In honor of the year of Einstein - Why Socialism? By Albert Einstein

[IChing]

From Monthly Review, New York, May, 1949. (there is no copy-write problem on this mods )

Is it advisable for one who is not an expert on economic and social issues to express views on the subject of socialism? I believe for a number of reasons that it is.

Let us first consider the question from the point of view of scientific knowledge. It might appear that there are no essential methodological differences between astronomy and economics: scientists in both fields attempt to discover laws of general acceptability for a circumscribed group of phenomena in order to make the interconnection of these phenomena as clearly understandable as possible. But in reality such methodological differences do exist. The discovery of general laws in the field of economics is made difficult by the circumstance that observed economic phenomena are often affected by many factors which are very hard to evaluate separately. In addition, the experience which has accumulated since the beginning of the so-called civilized period of human history has -- as is well known -- been largely influenced and limited by causes which are by no means exclusively economic in nature. For example, most of the major states of history owed their existence to conquest. The conquering peoples established themselves, legally and economically, as the privileged class of the conquered country. They seized for themselves a monopoly of the land ownership and appointed a priesthood from among their own ranks. The priests, in control of education, made the class division of society into a permanent institution and created a system of values by which the people were thenceforth, to a large extent unconsciously, guided in their social behavior.

But historic tradition is, so to speak, of yesterday; nowhere have we really overcome what Thorstein Veblen called "the predatory phase" of human development. The observable economic facts belong to that phase and even such laws as we can derive from them are not applicable to other phases. Since the real purpose of socialism is precisely to overcome and advance beyond the predatory phase of human development, economic science in its present state can throw little light on the socialist society of the future.

Second, socialism is directed toward a social-ethical end. Science, however, cannot create ends and, even less, instill them in human beings; science, at most, can supply the means by which to attain certain ends. But the ends themselves are conceived by personalities with lofty ethical ideals and -- if these ends are not stillborn, but vital and vigorous -- are adopted and carried forward by those many human beings who, half-unconsciously, determine the slow evolution of society.

EDITED BY ADMIN: COPYRIGHT

[dweller]

1. nominated

yes, i did read the whole article. Is there an online link? I'd like to pass this on to a few individuals for discussion. I can copy and paste, etc., but a link would be helpful.

now, if you would, please read:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x143489
or the link:
http://www.onlinejournal.com/Commentary/072305Stanton/072305stanton.html

thanks for posting this.
peace
dp

[TahitiNut]

2. Link

http://www.monthlyreview.org/598einst.htm

[dweller]

3. too cool

again, thanks to you both.
:thumbsup:
dp

[IChing]

4. private capitalists inevitably control,

directly or indirectly,
the main sources of information (press, radio, education).
It is thus extremely difficult,
and indeed in most cases quite impossible,
for the individual citizen to come to objective conclusions
and to make intelligent use
of his political rights.

[rman]

7. Which is crucial because

"..(man) acquires a cultural constitution which he adopts from society through communication.."

Which determines "the relationship of the individual to society". Which pretty much determines what society is like.

It's interesting to see there's really not much new these days, regarding the problems with society. It has only gotten worse since.

ie "painful solitude and isolation from which so many people are suffering in these days"

and "individuals feel indifferent or even hostile toward the group, small or large, to which they belong"

Also still the RW comes up with arguments that sometimes make me wonder if they are human at all;
"Why are you so deeply opposed to the disappearance of the human race?"
I mean, WTF?

[IChing]

8. Sweet catch on his words

The time -- which, looking back, seems so idyllic --
is gone forever when individuals or relatively small groups could be completely self-sufficient.
It is only a slight exaggeration to say that mankind constitutes
even now a planetary community
of production and consumption.

[IChing]

5. Thanks for the nomination and any google will produce this piece.

The Einstein estate has no problem on publishing thought.

at least this one.

google my post and make your selection.

[rman]

6. most excellent

-

[Trillo]

9. Wow.

I wish I could answer his questions at the end, there's some deep thought required there.

Thanks for posting IChing.

[girl gone mad]

10. Thanks for posting this...

By coincidence, just a few seconds before I glanced at your subject I was making a note to myself to set up a meeting with one of my former professors. He was actually a colleague of Einstein and is currently one of the leading Relativitists in the world. I wanted to get his advice for a story that I am writing. I'm certain the subject of politics will come up (the story does have political undertones) and I am interested in his opinions on the current state of affairs since I haven't spoken with him in a few years.

Maybe I should pick his brain on Einstein while I have him. To me the most interesting stories always involve those small and very personal details that are so easy to overlook when you are dealing with a larger than life character such as Einstein.

[Disturbed]

11. The word Socialism scares many people.

It seems many people have been conditioned to believe that Socialism is directly linked to the Soviet Union, Cuba,Republic of China, N. Korea and Vietnam. In my view none of those nations were or are true Democratic Socialist nations. Maybe 100 years from now if the world survives there may be a true Democratic Socialist nation on this planet. Maybe sooner. I sure hope so.

[Douglas Carpenter]

12. Excellent--thanks for this post

"I am for socialism--because I am for humanity."
Eugene V. Debs

_________________________


_______________________________________________________


A True Voice of Opposition
--A Voice for Working People
--Not the Elite--
http://www.bernie.org/issues.asp

Who is Congressman Bernie Sanders?

Read this article and watch the short video clips:

http://www.davidsirota.com/2005/04/who-is-bernie-sanders.html

[liberalmike27]

13. I read this a while back

and it is a wonderful article. Funny how he's saying about the same things, especially about the media, that we are saying now. It did get a little bit better while we had the fairness law where equal time had to be given to both sides (if you want to call (D) (R) both sides). But since they got rid of that law it has gotten terrible again. Clearly the media controls the elections, Dean and McCain demonstrate that in recent history, they chose Kerry, then destroyed him in the general against Bush. It's a sad, sad thing, and most are totally unaware of this fact outside these four sides.

[jonnyblitz]

14. Oscar Wilde had something to say about socialism also..

since we are on the subject of socialism:

The Soul of Man Under Socialism

by Oscar Wilde

The chief advantage that would result from the establishment of
Socialism is, undoubtedly, the fact that Socialism would relieve us
from that sordid necessity of living for others which, in the
present condition of things, presses so hardly upon almost
everybody. In fact, scarcely anyone at all escapes.

Now and then, in the course of the century, a great man of science,
like Darwin; a great poet, like Keats; a fine critical spirit, like
M. Renan; a supreme artist, like Flaubert, has been able to isolate
himself, to keep himself out of reach of the clamorous claims of
others, to stand 'under the shelter of the wall,' as Plato puts it,
and so to realise the perfection of what was in him, to his own
incomparable gain, and to the incomparable and lasting gain of the
whole world. These, however, are exceptions. The majority of
people spoil their lives by an unhealthy and exaggerated altruism -
are forced, indeed, so to spoil them. They find themselves
surrounded by hideous poverty, by hideous ugliness, by hideous
starvation. It is inevitable that they should be strongly moved by
all this. The emotions of man are stirred more quickly than man's
intelligence; and, as I pointed out some time ago in an article on
the function of criticism, it is much more easy to have sympathy
with suffering than it is to have sympathy with thought.
Accordingly, with admirable, though misdirected intentions, they
very seriously and very sentimentally set themselves to the task of
remedying the evils that they see. But their remedies do not cure
the disease: they merely prolong it. Indeed, their remedies are
part of the disease.

They try to solve the problem of poverty, for instance, by keeping
the poor alive; or, in the case of a very advanced school, by
amusing the poor.

But this is not a solution: it is an aggravation of the
difficulty. The proper aim is to try and reconstruct society on
such a basis that poverty will be impossible. And the altruistic
virtues have really prevented the carrying out of this aim. Just
as the worst slave-owners were those who were kind to their slaves,
and so prevented the horror of the system being realised by those
who suffered from it, and understood by those who contemplated it,
so, in the present state of things in England, the people who do
most harm are the people who try to do most good; and at last we
have had the spectacle of men who have really studied the problem
and know the life - educated men who live in the East End - coming
forward and imploring the community to restrain its altruistic
impulses of charity, benevolence, and the like. They do so on the
ground that such charity degrades and demoralises. They are
perfectly right. Charity creates a multitude of sins.

continued at:
http://emotionalliteracyeducation.com/classic_books_online/slman10.htm

[Mairead]

15. And in contrast to that well-reasoned article by a world-class thinker

we have this dreck: http://www.fff.org/freedom/fd0306f.asp

"Why is socialism more popular than capitalism? We have had 150 years to dissect socialism in theory. We have had 100 years to see socialism in action. Socialism, extensive government control over the economy, is a disaster in theory and a disaster in practice. The superiority of capitalism over socialism has been amply demonstrated by Ludwig von Mises, F.A. Hayek, Murray Rothbard, Hans-Hermann Hoppe, and others. Yet it continues to be the dominant political philosophy, even in the United States. Here, in what the rest of the world sees as an anarcho-capitalist jungle, we have socialized medicine, socialized education, and socialized retirement. The state seizes 40 percent of our income and tells us what we can and cannot do with what we keep. Virtually every aspect of the economy is regulated. The long-term trend is toward ever-greater government control over the economy, our property, and our lives. This trend continues even though capitalism works and socialism does not."

There's more at the link, but the last sentence in this paragraph reminds me of the VP at a then-major computer company who, discussing a computer development project that had flushed some $150M down the drain, actually said with no hint of irony "It was great system, a tremendous success. Except in the marketplace."

[Nederland]

16. He should have stuck to Physics

...because clearly his understanding of capitalist theory is lacking.

[jonnyblitz]

17. yeah, capitalism is working out just beautifully isn't it?

:eyes:

[Nederland]

18. I Wouldn't Know

There isn' a capitalist system functioning anywhere on the planet, nor is there a socialist one. Pure socialism is dead. Pure capitalism is dead. Just look at the world today. Nobody has a system where 100% of the economy is under government control and nobody has a system where 100% of the economy is in private hands. The people of the world have decided that the best system is a mixed one where the creative energy of a capitalist system is tapped and redirected toward more the humanitarian ends of a socialist system. The only argument these days is over what percentage of the economy should be privatized.

Einstein lived at a time when people thought that one system or another would win. In reality, they merged.