152. (Beiner's book was first published in 1992, and is written in full awareness of the demise of communism initiated by the revolutions of 1989.)
17. Ibid., 153.
18. In one way, however, the low crime rate in the Soviet Union is beside the point: it was also low in the World War II death camps at Dachau and Belsen, but this is hardly worth putting into the equation.
19. For an analysis of poverty under Soviet Communism, see Mervyn Matthews, Poverty in the Soviet Union (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986). For more general assessments of the weaknesses of the Soviet socialist system, see Janos Kornai, The Socialist System: The Political Economy of Communism (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1992); and Timothy J. Colton, The Dilemma of Reform in the Soviet Union (New York: Council on Foreign Relations, 1986), esp. 32-67.
20. For an analysis of poverty under Soviet Communism, see Mervyn Matthews, Poverty in the Soviet Union (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986). For more general assessments of the weaknesses of the Soviet socialist system, see Janos Kornai, The Socialist System: The Political Economy of Communism (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1992); and Timothy J. Colton, The Dilemma of Reform in the Soviet Union (New York: Council on Foreign Relations, 1986), esp. 32-67.
21. For an analysis of poverty under Soviet Communism, see Mervyn Matthews, Poverty in the Soviet Union (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986). For more general assessments of the weaknesses of the Soviet socialist system, see Janos Kornai, The Socialist System: The Political Economy of Communism (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1992); and Timothy J. Colton, The Dilemma of Reform in the Soviet Union (New York: Council on Foreign Relations, 1986), esp. 32-67.
22. Some, of course, think that the disease is not that bad; but that is another matter.
23. Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Discourse on the Origins of Inequality, in Rousseau, The Social Contract and Discourses, trans. G. D. H. Cole, rev. J. H. Brumfitt, John C. Hall, and P. D. Jimack (London: Everyman, 1993), 31-126.
24. Rousseau, however, did not suggest that commercial society was the cause of this transformation. Nor, in the end, did he think that abandoning commercial society was a plausible solution.
25. Adam Smith, Theory of Moral Sentiments (Indianapolis, IN: Liberty Fund, 1982).
26. Norberto Bobbio, Which Socialism? Marxism, Socialism, and Democracy, trans. Roger Griffin, ed. Richard Bellamy (Oxford: Polity Press, 1987), esp. chap. 5.
27. A notable example is to be found in Marx's critique of Hegel's theory of the state, and, in particular, Hegel's account of the bureaucracy as attending to the interests of the universal class. See G. W. F. Hegel, The Philosophy of Right, trans. T. M. Knox (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1978). For Marx's critique, see the early essays: Karl Marx, "On the Jewish Question," in David McLellan, ed., Karl Marx: Selected Writings (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1977), 39-62; and Karl Marx, "Towards a Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right: An Introduction," in McLellan, ed., Karl Marx: Selected Writings, 63-74.
28. A notable example is to be found in Marx's critique of Hegel's theory of the state, and, in particular, Hegel's account of the bureaucracy as attending to the interests of the universal class. See G. W. F. Hegel, The Philosophy of Right, trans. T. M. Knox (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1978). For Marx's critique, see the early essays: Karl Marx, "On the Jewish Question," in David McLellan, ed., Karl Marx: Selected Writings (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1977), 39-62; and Karl Marx, "Towards a Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right: An Introduction," in McLellan, ed., Karl Marx: Selected Writings, 63-74.
29. A notable example is to be found in Marx's critique of Hegel's theory of the state, and, in particular, Hegel's account of the bureaucracy as attending to the interests of the universal class. See G. W. F. Hegel, The Philosophy of Right, trans. T. M. Knox (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1978). For Marx's critique, see the early essays: Karl Marx, "On the Jewish Question," in David McLellan, ed., Karl Marx: Selected Writings (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1977), 39-62; and Karl Marx, "Towards a Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right: An Introduction," in McLellan, ed., Karl Marx: Selected Writings, 63-74.
30. Allende's coalition government, known as the Unidad Popular (UP), secured 44 percent of the vote in popular elections in 1973, though this group included a greater range of parties, including Radicals, Social Democrats, and some disaffected members of the Christian Democrats, as well as the Socialists.
31. David Miller, Market, State, and Community: Theoretical Foundations of Market Socialism (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1989), 252.
32. Ibid., 252.
33. Ibid., 254.
34. Ibid., 255.
35. Ibid., 255-57.
36. Ibid., 274.
37. Ibid., 293.
38. I b i d.
39. Ibid., 295-98.
40. Ibid., 301.
41. Ibid., 312.
42. Ibid., 319.
43. Schumpeter, Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy, chap. 22.
44. I recognize that this is a controversial point. I have defended this view at length in Chandran Kukathas, The Liberal Archipelago: A Theory of Diversity and Freedom (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003).
45. Libertarianism is subject to the same problem that socialism faces: if it tolerates pluralism and repudiates dictatorship, there is no reason to think that libertarian principles will generally be embraced or chosen by the political process. By libertarianism, I mean the political theories associated with such thinkers as Robert Nozick, Ayn Rand, and Murray Rothbard, rather than the liberal tradition (from John Locke to F. A. Hayek) more generally.