Socialism Without Markets: Democratic Planned Socialism
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
SOCIALISM WITHOUT MARKETS: DEMOCRATIC PLANNED SOCIALISM AL CAMPBEL Note: As of 3/15, the paper below only has the introductory material and the first major part of the paper, the positive statement of the economic aspects of my model. The second major part, the discussion of three other models of DPS, will be [is planned to be] available shortly before the conference. Al Campbell} INDEX I. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................ 2 II. WHAT SHOULD REPLACE CAPITALISM: THE GOALS OF SOCIALISM................................................... 3 III.. THE ALTERNATIVE TO MARKETS: CONSCIOUS ECONOMIC COORDINATION, CONTROL AND PLANNING......................................................................................................................................................... 4 1. GOAL #1: DEMOCRATIC CONTROL OF TWO KEY SOCIAL ECONOMIC AGGREGATES ................. 4 2. GOAL #2: DEMOCRATIC CONTROL OF MICRO (OR ENTERPRISE LEVEL) ECONOMIC DECISIONS .................................................................................................................................................. 5 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................................ 13 SOCIALISM WITHOUT MARKETS: DEMOCRARTIC PLANNED SOCIALISM 1 effects of markets, and distribution was to be 2 I. INTRODUCTION affected according to need. Similarly, the early socialists identified (generalized) markets with 1. Two interrelated issues inform the debate capitalism, and hence were clearly anti market. between socialists who advocate Market The subject of this conference, Marx, was very Socialism and those who advocate socialism clear in his opposition to markets in socialism without markets, Democratic Planned (1875).3 Other early socialists who outlined Socialism (DPS).1 The first is if socialism something of their vision of a socialist society without markets is feasible. David Schweickart, without markets were Bellamy (1888), Kautsky who calls his most left wing of all market (1892), Bukkarin and Preobrazhensky (1918), socialist models “Economic Democracy,” flatly and Neurath (1919). asserts: market socialism “is the only form of 3. These early visions of socialist societies socialism that is, at the present stage of human without markets were attacked by opponents for development, ... viable ...” (1998: 10). From a being very vague on a number of central issues logical point of view, one should as well concerning how they would function: how the consider the question of if market socialism is non market planning would be done, how possible. In fact, a few advocates of socialism people would be remunerated, how various without markets have made that point, for different actors would be motivated to do what example Bertell Ollman (1988) and David the plans were based on them doing, and so on. McNally (1993). By-in-large, however, this Recently, a number of people have put forward issue has not been included on the debate menu, extensively worked out models that address while the question of the feasibility of socialism these issues at a mid level of abstraction, much without markets has: advocates of socialism more concretely than the earlier generation of without markets have felt it necessary to defend non market socialist visions. their vision as feasible, while advocates of 4. This paper is not fundamentally about the market socialism have not felt the same debate between market socialists and socialists necessity. The second issue is, if both models are in fact possible, which would be more desirable. 2. Early attacks on capitalism, precursors of the modern socialist movement, were almost all 2 The seminal modern work and best known of these attacks on strictly anti-market, based on the dehumanizing capitalism, Thomas More’s Utopia (1516), was very clear on being anti market. For a fascinating detailed early Marxist analysis of this early anti market vision, see Kautsky (1888). 1 The adjectives “democratic” and “planned” really are not 3 While Marx talked about the first and second stage of sufficient do not capture all the essential aspects of the model communism, which are generally referred to today as the stages that I will describe and the related models I will critique. A more of socialism and communism, he really thought of the full satisfactory label to reflect their essence would be Democratic transition from capitalism to a post capitalist society as a and Participatory, Consciously Coordinated, Controlled and process, and one that would not end with some fixed set of Planned Socialism. Not only is that well beyond anything that relations called communism-there was no `end of history’ in could be reasonably used as a label, even its acronym Marx’s view, history was a permanent ongoing process of DPCCCPS is unmanageable. Hence we use DPS, with the transformation. This creates a small opening for misinterpreting understanding that the word “Democratic” represents his work: he indeed thought that at the beginning of a transition “Democratic and Participatory,” and “Planned” represents from capitalism that markets would continue to exist, but one “Consciously Coordinated, Controlled and Planned.” Concerning important aspect of that transition would be exactly the the current debates on the nature of a desirable socialism, the diminishing role over time of markets in economics and social name Democratic Planned Socialism is meant to reflect enough organization, and their replacement by conscious human of the essence of this approach to distinguish it from the currently organization and decision making. Lawler (1998), for example, popular Market Socialism visions on the one hand, and from the misinterpreted and misrepresented this acceptance of the now largely discredited Bureaucratic Planned Socialism that existence of markets in the transition to socialism as an existed in the former USSR, and China before its market reforms. indication that Marx accepted markets in his vison of the future. SOCIALISM WITHOUT MARKETS: DEMOCRARTIC PLANNED SOCIALISM 2 who reject markets.4 It is the position of this same goals, I want to stress two things in paper that there not only is a way to organize a passing to try to assure that the reader is not left socialist economy and society without markets, with an incorrect impression of my view of there are many ways it could be done. This these models: 1) all of these models are more paper will discuss four of these. In doing so, desirable than either capitalism or any version this will in passing underline the position in the of market socialism, and 2) all of these models debate with the market socialists that, contrary are broadly viable. to the assertion of Schweickart, there indeed is 7. This paper will have two main parts. a way (in fact many ways) to organize a Following a brief but necessary discussion of feasible non market socialist economy. But for the goals of socialism, the first main part will the interests of the author, that is considered a be an outline of economic procedures that I given, and the purpose of this paper is rather to maintain would yield a DPS that would be both consider the relative desirability of various feasible and desirable. In the second main part I aspects of a non market socialist economy, will discuss some aspects of the three models aspects which the models considered handle worked out above that I think are not as differently.5 desirable as certain alternatives. I will not try to 5. While there are other recent works give a full discussion of these models. On the advocating various visions of non market one hand, to do so would require a book length socialism,6 the three that have been outline the work. But beyond that, I not only agree with the most fully in the published literature are those general thrust of all three of these models, I by Devine (1988), Albert and Hahnel (1991a agree with many of their specific proposals, and 1991b), Cockshott and Cottrell (1993). either as the best way to achieve something, or 6. These three models and mine that I will more often as at least a good way among a consider share more than being models of number of possible good ways to achieve socialism without markets. I consider all of something. Hence my discussion will be them to be DPS models. Since I will be arguing focused very largely on what I disagree with, that some aspects of some of the models are which are only small, though sometimes less desirable than other ways of achieving the important, parts of the models.. II. WHAT SHOULD REPLACE 4 For the good collections addressing that debate, see Science CAPITALISM: THE GOALS OF and Society, 56(1), Spring 1992 (with a couple of follow on SOCIALISM articles in 57(2) and 57(3)), the Review of Radical Political Economy, 24(3&4), Fall/Winter 1992, and Ollman (1998) that is referred to in this article. 8. At the broadest and most abstract level, the central goal of socialism has always been 5 Science and Society, 66(1), Spring 2002, was an entire issue something like “human development,” “the devoted to such a discussion by seven advocates of DPS. This development of one’s human potential” or “the included an earlier version of the first part of this paper. opportunity to develop potential abilities.” At a slightly less abstract level, self governance (or 6 The works referred to above by Ollman and McNally have some often simply